§ 4001. Research and development projects

§ 4001. Research and development projects

(a) Authority.— The Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a military department may engage in basic research, applied research, advanced research, and development projects that—

(1) are necessary to the responsibilities of such Secretary’s department in the field of research and development; and

(2) either—

(A) relate to weapon systems and other military needs; or

(B) are of potential interest to the Department of Defense.

(b) Authorized Means.— The Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a military department may perform research and development projects—

(1) by contract, cooperative agreement, or grant, in accordance with chapter 63 of title 31;

(2) through one or more military departments;

(3) by using employees and consultants of the Department of Defense;

(4) by mutual agreement with the head of any other department or agency of the Federal Government;

(5) by transactions (other than contracts, cooperative agreements, and grants) entered into pursuant to section 4021 or 4022 of this title; or

(6) by purchases through procurement for experimental purposes pursuant to section 4023 of this title.

(c) Requirement of Potential Department of Defense Interest.— Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense or to a military department may not be used to finance any research project or study unless the project or study is, in the opinion of the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of that military department, respectively, of potential interest to the Department of Defense or to such military department, respectively.

(d) Additional Provisions Applicable to Cooperative Agreements.— Additional authorities, conditions, and requirements relating to certain cooperative agreements authorized by this section are provided in sections 4021 and 4026 of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 87–651, title II, § 208(a), Sept. 7, 1962, 76 Stat. 523, § 2358; amended Pub. L. 97–86, title IX, § 910, Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1120; Pub. L. 100–370, § 1(g)(3), July 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 846; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VIII, § 827(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1712; Pub. L. 103–355, title I, § 1301(a), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3284; Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title II, § 267(c)(2), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2468; Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VIII, § 862, Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1494; renumbered § 4001 and amended Pub. L. 116–283, div. A, title XVIII, § 1841(b)(1), (2)(A), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4243; Pub. L. 117–81, div. A, title XVII, § 1701(u)(2)(B), (C), (F)(i)(I), (II), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2151.)

5 U.S.C. 171c(b)(3) is omitted as unnecessary since the authorization for appropriations is implied in 5 U.S.C. 171c(b)(2).

1988 Act

In the existing text of 10 U.S.C. 2358, the bill would in two instances strike the phrase “or his designee” appearing after “Secretary of Defense” (section 1(g)(3)). The change is made for consistency in the Code, and no substantive change is intended. The committee notes that the Secretary of Defense has general authority to delegate functions under 10 U.S.C. 113(d).

Subsection (b) is based on Pub. L. 91–441, title II, § 204, Oct. 7, 1970, 84 Stat. 908.

Editorial Notes

Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–283, § 1841(b)(1), as amended by Pub. L. 117–81, § 1701(u)(2)(B), renumbered section 2358 of this title as this section.

Subsec. (b)(5). Pub. L. 116–283, § 1841(b)(2)(A)(i), as amended by Pub. L. 117–81, § 1701(u)(2)(C), substituted “section 4021 or 4022” for “section 2371 or 2371b”.

Subsec. (b)(6). Pub. L. 116–283, § 1841(b)(2)(A)(ii), as amended by Pub. L. 117–81, § 1701(u)(2)(F)(i)(I), substituted “section 4023” for “section 2373”.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 116–283, § 1841(b)(2)(A)(iii), as amended by Pub. L. 117–81, § 1701(u)(2)(F)(i)(II), substituted “sections 4021 and 4026” for “sections 2371 and 2371a”.

2017—Subsec. (b)(5), (6). Pub. L. 115–91 added pars. (5) and (6).

1996—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104–201 substituted “sections 2371 and 2371a” for “section 2371”.

1994—Pub. L. 103–355 amended section generally, inserting reference to development projects in section catchline, and in text specifying that relevant Secretary may perform research and development projects in accordance with chapter 63 of title 31, and adding subsec. (d) relating to additional provisions applicable to cooperative agreements.

1993—Pub. L. 103–160 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section read as follows:

“(a) In General.—Subject to approval by the President, the Secretary of Defense may engage in basic and applied research projects that are necessary to the responsibilities of the Department of Defense in the field of basic and applied research and development and that relate to weapons systems and other military needs. Subject to approval by the President, the Secretary may perform assigned research and development projects—

“(1) by contract with, or by grant to, educational or research institutions, private businesses, or other agencies of the United States;

“(2) through one or more of the military departments; or

“(3) by using employees and consultants of the Department of Defense.

“(b) Requirement of Potential Military Relationship.—Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense may not be used to finance any research project or study unless the project or study has, in the opinion of the Secretary of Defense, a potential relationship to a military function or operation.”

1988—Pub. L. 100–370 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, struck out “or his designee” after “Secretary of Defense” and “President, the Secretary”, and added subsec. (b).

1981—Par. (1). Pub. L. 97–86 substituted “by contract with, or by grant to,” for “by contract with”.

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Change of Name

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title II, § 214(a), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1325, provided that: “The joint technology office on hypersonics in the Office of the Secretary of Defense is redesignated as the ‘Joint Hypersonics Transition Office’. Any reference in a law (other than this section), map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the joint technology office on hypersonics shall be deemed to be a reference to the Joint Hypersonics Transition Office.”

Effective Date of 2021 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 117–81 applicable as if included in the enactment of title XVIII of Pub. L. 116–283 as enacted, see section 1701(a)(2) of Pub. L. 117–81, set out in a note preceding section 3001 of this title and note below.

Amendment by Pub. L. 116–283 effective Jan. 1, 2022, with additional provisions for delayed implementation and applicability of existing law, see section 1801(d) of Pub. L. 116–283, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.

Effective Date of 1994 Amendment

For effective date and applicability of amendment by Pub. L. 103–355, see section 10001 of Pub. L. 103–355, set out as a note under section 8752 of this title.

Demonstration of Near Real-Time Monitoring Capabilities To Enhance Weapon System Platforms

Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title II, § 228, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 786, provided that: “(a) Demonstration.—Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the service acquisition executives, shall carry out a demonstration to equip selected weapon system platforms with onboard, near real-time, end-to-end serial bus and radio frequency monitoring capabilities to detect cyber threats and improve maintenance efficiency. “(b) Phases.—The Secretary of Defense shall implement the demonstration under subsection (a) in phases as follows:“(1) Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 2025], the Secretary shall—“(A) select not fewer than three weapon system platforms for initial participation in the demonstration, prioritizing the MH–60R and MQ–9 aircraft fleets and using the priorities identified under section 1559 of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (Public Law 117–263; 10 U.S.C. 2224 note); and “(B) complete the initial deployment of monitoring capabilities to such platforms. “(2) Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall extend monitoring capabilities to the complete fleets of selected platforms and complete initial data collection and analysis from all participating platforms. “(c) Report Required.—“(1) In general.—Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on the findings of the Secretary with respect to the demonstration conducted pursuant to subsection (a). “(2) Contents.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall include the following:“(A) The effectiveness of the monitoring capabilities with respect to—“(i) cyber threat detection; “(ii) maintenance efficiency; and “(iii) operational readiness and mission capable rates. “(B) Specific recommendations regarding—“(i) whether near real-time monitoring capabilities should be implemented across additional Department weapon system platforms; “(ii) if additional implementation is recommended, which specific weapon system platforms should receive priority for such implementation, along with the estimated costs and funding requirements; “(iii) an analysis of the advisability of developing a program for implementing such capabilities, including potential risks, benefits, and trade-offs; and “(iv) proposed metrics for measuring successful implementation and operational effectiveness. “(3) Form of report.—The report submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex.”

Biotechnology Management Office

Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title II, § 242, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 790, provided that: “(a) Designation of Senior Official.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 2025], the Secretary of Defense shall designate a senior official, with relevant biotechnology experience, from a position within the Department of Defense that was in effect on the day before the date of the enactment of this Act, to—“(1) be the senior official for biotechnology issues; “(2) be the head of the Biotechnology Management Office established under subsection (b); and “(3) carry out the responsibilities for the office in subsection (c). “(b) Establishment of Biotechnology Management Office.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, with input from the senior official designated under subsection (a), charter and establish, under the authority, direction, and control of the Deputy Secretary of Defense, a Biotechnology Management Office to foster the development, acquisition, and sustainment of broad-based biotechnology capabilities for the Department. “(c) Responsibilities.—The office established under subsection (b) shall be responsible for the following:“(1) Maintaining and executing the Defense Biotechnology Strategy required by section 246 [139 Stat. 797], including development and execution of a long-term research, development, acquisition, and sustainment roadmap. “(2) Updating policies and guidance within the Department relating to the acquisition, adoption, and transition of biotechnology-based products into Department use. “(3) Coordinating with activities across the Department, the Federal Government, industry, academia, and international partners relating to biotechnology. “(4) Proposing options for streamlining the regulatory or acquisition process of the Department. “(5) Conducting, as may be needed, global competition analyses, net assessment, or forecasting to support decisionmakers on biotechnology advances. “(6) Supporting the development of public-private partnerships with academia, industry, and other State and local government partners, including through the development or fostering of regionally focused innovation ecosystems. “(7) Identifying biotechnology workforce and training gaps across the workforce of the Department. “(8) Such other responsibilities as the Secretary considers appropriate. “(d) Sunset.—This section shall terminate on September 30, 2030. “(e) Briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the designation of the senior official pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a briefing on the proposed scope of the charter for the office to be established pursuant to subsection (b), as well as implementation plans for preliminary activities the office will pursue during the proceeding one-year period.”

Biotechnology Supply Chain Resiliency Program

Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title II, § 244, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 793, provided that: “(a) Authorization.—“(1) In general.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments and the heads of relevant Defense Agencies, may establish and implement a program (referred to in this section as the ‘Program’) to develop and scale within the laboratories of the military departments, and transition from the laboratories of the military departments, biotechnology-based technologies and capabilities (including products such as chemicals, materials, and fuels) that are relevant to the mission of the Department of Defense and support the resilience, sustainability, and responsiveness of the defense supply chain. “(2) Activities.—Under the Program, the Secretary of Defense may carry out the following activities:“(A) Conduct an assessment of supply chain vulnerabilities in the Department of Defense. “(B) Direct the laboratories of the military departments to establish mechanisms to collaboratively—“(i) conduct applied research, including experimentation, advanced technological development, advanced component development, and rapid prototyping in bioindustrials, biomanufacturing, and related disciplines to support defense missions; “(ii) develop, prototype, test, and transition biologically derived materials and products to reduce reliance on foreign supply chains and vulnerable supply chains; “(iii) upgrade, expand, or construct physical and digital infrastructure, including laboratory facilities, of the Department and its partners to support bioindustrial research, development, testing, prototyping, and production; “(iv) as needed, enter into contracts, cooperative agreements, grants, or other transactions with relevant Federal entities and non-Federal entities, such as commercial entities, research institutions, and academic organizations, to execute the activities under this subparagraph (B); and “(v) support education, training, and workforce development initiatives to build and sustain a skilled bioindustrial and biomanufacturing workforce. “(C) Collaborate across the military departments, Defense Agencies, and other Federal entities to ensure alignment with national bioindustrial and supply chain strategies. “(D) Promote the development and utilization of next-generation feedstocks and processes in ways that support local economic growth. “(E) Modernize infrastructure through investment in facilities that enable rapid prototyping and advanced materials testing. “(F) Establish performance metrics and benchmarks to measure progress toward operational integration and transition to programs of record. “(3) Other considerations.—In the event the Secretary of Defense carries out the Program, the Secretary shall—“(A) prioritize technologies and capabilities that address critical defense supply chain vulnerabilities and enhance military readiness, including technologies and capabilities necessary to—“(i) reduce logistics through field-enabled manufacturing of materials and deployable infrastructure components; “(ii) enhance performance through development of novel materials; or “(iii) improve cost efficiency of manufacturing and reduce dependency on foreign supply chains; “(B) consult with representatives of industry, academia, and other Federal agencies with relevant expertise, to accelerate development and transitions; and “(C) ensure the Program supports the development and fielding of emerging technologies such as biotechnologies that provide operational and strategic advantages to the Armed Forces, including through—“(i) cross-service and public-private partnerships; and “(ii) applied research, pilot-scale production, and technology transition efforts focused on biomanufacturing and materials innovation. “(b) Reports.—“(1) Submission.—Not later than one year after commencing the Program, and biennially thereafter until the Program terminates under subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a report detailing all activities carried out under the program. Each report shall include, to the extent applicable, the following:“(A) A summary of key research, development, and prototyping efforts initiated or continued during the year or years covered by the report, including technical objectives, anticipated defense applications, and funding. “(B) A list of significant partnerships or agreements executed with industry, academic institutions, and other Federal agencies, including the purpose, national security nexus, and funding level of each such partnership or agreement. “(C) An assessment of infrastructure enhancements undertaken to support bioindustrial development and scale-up, including facility modernization and equipment acquisition. “(D) An evaluation of program performance against established milestones or metrics, including progress toward the transition of technologies to operational use or acquisition programs. “(E) An identification of major technical, logistical, or policy challenges encountered, and actions taken to mitigate such challenges. “(2) Form.—Each report under this subsection shall be submitted in unclassified form but may contain a classified annex. “(c) Sunset.—“(1) In general.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), the authority to carry out the Program shall terminate on the date that is 10 years after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 2025]. “(2) Extension.—The Program may be continued after the termination date specified in paragraph (1) if, before such date, the President—“(A) determines that continuation of the Program is necessary to meet national economic or national security needs; and “(B) submits notice of such determination to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.”

Ethical and Responsible Development and Deployment of Biotechnology Within the Department of Defense

Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title II, § 247, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 798, provided that: “(a) Requirement.—“(1) Policies and guidelines.—The Secretary of Defense shall issue policies and guidelines on the ethical and responsible development and deployment of biotechnology within the Department of Defense. “(2) Consultation.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the policies and guidelines under paragraph (1) are developed in consultation with—“(A) the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering; “(B) the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; and “(C) individuals representing industry, academia, and civil society. “(3) Public availability.—The Secretary of Defense shall make the policies and guidelines under paragraph (1) publicly available. “(b) Matters Included.—The policies and guidelines under subsection (a)(1) shall include the following:“(1) Definitions related to the ethical and responsible development and use of biotechnology. “(2) An assessment of whether, and to what extent, existing statutes, regulations, directives, manuals, or instructions limit the ability of the Department of Defense to provide guidelines for the ethical and responsible development of emerging biotechnology. “(3) Guidelines encouraging the safe use of biotechnology products under appropriate regulatory and other oversight processes. “(4) Policies relating to informed consent of members of the Armed Forces participating in the development of biotechnology products that have not received regulatory approval. “(5) Policies relating to whether, and under which conditions, uses of biotechnology that potentially result in irreversible or heritable characteristics are acceptable. “(6) Policies relating to the potential effects of biotechnologies on the environment. “(7) Policies relating to the compliance by and obligations of the Department of Defense with respect to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction (commonly referred to as the ‘Biological Weapons Convention’). “(8) Policies relating to human performance enhancement or augmentation. “(9) Such other matters as the Secretary of Defense determines relevant. “(c) Report.—“(1) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 2025], the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on the policies and guidelines under subsection (a)(1), including the methodologies used to develop the policies and guidelines. “(2) Form.—The report required under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may include a classified annex. “(3) Public availability.—The Secretary of Defense shall make report required under paragraph (1) publicly available, except such publicly available version of the report may not include any classified annex provided under paragraph (2). “(d) Briefing.—During the two-year period beginning on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall provide to the congressional defense committees an annual briefing on the implementation of the policies and guidelines under subsection (a)(1), including a description of any needed resources for such implementation.”

Prohibition on Painful Research on Domestic Cats and Dogs

Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title VII, § 732, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 932, provided that: “(a) Prohibition.—Except as provided by subsection (b) or (c), the Secretary of Defense may not conduct, or support the conduct of, painful research on a domestic cat (Felis catus) or a domestic dog (Canis familiaris). “(b) Exception.—The prohibition in subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to any physical exam, training program, or study relating to service animals or military animals. “(c) Waiver.—The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition in subsection (a) on a case-by-case basis if the Secretary—“(1) determines that the waiver is in the national security interests of the United States; and “(2) not later than 30 days after the date on which the Secretary makes the waiver, submits to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a detailed justification for the waiver, including—“(A) an identification of the Department of Defense account from which funds would be obligated or expended to conduct, or support the conduct of, the proposed research covered by the waiver; “(B) an identification of the amount of such funds; “(C) an identification of the intended purpose of such funds; “(D) an identification of the recipient or prospective recipient of such funds (including any nongovernmental recipient, as applicable); “(E) an explanation for how the waiver is in the national security interests of the United States; and “(F) any other information the Secretary determines appropriate. “(d) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) The term ‘military animal’ has the meaning given the term in section 2583(i)(1) of title 10, United States Code. “(2) The term ‘painful research’ includes any research, biomedical training, experimentation, or biological testing, classified in pain category D or E by the Department of Agriculture. “(3) The term ‘service animal’ has the meaning given the term in section 37.3 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, or such successor regulation.”

Special Operations Command Urgent Innovative Technologies and Capabilities Initiative

Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title VIII, § 863, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 989, provided that: “(a) Establishment.—The Commander of the United States Special Operations Command shall carry out a pilot program, subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, to be known as the ‘USSOCOM Urgent Innovative Technologies and Capabilities Initiative’ (in this section referred to as the ‘Initiative’) to accelerate the research, development, testing, procurement, and initial sustainment of innovative technologies and equipment that enhance the operational capabilities of Special Operations Forces to meet emerging mission requirements. “(b) Requirements.—The Commander shall—“(1) establish procedures for component special operations units to submit requests to the Commander for the inclusion of innovative technologies and equipment in the Initiative; and “(2) use authorities under section 167(e)(4) of title 10, United States Code, to carry out the Initiative. “(c) Report.—“(1) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this section [Dec. 18, 2025], and annually thereafter for the duration of the Initiative, the Commander of the United States Special Operations Command and Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on the implementation and effectiveness of the Initiative. “(2) Contents.—Each report shall include the following:“(A) A summary of activities carried out under the Initiative along with documentation of planned expenditures. “(B) An assessment of the effect of innovative technologies and equipment included in the Initiative on the operational capabilities of the United States Special Operations Command. “(C) Recommendations for the continuation, expansion, or modification of the Initiative. “(D) A description of any challenges encountered and lessons learned. “(E) A description of any action using established procedures for a reprogramming of funds in an amount greater than the approved amount for such reprogramming, as established by Congress, to carry out the Initiative. “(d) Sunset.—The authority to carry out the Initiative under this section shall terminate on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of this Act.”

Artificial Intelligence Model Assessment and Oversight

Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title XV, § 1533, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 1159, provided that: “(a) Cross-functional Team for Artificial Intelligence Model Assessment and Oversight.—“(1) Establishment.—The Secretary of Defense shall, in accordance with section 911 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114–328; 10 U.S.C. 111 note), establish a cross-functional team for artificial intelligence model assessment and oversight (in this section referred to as the ‘Cross-Functional Team’). “(2) Purpose.—The Cross-Functional Team shall develop a standardized assessment framework and governance structure to facilitate the evaluation of, collaboration on, and enablement of the rapid development or procurement of artificial intelligence models employed by the Department of Defense. “(3) Composition.—“(A) Leadership.—The Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense shall be the head of the Cross-Functional Team. “(B) Membership.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the Cross-Functional Team includes representatives from—“(i) the Office of the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense; “(ii) the chief artificial intelligence officers of the military departments, or in the absence of such position, the individual responsible for leading artificial intelligence efforts within each military department; “(iii) the chief information officers of the military departments; “(iv) the chief artificial intelligence officers of the combatant commands and the Joint Staff, or in the absence of such position, the individuals responsible for leading artificial intelligence efforts within each such command and the Joint Staff; “(v) the chief information officers of the combatant commands and the Joint Staff, or in the absence of such position, the individuals responsible for leading information technology efforts within each such command and the Joint Staff; “(vi) the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering; “(vii) the service acquisition executive of each of the military departments; and “(viii) such other components as the Secretary determines appropriate. “(4) Duties.—The Cross-Functional Team shall do the following:“(A) Develop a standardized assessment framework for artificial intelligence models currently used by the Department of Defense. “(B) Establish Department of Defense-wide guidelines for evaluating future artificial intelligence models being considered for use by the Department. “(C) Develop governance structures for the development, assessment, testing, and deployment of artificial intelligence models. “(D) Identify appropriate assessment levels for the performance of artificial intelligence models based on ultimate use case-based risk. “(E) Establish mechanisms for collaboration between components of the Department of Defense regarding the development, testing, assessment, and deployment of artificial intelligence models. “(F) Develop processes for the submission, review, and approval of use cases for artificial intelligence models against military and non-military activities of the Department of Defense. “(5) Framework content.—The standardized assessment framework required by paragraph (2) shall include—“(A) standards for the performance of artificial intelligence models; “(B) requirements for documentation of the development artificial intelligence models; “(C) procedures for testing artificial intelligence models; “(D) compliance with ethical principles regarding the use of artificial intelligence models; “(E) methodologies for assessing artificial intelligence models and time periods for validating artificial intelligence models; “(F) security requirements and compliance requirements, including the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program established under section 3608 of title 44, United States Code; “(G) procedures for the Department of Defense to use assessments of artificial intelligence models conducted by Executive agencies other than the Department to fulfill requirements under the framework; and “(H) such other elements as the Cross-Functional Team determines appropriate. “(b) Functional Leads for Artificial Intelligence Application.—“(1) Designation.—The Secretary of Defense shall designate such organizations of the Department of Defense as the Secretary considers appropriate to serve as functional leads for artificial intelligence applications used by the Department. “(2) Selection criteria.—In designating functional leads under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall consider—“(A) subject matter expertise; “(B) equities in the functional area; and “(C) capability to establish assessment standards. “(3) CDAO responsibilities.—The Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense shall—“(A) serve as the functional lead for business systems of the Department of Defense using artificial intelligence models; and “(B) provide Department-wide guidance on commercial artificial intelligence models. “(c) Assessments of Major Artificial Intelligence Systems.—The Secretary of Defense shall assess all major artificial intelligence systems using the standard assessment framework developed under subsection (a)(2). “(d) Administration.—“(1) In general.—In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall ensure the following:“(A) The Cross-Functional Team is established in accordance with subsection (a) on or before June 1, 2026. “(B) The functional leads for artificial intelligence application are designated in accordance with subsection (b) on or before January 1, 2027. “(C) The Cross-Function Team completes development of the standardized assessment framework and governance structure required by subsection (a)(2) on or before June 1, 2027. “(D) The assessment of major artificial intelligence systems required by subsection (c) is completed on or before January 1, 2028. “(2) Congressional briefing.—Not later than 30 days after the completion of an activity described in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (1), the Secretary of Defense shall provide the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a briefing on the status of the Secretary in carrying out this section. “(e) Sunset and Transition.—“(1) Sunset.—The Cross-Functional Team shall terminate on December 31, 2030. “(2) Transition.—Not later than June 30, 2030, the Secretary of Defense shall designate an element of the Department of Defense to succeed the Cross-Functional Team and develop a plan to transfer the duties of the Cross-Functional Team described in subsection (a)(4) to such successor element. “(3) Report on activities of successor organization.—Not later than one year after the date on which the Cross-Functional Team is terminated, and not less frequently than once each year thereafter until the date that is three years after the date on which the Cross-Functional Team is terminated, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the activities of the element of the Department of Defense to which the duties of the Cross-Functional Team were transferred. “(f) Definitions.—In this section:“(1) The term ‘artificial intelligence’ has the meaning given 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. note prec. 4061). “(2) The term ‘functional area’ refers to a specialized functional, operational, or subject-matter area within the Department of Defense. “(3)(A) The term ‘major artificial intelligence system’ means an artificial intelligence system of the Department of Defense that—“(i) is integrated with, or materially affects the operation of, an information system that—“(I) is categorized as high-impact under section 3554 of title 44, United States Code; or “(II) if compromised, would have a serious adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals; “(ii) is used by not fewer than 500 users of the Department annually; and “(iii) is employed in support of—“(I) military operations, training, or planning activities; or “(II) functions of the Department, including business operations, human resources management, administrative functions, or strategic planning activities. “(B) The term ‘major artificial intelligence system’ does not include an artificial intelligence system used solely for research, development, testing, or evaluation that has not been deployed for operational use. “(4) The terms ‘military department’ and ‘service acquisition executive’ have the meanings given such terms, respectively, in section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code.”

National Defense Economic Competition Research Council

Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title II, § 228, Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 1832, provided that: “(a) Establishment of Council.—“(1) In general.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2024], the Secretary of Defense shall establish a council to identify, evaluate, and coordinate existing research efforts, or propose new research topics, relating to economic competition activities, such as economic coercion, manipulation, or other uses of economic power to undermine the national defense strategy of the United States and the partners and allies of the United States. “(2) Designation.—The council established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the ‘National Defense Economic Competition Research Council’ (referred to in this section as the ‘Council’). “(b) Charter and Mission.—Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall issue a charter for the Council with a mission that includes the following:“(1) Conducting analysis of ongoing or proposed government and academic research relating to economic competition. “(2) Making proposals for new areas of research to increase understanding of adversarial uses of economic tools in support of military objectives to improve understanding of threats, vulnerabilities, and defensive options to mitigate such threats and vulnerabilities. “(3) Informing the tools available to the Department of Defense to defend against such economic competition, coercion and manipulation activities, including the use of adversarial capital to acquire technology, real estate, or other infrastructure, or to preemptively deny access by the United States. “(4) Assessing current data needs or shortfalls impairing understanding of threats and vulnerabilities relating to economic competition. “(5) Convening groups, which may include academic institutions, nonprofit organizations, commercial entities, other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, and international partners, to better understand regional requirements or inform the understanding of regional partners on the threats and vulnerabilities relating to military objectives as a result of increasing economic competition. “(6) Carrying out such other activities relating to economic competition as the Secretary deems appropriate. “(c) Participants.—“(1) Co-chairs.—The co-chairs of the Council shall be the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment. “(2) In general.—The co-chairs of the Council shall ensure that the Council includes participation from each of the following:“(A) The Office of Commercial and Economic Assessment of the Air Force. “(B) The Office of Expanded Competition. “(C) The Office of Strategic Capital. “(D) The Defense Innovation Unit. “(E) The Strategic Capabilities Office. “(F) The Joint Warfighting Analysis Center (JWAC). “(G) The Office of Global Economic and Investment Security [probably should be “Office of Global Investment and Economic Security”] under the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy. “(H) The Office of Naval Research, including ONR-Global. “(I) The Army Research Office. “(J) The Air Force Office of Scientific Research. “(K) The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. “(L) The Office of Strategic Intelligence and Analysis under the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. “(M) The program office of the Minerva Research Initiative. “(N) Other relevant organizations as determined by the Secretary of Defense. “(d) Input From the Joint Staff and Combatant Commands.—The Council shall regularly solicit input from the Joint Staff and combatant commands on needs, problem statements, or other topics relating to economic competition activities described in subsection (a)(1) affecting their areas of responsibility. “(e) Termination.—The Council shall terminate on December 31, 2035.”

Quantum Benchmarking Initiative

Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title II, § 231(a), (b), Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 1837, provided that: “(a) Initiative Required.—“(1) In general.—The Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency shall establish and carry out an initiative to rapidly expand and support efforts to evaluate concepts, development plans, and prototypes, components, and subsystems needed to develop a utility-scale quantum computing capability available to the Department of Defense. “(2) Designation.—The initiative established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the ‘Quantum Benchmarking Initiative’ (referred to in this section as the ‘Initiative’). “(b) Elements.—The Initiative shall include the following:“(1) Activities to broaden existing efforts of the Department of Defense to verify and validate commercial efforts to design and build utility-scale quantum computers, including through collaboration with key partners in the Air Force Research Laboratory, the Office of Strategic Capital, the Defense Innovation Unit, and such other partners and organizations of the Department of Defense as the Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency deems appropriate. “(2) Working with the Office of Strategic Capital to establish regular interactions with the venture capital and finance community to help accelerate commercial efforts to develop concepts, plans, prototypes, components, and subsystems needed to develop viable utility-scale quantum computers. “(3) Working with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy to connect key performers in fault-tolerant utility-scale quantum computing with support for industrial bases analysis, manufacturing support, and other analysis support to help foster and grow the broader industrial base supporting fault-tolerant utility-scale quantum computing. “(4) Working with the military departments and other components of the Department of Defense to refine use cases for militarily relevant applications of utility-scale quantum computers.”

Pilot Program on Development of Near-Term Use Cases and Demonstration of Artificial Intelligence Toward Biotechnology Applications for National Security

Electromagnetic Spectrum Demonstration Program

Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title II, § 234, Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 1839, provided that: “(a) In General.—Not later than November 30, 2025, the Chief Information Officer of the Department of Defense, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, shall complete a demonstration program to assess the viability of using wideband adaptive signal processing technology to support simultaneous transmit and receive signals on the same electromagnetic spectrum frequency band that—“(1) does not produce harmful interference; “(2) significantly reduces electromagnetic spectrum guard bands; “(3) maintains signal quality with respect to latency and throughput; and “(4) increases electromagnetic spectrum access within the frequency band. “(b) Location.—The demonstration program required by subsection (a) shall be conducted at a test and training range of the Department of Defense. “(c) Consultation.—In carrying out the demonstration program required by subsection (a), the Chief Information Officer, the Under Secretary, and the Director shall consult with, at a minimum, the following:“(1) The Joint Staff. “(2) The military departments and their associated research labs. “(3) Other Department of Defense organizations and agencies. “(4) The Federal Communications Commission. “(5) The National Telecommunications and Information Administration. “(6) Other Federal agencies. “(7) Industry and nongovernmental entities. “(d) Authority to Enter Into Contracts.—Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Chief Information Officer may enter into such contracts or other agreements as the Chief Information Officer considers appropriate to conduct studies and demonstration projects under the demonstration program required by subsection (a). “(e) Briefing on Plans for Program.—Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2024], the Chief Information Officer, the Under Secretary, and the Director shall jointly provide to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a briefing on the plans to carry out the demonstration program required by subsection (a). “(f) Periodic Assessments of Program.—The Chief Information Officer, the Under Secretary, and the Director shall, periodically, assess the demonstration program required by subsection (a) while the program is being carried out. “(g) Briefing on Completed Program.—Upon completion of the demonstration program required by subsection (a), the Chief Information Officer, the Under Secretary, and the Director shall jointly provide the congressional defense committees a briefing on their findings with respect to the demonstration program.”

Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title II, § 236, Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 1840, provided that: “(a) Pilot Program Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall carry out a pilot program to develop near-term use cases and demonstrations of artificial intelligence for national security-related biotechnology applications. “(b) Public-private Partnerships.—The Secretary of Defense shall carry out the pilot program required by subsection (a) through one or more public-private partnerships entered into for purposes of the pilot program. “(c) Laboratory Support and Infrastructure.—In support of a public-private partnership entered into under subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may, on a reimbursable basis, make available—“(1) the facilities and services of a Department of Defense laboratory to perform experimentation for biotechnology applications to aid in the validation of artificial intelligence models; and “(2) computing and data storage infrastructure and capabilities of the Department of Defense. “(d) Duration.—The pilot program required by subsection (a) shall—“(1) commence not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2024]; and “(2) terminate five years after the date of the on which the program commences under paragraph (1). “(e) Annual Report.—“(1) In general.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, and not later than December 1 of every other year thereafter until the termination date specified in subsection (d)(2), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a report on the pilot program. “(2) Contents.—Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall include, for the period covered by the report, the following:“(A) An assessment of existing Department of Defense biotechnology-related data resources and how they may be used in the pilot program. “(B) An assessment of required cybersecurity measures for users under the pilot program. “(C) A description of any mechanisms developed for collaboration among different parties associated with projects under the pilot program, including intellectual property agreements, funding agreements, and material transfer agreements. “(D) An assessment of the role that artificial intelligence is playing in developing biotechnology applications for national security purposes, including identification of commercial or academic applications used in the pilot program. “(E) A description of near-term use cases developed under the pilot program for artificial intelligence-enabled biotechnology applications for national security. “(F) A description of planned, ongoing, and completed demonstrations or other pilot programs funded under the pilot program required by subsection (a) or otherwise funded by the Department of Defense. “(G) An assessment of the viability of transitioning technology developed under the pilot program into operational use within the Department, including assessment of—“(i) the resources needed for further development and scaling of such technology; and “(ii) the potential benefits of such technology. “(3) Form.—Each report under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. “(f) Transition Plan.—Not later than one year before the date on which the pilot program terminates under subsection (d)(2), the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan that outlines what steps the Department could take to turn the pilot program into an operational program if authorized and funded by Congress to do so. The plan shall include the following:“(1) A transition timeline. “(2) Associated projected annual cost of operating the program. “(3) Additional infrastructure that might be needed, including associated costs. “(4) A descriptive analysis of the relevant technical, engineering and commercial biotechnology ecosystem, including entities within the Department and external stakeholders. “(5) Examples of projects from the pilot phase of the program and their outcomes. “(6) The potential impact to Department capabilities of transitioning the program. “(7) Any other details deemed necessary to include by the Secretary.”

Biotechnology Roadmap

Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title II, § 242, Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 1845, provided that: “(a) Roadmap Required.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2024], the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and the Secretaries of the military departments, shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] a biotechnology roadmap. “(b) Elements.—In the roadmap required by subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall—“(1) identify the strategic objectives of the Department of Defense relating to biotechnology; “(2) for each strategic objective, establish specific goals and milestones for the achievement of such objective, including timelines for meeting such goals and milestones; “(3) in the case of each updated version of the roadmap following submittal of the initial roadmap under subsection (a), include—“(A) a review of the goals and milestones established under paragraph (2) to ensure such goals and milestones continue to align with strategic objectives under paragraph (1); and “(B) a description of any goals and milestones that changed as a result of such review; “(4) identify the biotechnology development needs and priorities for national security applications based on the strategic objectives identified in paragraph (1); “(5) assess the technology maturity of each priority identified pursuant to paragraph (4); “(6) describe funding sources for each priority identified pursuant to paragraph (4), including both current sources and sources covered by the future-years defense program submitted to Congress under section 221 of title 10, United States Code; “(7) provide a plan, timeline, and metrics for research, development, testing, and evaluation activities for the priorities identified pursuant to paragraph (4); “(8) assess opportunities for rapid acquisition and fielding of biotechnology in support of the priorities identified pursuant to paragraph (4); “(9) identify and describe the role of each organization of the Department with responsibilities relating to biotechnology under the strategy, including investment priorities for the Office of Strategic Capital and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; “(10) assess the overall risk to the security of the United States of the biotechnology efforts covered by the strategy; “(11) analyze any requirements of the Federal Government that hinder the ability of the Department to advance and use biotechnology; “(12) provide for the development and support of the biotechnology workforce of the Department, including personnel with responsibilities relating directly to biotechnology and personnel who indirectly support the biotechnology efforts of the Department such as personnel involved program management, acquisition, investment, and legal matters; “(13) with respect to the biotechnology workforce described in paragraph (12)—“(A) identify the total number of biotechnology positions required to support the objectives of the roadmap—“(i) as of the date of the roadmap; and “(ii) over the periods of five and 10 years following such date; “(B) indicate the number of such positions that have been filled as of the date of the roadmap; “(C) describe the positions included in the biotechnology workforce, including a description of—“(i) the role of each position in supporting the objectives under paragraph (1); and “(ii) the qualifications required for each position, including any qualifications relating to seniority level, education, training, and security clearances; “(D) identify any challenges affecting the ability of the Department to develop the biotechnology workforce and propose solutions to those challenges; “(E) assess whether the codes used to define positions and roles within the workforce of the Department adequately cover the range of positions and personnel that comprise the biotechnology workforce, such as personnel in research, engineering, and testing; “(F) identify mechanisms to enable the Department to access outside expertise relating to biotechnology, including mechanisms to assemble a pool of outside experts who have been prequalified (including by obtaining any necessary security clearances) to provide advice and assistance to the Department on matters relating to biotechnology on an as-needed basis; and “(G) assess whether personnel occupying existing positions in the Department could be used to meet biotechnology workforce needs with additional training and, if so, the nature and scope of the training required; and “(14) address collaboration between the Department and international partners to advance research on biotechnology, which shall include—“(A) a description of any international partnerships under which the United States is collaborating with partners to conduct biotechnology research and development for defense purposes, including a description of any investment priorities for the Office of Strategic Capital and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency relating to such partnerships; “(B) a description of any new international partnerships that may be entered into, or existing partnerships that may be modified, to provide for such collaboration; and “(C) identification of any challenges affecting the ability of the Department engage in such collaboration with international partners, including—“(i) any limitations on co-investments within international partnerships; “(ii) any United States export controls or other technology protections that hinder information sharing within such partnerships; and “(iii) any other challenges that may prevent the full utilization of such partnerships for such collaboration. “(c) Biennial Updates.—Not less frequently than once every two years following the submittal of the initial roadmap under subsection (a) until the termination date specified in subsection (h), the Secretary shall—“(1) review and update the roadmap; and “(2) submit an updated version of the roadmap to the congressional defense committees. “(d) Form.—Each version of the roadmap required to be submitted under this section may be submitted in classified form, but if so submitted, shall include an unclassified executive summary. “(e) Public Availability.—On annual basis, the Secretary shall make an unclassified version of the most recent roadmap submitted under this section available on a publicly accessible website of the Department of Defense. “(f) GAO Evaluation and Report.—Not later than 180 days after the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits the initial roadmap pursuant to subsection (a), the Comptroller General of the United States shall—“(1) complete an evaluation of the roadmap; and “(2) submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the findings of the Comptroller General with respect to such evaluation. “(g) Biotechnology Defined.—In this section, the term ‘biotechnology’ means the application of science and technology to living organisms and to parts, products, and models of such organisms to alter living or non-living materials for the production of knowledge, goods, or services. “(h) Sunset.—This section shall terminate on the date that is 10 years after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2024].”

Artificial Intelligence Human Factors Integration Initiative

Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title XV, § 1531, Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 2142, provided that: “(a) Initiative Required.—“(1) In general.—The Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment and the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense, shall establish an initiative—“(A) to improve the human usability of artificial intelligence systems and information derived from such systems through the application of cognitive ergonomics techniques; and “(B) to improve the human usability and cognitive effectiveness of artificial intelligence systems adopted by the Department of Defense by ensuring that design tools and metrics are available for artificial intelligence and machine learning programs that ensure human factors considerations are included for such systems. “(2) Designation.—The initiative established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be known as the ‘Artificial Intelligence Human Factors Integration Initiative’ (in this section the ‘Initiative’). “(b) Briefing.—Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 23, 2024], the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense shall jointly brief the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives on the following:“(1) Existing research and development work within the Department of Defense laboratories relating to human-machine teaming, human-centered design, cognitive load, cognitive ergonomics, and similar topics that are currently being used or could be used to inform or enhance Department personnel usability of artificial intelligence systems and artificial intelligence-derived information. “(2) Identification of gaps in research with respect to interactions of personnel of the Department with artificial intelligence systems in warfighting and nonwarfighting environments that may necessitate additional research within the Federal Government, industry, or academia. “(3) Identification of relevant tools, methodologies, testing processes or systems, and evaluation metrics that may be of use to the Department in improving the cognitive ergonomic and human usability features of artificial intelligence systems for personnel of the Department. “(c) Plan.—Not later than 90 days after the date on which the briefing required by subsection (b) is provided, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, and the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense shall jointly develop and implement a plan to—“(1) work with the military departments (as defined in section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code) and other components of the Department to ensure human factors and human systems integration elements are considered early in the development or evaluation process with respect to the procurement, adoption, or use of artificial intelligence systems or artificial intelligence-derived information; “(2) convene research meetings or other forums to coordinate cognitive ergonomics research or related research challenges with a broad community of academic, commercial, and international partners; “(3) work with the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Officer of the Department of Defense to review commercial toolsets to assess the level of human factors integration investment of such commercial toolsets; and “(4) develop guidance based on the research and development work identified pursuant to subsection (b)(1) regarding how to create a framework or taxonomy for characterizing the exercise of appropriate levels of human judgment within Department of Defense Directive 3000.09 (relating to Autonomy in Weapons Systems), or successor directive, for artificial intelligence programs in the Department. “(d) Rule of Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or otherwise limit the authority of the Secretary of Defense to research, develop, improve, or acquire any weapon system or other capability that is enabled, empowered, enhanced, or improved by artificial intelligence, machine learning, or a large language model.”

Advanced Computing Infrastructure To Enable Advanced Artificial Intelligence Capabilities

Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title XV, § 1532, Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 2144, as amended by Pub. L. 119–60, div. A, title XV, § 1531, Dec. 18, 2025, 139 Stat. 1156, provided that: “(a) In General.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a program, or designate an existing program, to meet the testing and processing requirements for next generation advanced artificial intelligence capabilities. “(b) Development and Expansion of High-performance Computing Infrastructure.—“(1) In general.—Under the program established or designated under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall expand the infrastructure of the Department of Defense for development and deployment of military applications of high-performance computing and artificial intelligence capabilities that are located at installations of the Department or accessible through commercial cloud or hybrid-cloud environments. “(2) Artificial intelligence applications.—(A) The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that a portion of the infrastructure added pursuant to paragraph (1) is—“(i) dedicated to providing access to modern artificial intelligence accelerators for training, fine-tuning, modifying, and deploying large artificial intelligence systems; and “(ii) configured in accordance with industry best practices. “(B) In carrying out subparagraph (A), the Secretary of Defense shall ensure, to the extent practical, that the Department of Defense does not use the portion of the infrastructure described in such subparagraph for the development of new artificial intelligence systems to the extent that such infrastructure is duplicative of readily available commercial or open source products or services that meet or are reasonably capable of meeting the physical and data security standards of the Department. “(c) High-performance Computing Roadmap.—“(1) In general.—Under the program established or designated under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall develop a roadmap that describes the high-performance computing infrastructure needed for the Department of Defense to research, test, develop, and evaluate advanced artificial intelligence applications projected over the period covered by the future-years defense program, including dedicated computing assets owned and maintained by the Department of Defense and commercial cloud services and other infrastructure-as-a-service services. “(2) Assessment.—The roadmap required by paragraph (1) shall include assessments of the following:“(A) The anticipated processing for advanced artificial intelligence applications of the Department of Defense during the period covered by the roadmap, including the computing needs associated with the development of such advanced artificial intelligence applications. “(B) The physical and data security standards required for the infrastructure for the research, development, testing, and evaluation of advanced artificial intelligence applications, including data handling requirements. “(C) For each data center to be built or expanded on a military installation, an estimate, to the degree that the Secretary determines that providing such an estimate will not delay the submittal of the triennial update required by paragraph (3), of the additional resource usage resulting from building or expanding such data center, including—“(i) an estimate of the increased footprint for physical space needs; “(ii) assessments of projected electricity and water usage requirements for such data center; “(iii) anticipated effects on the installation and the surrounding community resulting from the increased power, water, and other resource needs of such data center, including measures to mitigate any potential adverse effects on military installations; and “(iv) strategies to prevent disruptions to local public utility services and to ensure resilience of the community in which the military installation resides and in which the data center is being built, including consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies to align infrastructure planning with broader needs of such community. “(D) The evaluation, milestones, and resourcing needs to maintain and expand the computing infrastructure necessary for the computing needs described in subparagraph (A). “(3) Triennial updates.—Not later than March 1, 2027, and not later than March 1 of every third year thereafter until March 1, 2033, the Secretary shall update the roadmap required by paragraph (1) and submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] the updated roadmap. “(d) Artificial Intelligence System Development.—“(1) In general.—Using the infrastructure added under the program established or designated under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall develop advanced artificial intelligence systems that have general-purpose military applications for multiple data formats, including text, audio, and graphical. “(2) Training of systems.—The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that advanced artificial intelligence systems developed pursuant to paragraph (1) are trained using datasets curated by the Department of Defense using general, openly or commercially available sources of such data, or data owned by the Department, depending on the appropriate use case. Such systems may use openly or commercially available artificial intelligence systems, including those available through infrastructure located at installations of the Department or cloud or hybrid-cloud environments, for development or fine-tuning. “(e) Coordination and Duplication.—In establishing or designating the program under subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Secretary of Energy to ensure that none of the activities carried out under this section are duplicative of any activity of a research entity of the Department of Energy, including the following:“(1) The National Laboratories. “(2) The Advanced Scientific Computing Research program. “(3) The Advanced Simulation and Computing program.”