Federal AI Governance and Transparency Act

• Authority: United States Congress
• Parent authority: Federal government
• Jurisdiction: United States
• Collections: U.S. federal laws
• Most recent activity: Defunct
• Most recent activity date: 2025-01-03

Risk subdomain coverage

Good coverage — Comprehensive governance measures or mitigations with clear procedures relating to the risk subdomain are explicitly described.

• Unfair discrimination and misrepresentation
• Unequal performance across groups
• Compromise of privacy
• AI system security vulnerabilities
• Loss of human agency and autonomy
• Governance failure
• AI pursuing its own goals
• Lack of capability or robustness
• Lack of transparency or interpretability

Minimal coverage — Brief mention but no specific mitigations, recommendations or governance measures relating to the risk subdomain are described.

• False or misleading information
• Overreliance and unsafe use

All other risk subdomains had no coverage in this document.

Risk Coverage Summary

The document has good coverage of approximately 8-10 subdomains, with strong focus on discrimination and fairness (1.1, 1.3), privacy protection (2.1), AI system security (2.2), misinformation risks (3.1), governance structures (6.5), and AI system safety failures (7.1, 7.3, 7.4). Coverage is concentrated in fairness, transparency, accountability, and system reliability domains.

Sector coverage

Good coverage — Comprehensive governance measures or mitigations with clear procedures relating to the sector are explicitly described.

• Public Administration (excl. National Security)
• National Security

Minimal coverage — Brief mention but no specific mitigations, recommendations or governance measures relating to the sector are described.

• Professional & Technical Services
• Scientific Research & Development Services

All other sectors had no coverage in this document.

Sectors Summary

This document governs AI use across all Federal government agencies and operations, primarily covering the Public Administration sector. It applies to all federal agencies using AI systems, with exemptions for national security systems. The governance framework extends to contractors providing AI systems to the federal government.

Legislative Status

Hard Law

Legislative Status Summary

This is a binding federal statute enacted by Congress with mandatory requirements, enforcement mechanisms through the Director of OMB and agency Inspectors General, and legal penalties for non-compliance.

Actors

Proposer

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Entities: United States Congress; Mr. Comer; Mr. Raskin; Ms. Mace; Ms. Ocasio-Cortez; Mr. Higgins of Louisiana; Mr. Connolly; Mr. Langworthy; Mr. Khanna; Committee on Oversight and Accountability
• Summary: The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by multiple congressional representatives and referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, indicating Congress as the proposer of this governance framework.

Target

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor, AI_Deployer
• Entities: Federal agencies; agency Chief Information Officer; Chief Data Officer; senior agency official for privacy; contractors or subcontractors with the Federal Government
• Summary: The document explicitly targets federal agencies and their officials responsible for AI systems, as well as contractors who build, provide, operate, or maintain federal AI systems.

Enforcer

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Entities: Director of the Office of Management and Budget; Inspector General; Administrator of General Services; Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology; Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy; Director of the Office of Personnel Management
• Summary: The Director of OMB has primary enforcement authority with explicit powers to oversee compliance and take enforcement actions. Inspectors General conduct independent evaluations, and the Comptroller General provides periodic oversight.

Monitor

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Entities: Inspector General; Comptroller General; appropriate congressional committees; Committee on Oversight and Accountability of the House of Representatives; Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate
• Summary: Inspectors General are required to perform independent evaluations every 2 years, the Comptroller General periodically evaluates implementation, and congressional committees receive reports on compliance and effectiveness.

AI Lifecycle Stages

Lifecycle stages covered by the documents, as defined in the OECD Framework for the Classification of AI Systems

• Plan and Design
• Collect and Process Data
• Build and Use Model
• Verify and Validate
• Deploy
• Operate and Monitor

AI Lifecycle Summary

The document comprehensively covers all stages of the AI lifecycle with particular emphasis on deployment, operation and monitoring. It addresses planning and design through governance charter requirements, data collection and processing through training data documentation, model building through development oversight, verification and validation through testing requirements, deployment through notification processes, and ongoing operation through monitoring and evaluation mandates.

Technical Scope

Terms relating to technical scope that are mentioned or implicitly referenced in the document

• AI Systems

Technical Scope Summary

The document explicitly defines and covers 'artificial intelligence' and 'artificial intelligence systems' broadly. It does not specifically mention frontier AI, general purpose AI, task-specific AI, foundation models, generative AI, predictive AI, open-weight models, or compute thresholds. The focus is on Federal AI systems regardless of their technical characteristics.