Photo of Nkechi KanuPhoto of Kate GrowleyPhoto of Jacob HarrisonPhoto of Bryan Dewan

On September 2, 2026, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), through its Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), released two new Notices on the topic of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI): ISOO Notices 2026-07 and 2026-08. 

CUI is a category of information that the federal government creates or possesses, or that an entity creates or possesses for or on behalf of the federal government, that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls but is not classified, per 32 CFR 2002.4(h).  Federal government contracts often require contractors to implement heighted cybersecurity and physical security controls to safeguard CUI.  Federal agencies are supposed to tell their contractors which contract-relevant information is CUI. In practice, however, contractors often find it difficult to determine what constitutes CUI.  Additionally, contractual requirements for safeguarding and handling CUI often vary across programs and agencies, with inconsistent and sometimes unclear identification processes. 

ISOO Notice 2026-07, Executive Agent Guidance for Implementation of the Controlled Unclassified Information Program, seeks to address some of these challenges.  Neither this Notice nor its companion Notice regarding CUI waivers (2026-08) directly addresses or applies to contractors—both apply to federal agencies—but they may nevertheless benefit contractors. 

Significantly, ISOO Notice 2026-07 instructs agencies, “[f]or all contracts requiring access to CUI,” to provide, at a minimum, the following guidance to prime contractors: 

  • Identification of Specific Government-Furnished Information Designated as CUI; 
  • Process for identification of Contractor Developed Information as CUI; 
  • Process for CUI challenges; 
  • Training requirements and resources; 
  • Access requirements; 
  • Marking requirements; 
  • Safeguarding requirements; 
  • Decontrol and disposition requirements; 
  • Reporting requirements; 
  • Self-Inspection requirements; 
  • Process for reporting misuse of CUI; and 
  • Penalties for misuse of CUI. 

ISOO Notice 2026-07 provides additional detail on several of these items.  For example, the Notice instructs agencies to decontrol CUI in a timely manner when it no longer requires protection and to “include the identification of a specific decontrolling date or event with all CUI.”  It also requires agencies to implement processes for the timely communication of CUI challenge decisions (i.e., decisions resolving challenges to CUI status). 

Takeaways for Federal Government Contractors 

This guidance is the latest indication that the government is seeking to make strides in more clearly communicating CUI handling requirements to their contractors.  Earlier this summer, the FAR Council release an updated draft of the much-anticipated “FAR CUI Rule,” which calls for a new Standard Form that would itemize all CUI expected to be handled in contract performance.  While comments on the proposed rule are considered, the new Notices could serve as an immediate step toward clearer CUI expectations in contracts.  As federal agencies begin to implement this guidance, contractors should consider affirmatively requesting the information it outlines.  Obtaining this clarity in writing at the outset of a contractual relationship can help establish clear compliance obligations and minimize the risks of over- or under-protecting CUI. 

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Nkechi Kanu Nkechi Kanu

Nkechi A. Kanu is a counsel in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring, where she is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

Nkechi’s practice focuses on False Claims Act investigations and litigation. Nkechi has significant experience assisting companies with…

Nkechi A. Kanu is a counsel in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring, where she is a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Group.

Nkechi’s practice focuses on False Claims Act investigations and litigation. Nkechi has significant experience assisting companies with complex internal investigations and represents clients in government investigations involving allegations of fraud. She also focuses on assisting clients with investigations relating to cybersecurity and information security compliance. Her complementary litigation practice involves defending companies in government-facing litigation arising under the FCA, resulting in the dismissal of qui tam complaints and successful settlements of FCA claims with DOJ.

Photo of Kate Growley Kate Growley

Kate M. Growley (CIPP/US, CIPP/G) is a director with Crowell & Moring International and based in Hong Kong. Drawing from over a decade of experience as a practicing attorney in the United States, Kate helps her clients understand, navigate, and shape the policy…

Kate M. Growley (CIPP/US, CIPP/G) is a director with Crowell & Moring International and based in Hong Kong. Drawing from over a decade of experience as a practicing attorney in the United States, Kate helps her clients understand, navigate, and shape the policy and regulatory environment for some of the most complex data issues facing multinational companies, including cybersecurity, privacy, and digital transformation. Kate has worked with clients across every major sector, with particular experience in technology, health care, manufacturing, and aerospace and defense. Kate is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP) in both the U.S. private and government sectors by the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP). She is also a Registered Practitioner with the U.S. Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Cyber Accreditation Body (AB).

Photo of Jacob Harrison Jacob Harrison

Jacob Harrison helps his clients navigate both domestic and international legal challenges.

Jake advises U.S. government contractors on internal investigations and state and federal regulatory compliance. His compliance practice focuses on counseling clients operating at the intersection of government contracts and cybersecurity, including

…

Jacob Harrison helps his clients navigate both domestic and international legal challenges.

Jake advises U.S. government contractors on internal investigations and state and federal regulatory compliance. His compliance practice focuses on counseling clients operating at the intersection of government contracts and cybersecurity, including for cybersecurity compliance reviews, risk assessments, and data breaches.

In his international practice, Jake represents foreign and domestic clients in Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and Anti-Terrorism Act litigation. He also has experience advising clients involved in cross-border commercial arbitration proceedings.

During law school, Jake served as an associate editor of the Emory Law Journal and interned at the Supreme Court of Georgia and the Georgia House Democratic Caucus. Before attending law school, Jake worked in politics and state government.