NewsGovernmentNew
GSA's AI contract clause takes effect, barring vendors from training models on government data
A General Services Administration clause covering federal purchases of large language model tools took effect on 19 October; it is a class deviation, so it applies as policy before formal rulemaking and public comment.
Evidence: 4 sources · 1 official record · 3 independent reports · 3 open questions
| Date | Step |
|---|---|
| March 2026 | First draft circulated |
| 17 June 2026 | Revised draft in the Federal Register |
| 19 October 2026 | Takes effect as a class deviation |
| 6 November 2026 (planned) | Added to the Multiple Award Schedule |
What happened
- On 19 October, GSA's clause 552.239-7001, "Basic Safeguarding of Data within Large Language Model Artificial Intelligence Systems", took effect.
- GSA issued it as a class deviation in a regulation memo signed by Senior Procurement Executive Jeffrey Koses, so contracting officers could use it before the effective date.
- It applies when the government buys a tool in which large language model functionality is a material feature and government data goes into or comes out of the model.
- Contractors may not use government data to train models, to inform advertising, or to sell to third parties.
- GSA plans to add the clause to its Multiple Award Schedule in a refresh scheduled for 6 November.
Why it matters
GSA runs the contracts many agencies use to buy software, so these terms are likely to shape how AI chatbots, agents, and productivity tools are sold across the federal government.
What is confirmed and what is claimed
Confirmed
- The clause took effect on 19 October as a class deviation and remains policy until GSA rescinds it or codifies it through formal rulemaking with public comment (Nextgov/FCW; FedScoop; Covington's Inside Government Contracts). 123
- It covers purchases of AI where government data is processed by the model, and does not cover large language models that contractors use only internally, unless delivered to or accessed by the government (FedScoop; Nextgov/FCW). 12
- It bars contractors from using government data for model training, advertising, or sale to third parties (Nextgov/FCW). 1
- The final version followed more than 75 comments on earlier drafts, and a requirement in a March 2026 draft barring AI components controlled by non-US entities was dropped (Nextgov/FCW; Wiley). 1
Claimed, not independently verified
- GSA reserves the right to run its own automated assessments of covered models, including against what the clause calls "Unbiased AI Principles"; how often it will do so is not yet known (as described by Covington).
- The Center for Democracy and Technology called the final terms a significant improvement over earlier drafts (as reported by Nextgov/FCW). 1
The clause is the most detailed set of contract terms the US government has adopted for buying generative AI. It sets rules for how vendors handle the data agencies type into chatbots, agents, and AI features in productivity software, including encrypted transmission, audit logging, incident reporting, and returning or deleting data when a contract ends.
Context
GSA first circulated a draft in March 2026. Industry pushed back on its breadth, including a ban on AI components from non-US entities and broad licensing demands. A revised version was published for comment in the Federal Register on 17 June. The final text narrows the clause to cases where the government is actually buying AI and its data passes through the model.
Because it is a class deviation rather than a final rule, it applies immediately but can be changed or withdrawn without the full rulemaking process. Contracting officers decide whether to add it to contracts already awarded.
The clause arrives as GSA moves its "OneGov" AI deals with major model providers away from nominal $1 prices toward usage-based pricing, which makes contract terms on data and cost more important for agencies. For the wider questions to ask about public-sector AI, see our guide to AI in government.
What to watch
- The Multiple Award Schedule refresh planned for 6 November, which would put the clause in front of many more vendors.
- Whether GSA publishes the benchmarks it would use for its own model assessments.
- Formal rulemaking and the public comments it draws.
What we don’t know yet
- How contracting officers will judge when large language model functionality is a "material feature", a phrase legal commentators say the clause does not define.
- Whether the bias-assessment provisions will be used, and against which benchmarks.
- When GSA will start formal rulemaking, and whether other agencies will adopt similar terms.
Evidence and sources
- Independent reporting GSA memo to set AI-specific acquisition rules
- Independent reporting GSA issued an AI acquisition policy for new contracts. Here's what it says.
- Document or data GSAR Class Deviation on Safeguarding Government Data in Large Language Models Takes Effect
- Independent reporting The Most Important Phrase in GSA's Revised AI Clause Has No Definition