“Air Force intelligence components do not engage in experimentation involving human subjects for intelligence purposes,” a new Air Force Instruction (pdf) states categorically.
Except for the exceptions.
“Any exception would require approval by the Secretary or Under Secretary of the Air Force and would be undertaken only with the informed consent of the subject and in accordance with procedures established by AF/SG to safeguard the welfare of subjects.”
The new Instruction presents a generally scrupulous account of the regulatory framework within which Air Force intelligence operates. It addresses domestic search and surveillance, imagery collection and dissemination, mail covers, and other intelligence activities.
See Air Force Instruction 14-104, “Oversight of Intelligence Activities,” 16 April 2007.
Some other noteworthy new Air Force Instructions include these (both pdf):
AFI 10-2604, “Disease Containment Planning Guidance,” 6 April 2007.
AFI 40-201, “Managing Radioactive Materials in the U.S. Air Force,” 13 April 2007.
To secure the U.S. bio-infrastructure, maintain global leadership in biotechnology, and safeguard American citizens from emerging threats to their privacy, the federal government must modernize its approach to human genetic and biological data.
To ensure an energy transition that brings broad based economic development, participation, and direct benefits to communities, we need federal policy that helps shape markets. Unfortunately, there is a large gap in understanding of how to leverage federal policy making to support access to capital and credit.
From use to testing to deployment, the scaffolding for responsible integration of AI into high-risk use cases is just not there.
OPM’s new HR 2.0 initiative is entering hostile terrain. Those who have followed federal HR modernization for years desperately want this effort to succeed.