[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4683 Introduced in Senate (IS)]
<DOC>
119th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. 4683
To require the Secretary of Defense to assess the effects of artificial
intelligence integration on warfighter effectiveness, skill retention,
and operational readiness, and for other purposes.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
June 4, 2026
Mr. Kelly (for himself and Mr. Cotton) introduced the following bill;
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To require the Secretary of Defense to assess the effects of artificial
intelligence integration on warfighter effectiveness, skill retention,
and operational readiness, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Warfighter Artificial Intelligence
Readiness and Preparedness Act of 2026'' or the ``WARP Act of 2026''.
SEC. 2. ASSESSMENT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE EFFECTS ON WARFIGHTER
SKILL RETENTION AND OPERATIONAL READINESS.
(a) Assessment Required.--Commencing not later than August 1, 2027,
the Secretary of Defense shall conduct a comprehensive assessment of
the effects on human performance of the adoption of artificial
intelligence systems by personnel of the Department of Defense on the
maintenance and retention of essential warfighter skills.
(b) Coordination and Lead Official.--The Secretary of Defense shall
designate a senior official--
(1) to coordinate the assessment and research activities
required by this section;
(2) to oversee the integration of findings under this
section into the policies of the Department, with the objective
of maximizing both artificial intelligence-enabled performance
and proficiency in critical, hard-to-recover skills; and
(3) who is authorized to coordinate among the military
departments and relevant defense agencies for purposes of
carrying out this section.
(c) Scope of Assessment.--The assessment required under subsection
(a) shall include the following:
(1) Identification of military occupational specialties and
operational roles where structured proficiency management will
be most critical to sustaining readiness alongside artificial
intelligence adoption based on the susceptibility to skill
atrophy resulting from reliance on artificial intelligence-
enabled systems as well as speed and investments to recover
such skill.
(2) Evaluation of the conditions under which artificial
intelligence-enabled systems augment warfighter capability and
the conditions that call for deliberate proficiency sustainment
measures to preserve independent judgment and awareness based
on the cognitive, operational, and manual skills decline among
personnel who regularly use artificial intelligence-enabled
systems compared to personnel performing equivalent tasks
without such systems.
(3) Identification of measurable indicators that
distinguish beneficial skill augmentation from conditions
requiring proficiency intervention.
(4) Assessment of how current training and certification
programs can be structured to build and sustain critical, hard-
to-recover proficiency based on a review of the conditions
under which reliance on artificial intelligence systems may
contribute to overreliance, miscalibrated confidence in system
outputs, diminished trust in independent human judgment, or
reduced situation awareness.
(5) Evaluation of whether current training programs and
certification standards adequately preserve critical warfighter
proficiency for degraded-mode, denied, or contested operational
environments, including the adequacy of primary, alternate,
contingency, and emergency planning frameworks.
(6) Recommendations for policies, training protocols,
doctrine, acquisition requirements, talent management
strategies, or readiness metrics to ensure that artificial
intelligence adoption strengthens operational readiness.
(d) Research Activities.--
(1) In general.--The official designated under subsection
(b) shall carry out research activities to support the
assessment required under subsection (a), which may include
controlled experiments or high-fidelity simulations comparing
performance with and without artificial intelligence-enabled
systems, longitudinal studies measuring skill retention
trajectories, full-spectrum performance, and recovery
timelines, assessment of operator confidence and decisionmaking
accuracy under simulated contested conditions, and development
of standardized skill sustainment metrics applicable across the
Armed Forces.
(2) Coordination.--In carrying out the research activities
under paragraph (1), the official designated under subsection
(b) shall coordinate with the following entities, as
appropriate:
(A) The Army Research Institute for Behavioral and
Social Sciences.
(B) The Office of Naval Research.
(C) The Air Force Research Laboratory Human
Effectiveness Directorate.
(D) The Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence
Office.
(E) The military departments.
(F) Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness.
(G) Such other research entities and operational
commands as the Secretary of Defense considers
appropriate.
(3) Research methodology.--Research conducted under this
subsection shall--
(A) establish baseline measurements of task
performance and cognitive capabilities prior to
artificial intelligence system use;
(B) assess performance changes during routine
artificial intelligence-assisted operations;
(C) evaluate skill sustainment when artificial
intelligence systems are removed or unavailable;
(D) measure recovery timelines to baseline
proficiency after extended artificial intelligence-
assisted operations; and
(E) identify factors that accelerate or support
skill sustainment.
(e) Reports.--
(1) Initial report.--
(A) In general.--Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on the assessment required under
subsection (a).
(B) Elements.--The report required under
subparagraph (A) shall include the following:
(i) An identification of military
occupational specialties and operational roles
where proficiency sustainment will be most
critical based on which are most vulnerable to
hard-to-recover skill atrophy.
(ii) Preliminary findings from controlled
operational experiments and the design of
longitudinal studies under subsection (d)(1).
(iii) An assessment of opportunities to
strengthen readiness based on identification of
high-level risks to proficiency based on
current or planned artificial intelligence
deployment practices.
(iv) Recommended changes to policies,
training, doctrine, or acquisition requirements
to optimize human and artificial intelligence
integration.
(v) Recommendations for updates, identified
as near- or long-term in nature, to existing
training programs, certification standards, and
operational doctrine to build and sustain
critical and hard-to-recover proficiencies and
identification of the Department of Defense
component or office best positioned to
implement each such recommendation.
(vi) An identification of any additional
authorities, resources, research partnerships
with academic institutions or federally funded
research and development centers, or technical
expertise needed to conduct the research
activities described in subsection (d).
(2) Longitudinal study report.--
(A) In general.--Not later than three years after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Defense shall submit to the congressional defense
committees a report containing the findings of the
longitudinal studies conducted under subsection (d)(1).
(B) Elements.--The report required under
subparagraph (A) shall include the following:
(i) An identification of measured rates of
retention and atrophy of hard-to-recover skills
across different military occupational
specialties and operational contexts.
(ii) An assessment of skill recovery
trajectories and the time required to restore
baseline proficiency.
(iii) An evaluation of degraded-mode
performance outcomes under simulated contested
conditions.
(iv) Updated recommendations for policies,
training protocols, doctrine, acquisition
requirements, or readiness metrics based on
research findings.
(v) Any update to the recommendations made
under paragraph (1)(B)(v).
(f) Briefings.--
(1) Initial briefing.--Not later than 90 days after the
submittal of the initial report under subsection (e)(1), the
Secretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional defense
committees a briefing on the findings and recommendations
contained in such report.
(2) Longitudinal study briefing.--Not later than 90 days
after the submittal of the longitudinal study report under
subsection (e)(2), the Secretary of Defense shall provide to
the congressional defense committees a briefing on the findings
and recommendations contained in such report.
(g) Review of Training and Doctrine.--The Secretary of Defense
shall assess whether existing training programs, certification
standards, and operational doctrine adequately account for the effects
of artificial intelligence-enabled systems on skill retention and
degraded-mode performance and shall include in the reports required
under subsection (e)--
(1) recommendations for updates, as appropriate, identified
as near-term or longer-term in nature; and
(2) identification of the Department of Defense component
or office best positioned to consider implementation of each
such recommendation.
(h) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Artificial intelligence system.--The term ``artificial
intelligence system'' has the meaning given the term
``artificial intelligence'' in section 238(g) of the John S.
McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019
(Public Law 115-232; 10 U.S.C. 4061 note prec.).
(2) Artificial intelligence-enabled system.--The term
``artificial intelligence-enabled system'' means any weapons
system, decision support tool, or operational capability that
incorporates or relies on an artificial intelligence system.
(3) Congressional defense committees.--The term
``congressional defense committees'' has the meaning given that
term in section 101 of title 10, United States Code.
(4) Degraded-mode operations.--The term ``degraded-mode
operations'' means military operations conducted when
artificial intelligence systems or supporting infrastructure
are unavailable, partially functional, compromised, or under
adversarial attack.
(5) Primary, alternate, contingency, and emergency
planning.--The term ``primary, alternate, contingency, and
emergency planning'' means a framework for ensuring continuity
of operations when primary systems become unavailable,
requiring personnel to employ alternate approaches, contingency
plans, or emergency procedures.
<all>