[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 22, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44964-44966]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-11195]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Docket ID: DoD-2024-OS-0058]


Defense Industrial Base Adoption of Artificial Intelligence for 
Defense Applications; Notice of Availability

AGENCY: Office of Policy, Analysis, and Transition (PA&T), Office of 
the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Industrial Base Resilience), 
Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Notice of request for public comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The DoD Office of Industrial Base Resilience seeks public 
comment on actions it can take to enable the Defense Industrial Base 
(DIB) to continue to adopt artificial intelligence (AI) for defense 
applications. Feedback from the public will guide the DoD in developing 
policies, initiatives, and resource distribution to ensure support for 
the DIB in integrating AI into defense systems. Public comments will 
also be used to formulate PA&T's Trusted AI Defense Industrial Base 
Roadmap.

DATES: Responses to this notice must be received by July 22, 2024.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by any of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant to the 
Secretary of Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency, 
4800 Mark Center Drive, Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, VA 22350-
1700.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name, docket 
number, and title of this Federal Register document. Each responding 
entity (individual or organization) is requested to submit only one 
response. You need not reply to all questions listed. The general 
policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is 
to make them available as they are received, without change, including 
any personal identifiers or contact information for public viewing on 
the internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, your response to 
this RFI should not include any information that is proprietary, 
copyrighted, or personally identifiable, or that you do not wish to be 
made public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kylie Gaskins, Deputy Director, 
Enabling Future Capabilities Transition Division of the Office of 
Policy, Analysis, and Transition, at (571) 372-6380 or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The DoD Office of Industrial Base Resilience recognizes that the 
integration of AI into defense systems is pivotal to national security. 
The DIB is responsible for developing, manufacturing, and maintaining 
the systems that the U.S. military uses to defend the nation. DoD 
collaborates with the DIB to rapidly adopt AI for defense applications 
and maintain the nation's tactical advantage.

[[Page 44965]]

    The Department recognizes the importance of investing in the DIB's 
ability to incorporate AI into the design, development, operations, 
maintenance, and support of defense systems. Two Executive Orders 
signed in 2021 and 2023 underscore the need for the United States to 
uphold its technological competitiveness. Executive Order 14017, 
``America's Supply Chains'' (available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/03/01/2021-04280/americas-supply-chains), prioritizes the establishment of a resilient supply 
chain and DIB to safeguard U.S. economic prosperity and national 
security. Executive Order 14110, ``Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy 
Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence'' (available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/11/01/2023-24283/safe-secure-and-trustworthy-development-and-use-of-artificial-intelligence), 
highlights the importance of integrating AI securely and safely. The 
recently released National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS) 
(available at https://www.businessdefense.gov/NDIS.html) emphasizes the 
significance of robust supply chains and modernization of the DIB, both 
of which can be facilitated through the adoption of AI. Finally, the 
Data, Analytics, and Artificial Intelligence Adoption Strategy 
(available at https://media.defense.gov/2023/Nov/02/2003333300/-1/-1/1/DOD_DATA_ANALYTICS_AI_ADOPTION_STRATEGY.PDF), by the Department's Chief 
Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office, advocates for an approach 
to AI that includes data, analytics, rapid research and development, 
and seamless integration with allied nations and partners. These 
strategies, approaches, and policies emphasize the critical importance 
of a robust DIB with the resources necessary to employ AI effectively 
for defense applications.
    The Department seeks comments from the public to: (1) help the DoD 
understand the resources needed by the DIB for ongoing integration of 
AI into defense systems; and (2) help PA&T to develop a Trusted AI 
Defense Industrial Base Roadmap, which will outline short-, mid-, and 
long-term DIB considerations for AI-enabled defense systems.

Written Comments

    The DoD seeks input and insight specifically pertaining to the 
policy goals outlined in Executive Orders 14017 and 14110, the NDIS, 
and the Data, Analytics, and Artificial Intelligence Adoption Strategy. 
These directives directly impact the DIB's ability to integrate AI into 
defense applications. The Department is seeking input from the public 
on the following questions:

Infrastructure/Supply Chain Resilience

    The domestic DIB includes public-sector (government-owned, 
government-operated) facilities, academic institutions, and private-
sector (commercial) companies that are located in the United States and 
that enable the DoD to conduct its missions. The global DIB includes 
foreign-owned companies, commodities, and supply chains sourced from 
countries with or without which the United States maintains formal 
defense cooperation partnerships with the United States. Together, the 
domestic DIB and portions of the global DIB form the National 
Technology and Industrial Base, as established by 10 U.S.C. 4801.
    1. What foundational investments in the DIB does the DoD need to 
make to support increased adoption of AI into defense systems (e.g., 
manufacturing considerations, standards, best practices, bill of 
materials, etc.)? What foundational investments (e.g., standards, best 
practices, bills of materials, etc.) already exist within the DIB for 
defense systems that incorporate AI?
    2. Are there specific vulnerabilities in the current and future 
supply chain that the DoD needs to address to support defense systems 
that incorporate AI?
    3. Are there specific sectors/subindustries within the DIB that 
face significant challenges in developing and applying AI to defense 
systems? If so, which sectors/subindustries are impacted and what 
challenges do the sectors/subindustries face?

Workforce

    A non-traditional defense contractor is defined as an entity that 
is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least the 
one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by the DoD for 
the procurement or transaction, any contract or subcontract for the DoD 
that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards 
prescribed pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 1502 and the regulations implementing 
such section.
    A small business in the United States is defined by the U.S. Small 
Business Administration's table of small business size standards: 
https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards.
    4. How can the DoD support the involvement of non-traditional 
defense contractors and small businesses in the design, development, 
testing, and deployment of AI technologies for defense applications?
    5. How can the DoD support and create effective partnerships with 
the DIB that will ensure that the DoD and DIB workforce is adequately 
trained, skilled, and sized to partner effectively?

Innovation

    6. Are there specific intellectual property considerations or 
challenges related to the development of AI-enabled defense systems 
that impact the DIB? If so, how can the DoD address these issues to 
promote innovation?
    7. How can the DoD promote information-sharing and collaboration 
among government agencies, defense contractors, and research 
institutions to enhance data availability, collective knowledge, 
capabilities, and defense innovation in AI adoption into defense 
systems?
    8. What measures can the DoD take to assess and mitigate the risks 
associated with potential adversarial exploitation of AI technologies 
within the DIB for developmental and/or operational defense systems?

Acquisition, Policy, & Regulatory Environment

    9. Please identify statutory, regulatory, or other policy barriers 
to the DIB's design, development, testing, and provision of AI-enabled 
defense systems in a manner consistent with DoD's approach to 
Responsible AI (https://rai.tradewindai.com/).
    10. Please identify examples of DoD programs, strategies, policies, 
or initiatives that have provided effective support to the DIB in 
transitioning AI for defense applications. What made these programs, 
strategies, policies, or initiatives successful?
    11. What DoD financing and acquisition mechanisms can help 
facilitate or incentivize the DIB to continue to invest in AI 
technologies for defense applications?
    12. What are the primary barriers that the DoD needs to address in 
the next five to ten years to enable the DIB to adopt AI for defense 
applications?
    13. In what ways can AI support or enhance acquisitions, supply 
chain management, regulatory compliance, and information-sharing in the 
DIB?
    The DoD encourages respondents to structure their comments using 
the same text above as identifiers for the areas of inquiry to which 
they are responding. This will assist the DoD in reviewing and 
summarizing the comments. For example, a commenter submitting comments 
responsive to (1), ``1. What foundational investments in the Defense 
Industrial Base (DIB) does the DoD need to make to support increased 
adoption of AI into defense systems (e.g.,

[[Page 44966]]

manufacturing considerations, standards, best practices, bill of 
materials, etc.)?'' would use that same text as a heading in the public 
comments followed by the commenter's specific comments in this area. 
The Department encourages the use of an Executive Summary at the 
beginning of all comments and information so it can review the 
submitted documents more efficiently. All inputs are welcome. 
Respondents do not need to reply to every question.

Requirements for Written Comments

    The http://www.regulations.gov website allows users to provide 
comments by filling in a ``Type Comment'' field, or by attaching a 
document using an ``Upload File'' field. The DoD prefers that comments 
be provided in an attached document. The Department prefers submissions 
in Microsoft Word (.doc files) or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf files). If the 
submission is provided in a format other than Microsoft Word or Adobe 
Acrobat, please indicate the name of the application in the ``Type 
Comment'' field. Please do not attach separate cover letters to 
electronic submissions; rather, include any information that might 
appear in a cover letter within the comments. Similarly, to the extent 
possible, please include any exhibits, annexes, or other attachments in 
the same file, so the submission consists of one file instead of 
multiple files. Responses must not exceed 12 pages in 12-point or 
larger font, with a page number provided on each page. Comments will be 
placed in the docket and open to public inspection. Comments may be 
viewed on http://www.regulations.gov by entering docket number DoD-
2024-OS-0058 in the search field on the home page.
    All filers should name their files using the name of the person or 
entity submitting the comments. Responses should include the name of 
the person(s) or organization(s) filing the comment, as well as the 
respondent type (e.g., academic institution, advocacy group, 
professional society, industry, member of the public, government 
agency, other). Respondent's role in the organization is also requested 
to be provided (e.g., researcher, faculty, student, administrator, 
program manager, journalist) on a voluntary basis. We will not make 
communications from United States Government agencies available for 
public inspection.
    Anyone submitting business confidential information should clearly 
identify the business confidential portion at the time of submission, 
file a statement justifying nondisclosure and referring to the specific 
legal authority claimed, and provide a non-confidential version of the 
submission. The non-confidential version of the submission will be 
placed in the public file on http://www.regulations.gov. For comments 
submitted electronically containing business confidential information, 
the file name of the business confidential version should begin with 
the characters ``BC.'' Any page containing business confidential 
information must be clearly marked ``BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL'' on the top 
of that page. The non-confidential version must be clearly marked 
``PUBLIC.'' The file name of the non-confidential version should begin 
with the character ``P.'' The ``BC'' and ``P'' should be followed by 
the name of the person or entity submitting the comments or rebuttal 
comments.
    If a public hearing is held in support of this assessment, a 
separate Federal Register notice will be published providing the date 
and information about the hearing. The Office of the Deputy Assistant 
Secretary of Defense (Industrial Base Resilience) does not maintain a 
separate public inspection facility. Requesters should first view the 
Department's web page, which can be found at https://open.defense.gov/ 
(see ``Electronic FOIA'' heading). The records related to this 
assessment are made accessible in accordance with the regulations 
published in part 4 of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations (15 
CFR 4.1 through 4.11).

    Dated: May 16, 2024.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2024-11195 Filed 5-21-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6001-FR-P