Overview
A memorandum signed by Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence Aaron Lukas on 31 July 2026 set out preliminary implementation guidance for a UAP nondisclosure-agreement waiver. Representative Eric Burlison’s office publicly distributed it the following day with the administration’s authorisation.
The operative condition concerns the recipient: the memorandum describes waiving prior agreements, oaths or commitments when current or former government employees and contractors speak with authorised government representatives of AARO or PURSUE. Its opening reference to review and declassification identifies a controlled government process. It should not be presented as a general public-release authorisation for every item someone describes as UAP information.
Chronology
29 July 2026 Burlison issues a statement about the presidential NDA directive.
31 July 2026 Lukas signs preliminary memorandum ES 2026-00818.
1 August 2026 Burlison’s office publicly distributes the memorandum.
Within 30 days of receipt The memorandum directs IC components to coordinate designees and anticipates detailed reporting procedures.
What the memorandum directs
The text says the Department of War and Intelligence Community will implement a process for current and former government employees and contractors with relevant UAP information. It names AARO and authorised PURSUE representatives as recipients. Its distribution list spans intelligence agencies, departmental intelligence offices and the armed services.
The instruction also requires Intelligence Community members to coordinate a PURSUE designee with ODNI and inform their workforce of the presidential order. Those administrative actions matter: a person needs an identifiable authorised recipient and a usable procedure for the waiver to become a practical reporting route.
What remained to be implemented
The memorandum calls itself preliminary guidance. It says detailed reporting procedures will be disseminated within thirty days and that broader implementation guidance will follow. Those statements are commitments to subsequent work. The released memorandum alone cannot establish whether every designee was appointed on time, every affected person was notified or every submitted report was examined.
The thirty-day instruction is tied to receipt of the memorandum. Without delivery records it cannot be converted into a single verified completion date for all recipients. A useful implementation history would pair the memorandum with dated component instructions and evidence of the resulting reporting arrangements.
The distinction between reporting access and findings
Removing a contractual obstacle to authorised reporting can make information available for examination. It does not authenticate the information in advance. Claims about recovered materials, hidden programmes or unusual encounters still require records and evidence appropriate to each claim.
Similarly, a process for review and declassification has an outcome separate from intake. A submission may prompt investigation without becoming a public release. Counting publicly released files would not, by itself, measure how many people used the waiver or how many submissions contained relevant new information.
Evidence assessment
Lukas’s memorandum turns the presidential directive into instructions to Intelligence Community members. The named recipients, designee requirement and promised procedures give readers specific commitments to check against later implementation records.
It gives no tally of disclosures or investigative results. Establishing whether the reporting route yielded new information requires later component instructions and dated submission and decision records.
Source library
ODNI memorandum ES 2026-00818
Signed two-page preliminary guidance, including distribution list. The signature date is 31 July 2026; the authorised-recipient condition is in the operative paragraph. Read source
Burlison: public distribution of the administration memorandum
The issuing office’s 1 August 2026 announcement of authorised distribution. It establishes the release history, not an independent legal interpretation or implementation audit. Read source