[Senate Report 118-109]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 234
118th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 118-109
_______________________________________________________________________
AI LEADERSHIP TRAINING ACT
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
to accompany
S. 1564
TO REQUIRE THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT TO ESTABLISH, OR OTHERWISE
ENSURE THE PROVISION OF, A TRAINING PROGRAM ON
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR FEDERAL MANAGEMENT
OFFICIALS AND SUPERVISORS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
November 2, 2023.--Ordered to be printed
_________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
49-010 WASHINGTON : 2023
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan, Chairman
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JON OSSOFF, Georgia RICK SCOTT, Florida
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
LAPHONZA R. BUTLER, California ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
David M. Weinberg, Staff Director
Michelle M. Benecke, Senior Counsel
William E. Henderson III, Minority Staff Director
Christina N. Salazar, Minority Chief Counsel
Kendal B. Tigner, Minority Professional Staff Member
Laura W. Kilbride, Chief Clerk
Calendar No. 234
118th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 118-109
======================================================================
AI LEADERSHIP TRAINING ACT
_______
November 2, 2023.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Peters, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1564]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs, to which was referred the bill (S. 1564), to require
the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to
establish, or otherwise ensure the provision of, a training
program on artificial intelligence for Federal management
officials and supervisors, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment, in the nature of a substitute, and recommends that
the bill, as amended, do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
I. Purpose and Summary.............................................. 1
II. Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
III. Legislative History.............................................. 2
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill, as Reported............. 3
V. Evaluation of Regulatory Impact.................................. 4
VI. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 4
VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 5
I. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
S. 1564, the Artificial Intelligence Leadership Training
Act, requires the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) to provide or otherwise ensure that federal
supervisors and management officials receive annual training on
artificial intelligence (AI). Instruction required in this
legislation includes trustworthy and responsible AI; the
benefits and risks of AI; how risks can be mitigated; and,
future trends. The bill encourages the OPM Director to utilize
interactive learning with technologists, scholars, and other
experts from the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. The
bill requires methods to measure the participation of trainees
and receive their feedback, and includes a sunset of 10 years
after the date of enactment.
II. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
As the federal government ramps up investments in AI,
leaders in the federal government need training on its
capabilities and risks.\1\ Along with positive impacts for
agencies and society, there are parallel causes of concern
that, if improperly or maliciously applied, AI could cause
grave harm to our citizens as well as to national security.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, Final
Report (Mar. 2021) (www.nscai.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Full-
Report-Digital-1.pdf); National Artificial Intelligence Advisory
Committee, Year 1 Report (May 2023) (www.ai.gov/wp-content/uploads/
2023/05/NAIAC-Report-Year1.pdf).
\2\Pew Research Center, Themes: The most harmful or menacing
changes in digital life that are likely by 2035 (June 21, 2023)
(www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/06/21/themes-the-most-harmful-or-
menacing-changes-in-digital-life-that-are-likely-by-2035/); Brookings
Institution, Protecting privacy in an AI-driven world (Feb. 10, 2020)
(www.brookings.edu/research/protecting-privacy-in-an-ai-driven-world/);
Government Accountability Office, Artificial Intelligence: An
Accountability Framework for Federal Agencies and Other Entities (GAO-
21-519SP) (June 30, 2021); Government Accountability Office, Facial
Recognition Technology: Federal Law Enforcement Agencies Should Better
Assess Privacy and Other Risks (GAO-21-518) (June 29, 2021); see also
Government Accountability Office, Forensic Technology: Algorithms
Strengthen Forensic Analysis, but Several Factors Can Affect Outcomes
(GAO-21-435SP) (July 6, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The need for workforce training on AI has been recognized
by experts such as the National Security Commission on
Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI).\3\ In its report, NSCAI is
particularly concerned with the implications of an under-
trained federal workforce, noting: ``Government agencies that
rely solely on contractors for digital expertise will become
incapable of understanding the underlying technology well
enough to make successful acquisition decisions independent of
contractors.''\4\ More recently, the National AI Advisory
Committee also recommended training for public and private
sector entities, citing lack of knowledge and skills among
personnel as a challenge to adoption of trustworthy AI.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, Final
Report (Mar. 2021) (www.nscai.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Full-
Report-Digital-1.pdf).
\4\Id. at 123.
\5\National Artificial Intelligence Advisory Committee, Year 1
Report (May 2023) (www.ai.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/NAIAC-Report-
Year1.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Senator Gary Peters (D-MI) introduced S. 1564, the
Artificial Intelligence Leadership Training Act, on May 11,
2023, with original cosponsor Senator Mike Braun (R-IN). The
bill was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs.
The Committee considered S. 1564 at a business meeting on
May 17, 2023. At the business meeting, Senator Peters offered a
substitute amendment, as well as a modification to the
substitute amendment due to negotiations with the Ranking
Member. The Peters substitute amendment as modified adds more
time to implement the bill and adds a requirement for the
training program in the bill to cover the risks that federal
government use of AI, including the use of AI for censorship
and surveillance and the risks AI, poses to the First and
Fourth Amendments to the Constitution. The Peters substitute
amendment as modified also allows Congress to request
information from the OPM Director on materials used to carry
out the training program, including the name and organization
of any person responsible for developing any part of the
training provided by the program, and it provides the Director
14 days to respond to any request. The Committee adopted the
modification to the Peters substitute amendment and the Peters
substitute as modified by unanimous consent, with Senators
Peters, Hassan, Sinema, Rosen, Padilla, Ossoff, Blumenthal,
Paul, Lankford, Romney, and Scott present.
Senator Paul offered an amendment to the bill that would
have required a GAO evaluation and report of all censorship and
surveillance activities conducted by the Department of Homeland
Security. The Paul amendment was not adopted, by roll call vote
of 6 yeas to 9 nays, with Senators Paul, Lankford, and Scott
voting in the affirmative, and Senators Peters, Hassan, Sinema,
Rosen, Padilla, Ossoff, Blumenthal, and Romney voting in the
negative. Senators Johnson, Hawley, and Marshall voted yea by
proxy, and Senator Carper voted nay by proxy.
The bill, as amended by the Peters substitute amendment as
modified, was ordered reported favorably by roll call vote of 9
yeas to 1 nay, with Senators Peters, Hassan, Sinema, Rosen,
Padilla, Ossoff, Blumenthal, Lankford, and Romney voting in the
affirmative, and Senator Paul voting in the negative. Senators
Carper and Marshall voted yea by proxy, for the record only,
and Senators Johnson, Scott, and Hawley voted nay by proxy, for
the record only.
IV. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE BILL, AS REPORTED
Section 1. Short title
This section establishes the short title of the bill as the
``Artificial Intelligence Leadership Training Act'' or the ``AI
Leadership Training Act.''
Section 2. Artificial Intelligence leadership training program
Subsection (a) defines the terms ``AI,'' ``covered
employee,'' ``director,'' ``executive agency,'' ``management
official,'' ``supervisor,'' and ``program.''
Subsection (b) instructs the Director of OPM to develop and
implement, or otherwise ensure the provision of, an AI
leadership training program for covered employees, who are
supervisors and managers, to be provided on an annual basis.
The purpose is to ensure that these leaders have knowledge
regarding (1) the capabilities and risks associated with AI;
(2) safety and ethical issues relating to AI; (3) federal
government requirements and best practices with respect to AI,
such as with respect to the procurement, use, testing,
evaluation, and auditing of AI capabilities; and (4) other
matters relating to requirements for the development and use of
AI within and by the federal government. This subsection
enumerates the purposes of the topics that, at a minimum, must
be included in the program.
This subsection also requires the Director to update the
program every two years, and to establish a means by which to
measure participation in the program and to receive and
incorporate feedback from participants. This subsection
includes a sense of Congress that the program should include
interactions with technologists, scholars, and other experts
from the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. Finally, this
subsection requires the program to sunset 10 years after the
enactment of this bill.
V. EVALUATION OF REGULATORY IMPACT
Pursuant to the requirements of paragraph 11(b) of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee has
considered the regulatory impact of this bill and determined
that the bill will have no regulatory impact within the meaning
of the rules. The Committee agrees with the Congressional
Budget Office's statement that the bill contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would impose no costs
on state, local, or tribal governments.
VI. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
S. 1564 would require the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) to establish a training program to provide federal
managers with an introductory understanding of the operational
benefits and privacy risks of using artificial intelligence, or
AI, which allows computer systems to perform tasks that
typically require human intelligence.
Using information from OPM and other agencies about efforts
to use AI across the federal government, CBO anticipates that
OPM would need five full-time employees to create and manage
the training program. Accounting for the time needed to develop
the program, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would
cost $10 million over the 2023-2028 period for staff and
technology costs. Any spending would be subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
The costs of the legislation, detailed in Table 1, fall
within budget function 800 (general government). For this
estimate, CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted late in
fiscal year 2023 and that costs from implementing the bill will
begin in fiscal year 2024.
TABLE 1.--ESTIMATED INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION UNDER S. 1564
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, millions of dollars--
----------------------------------------------------------
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2023-2028
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Authorization.............................. 0 2 2 2 2 2 10
Estimated Outlays.................................... 0 2 2 2 2 2 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Aldo Prosperi.
The estimate was reviewed by Christina Hawley Anthony, Deputy
Director of Budget Analysis.
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director, Congressional Budget Office.
VII. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
This legislation would make no change in existing law,
within the meaning of clauses (a) and (b) of subparagraph 12 of
rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, because this
legislation would not repeal or amend any provision of current
law.
[all]