20 FAM 302.2
Compliance Standards (AI)
(CT:DATA-13; 02-20-2025)
(Office of Origin: M/SS/CFA)
20 FAM 302.2-1 Department AI Use Cases
(CT:DATA-13; 02-20-2025)
a. The policies in this section, and in particular the governance and inventory requirements, apply to all Department of State AI use cases other than those for purposes of national security and defense. The policies in this section do not apply to AI used, in whole or in part, in defense or national security systems, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6) or as otherwise determine by the Department. AI use cases for purposes of national security or defense are subject to principles as described in 20 FAM 302.2-8.
b. The policies in this section do not apply to AI embedded within common commercial products, such as word processors or map navigation systems, or AI research and development activities. The principles in this section and OMB implementation guidance should inform any R&D directed at potential future applications of AI in the Federal Government.
c. Each bureau or office that owns an AI Use Case must have a documented AI governance structure. Governance documentation must specify the bureau's roles and responsibilities, procedures for review and certification of compliance, and an inventory of all AI use cases (that will be collected by the RAIO once yearly). While specific AI oversight and governance procedures may vary, each bureau or office is required to certify and retain evidence that each AI use case in development, or currently in use, complies with the Principles of Trustworthy AI set forth in this section.
d. AI use case owners are encouraged to use the Department of State Responsible AI System Card as a guide.
e. M/SS/CfA is responsible for ensuring the availability of appropriate training to all State Department personnel responsible for the design, development, acquisition, and use of AI. M/SS/CfA has additional guidance, assessment, and “best practices” documents available for further clarification.
20 FAM 302.2-1(A) AI Use Case Compliance Principles
(CT:DATA-2; 04-24-2023)
The principles below, as they apply to the Department of State, are intended to ensure the Department's AI use cases comply with E.O. 13960:
(1) Lawful. AI use case owners must design, develop, acquire, and use AI in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution and all other applicable laws and policies, including those addressing privacy, civil rights, civil liberties, and intellectual property.
(a) This means understanding and abiding by any specific legal or regulatory requirements concerning the data being used as well as any such requirements that pertain to the processes and systems the AI use case affects.
(b) AI applications should include internal and external checks to help ensure equitable application across all participants.
(c) Individual privacy must be respected and data must not be used in a manner inconsistent with privacy laws and policies applicable to such data; use of data should be approved by the data steward (defined in 20 FAM 101.3-1). AI systems must be protected from risks (including threats to privacy and cybersecurity) that may directly or indirectly cause physical and/or digital harm to any individual.
(d) AI use cases utilizing PII must abide by existing privacy laws and policies, including 5 FAM 460. Use case owners must consult with the Privacy Office in design of their use case governance plan when data elements include PII.
(e) As AI is a new yet fast-emerging field of technology, the legal landscape relating to AI applications is unsettled and evolving. Department components should consult with L/M when initiating development of AI Use Cases. L/M might consult other L offices depending on the type of AI.
(2) Purposeful, performance-driven, accurate, reliable, and effective. AI use case owners must seek opportunities for designing, developing, acquiring, and using AI only where the benefits of doing so significantly outweigh the risks, and the risks can be assessed, managed, and documented. They must also ensure that their application of AI is consistent with the use cases for which that AI was trained, and such use is accurate, reliable, and effective.
(a) AI use cases should have the ability to learn from humans and other systems and produce consistent, accurate, and reliable outputs consistent with the original design.
(3) Safe, secure, and resilient. AI use case owners must ensure the safety, security, and resiliency of their AI use cases, including resilience when confronted with systematic vulnerabilities, adversarial manipulation, and other malicious exploitation.
(4) Understandable and transparent. AI use case owners must ensure that the operations and outcomes of their AI use cases are sufficiently understandable by subject matter experts, users, and others as appropriate. AI use case owners should also be transparent when providing relevant information regarding their use of AI to appropriate stakeholders, such as Congress and the public, to the extent such disclosure is in accordance with applicable law, regulation, and policy and is practicable balancing transparency with sensitivity of data and methods.
(a) All relevant individuals should be able to understand how data is being used as an input to the AI use case, the model(s) used in the AI use case, and how the outputs of the AI use case are used to make decisions. Attributes, correlations, and other relevant measures for population baselining, where appropriate, should be open to inspection.
(b) Outcomes of AI use cases that impact policy or other decision-making processes should uphold scientific integrity as described in 11 FAM 820.
(5) Responsible, traceable, accountable, and regularly monitored. AI use case owners must ensure that human roles and responsibilities are clearly defined, understood, and appropriately assigned for the design, development, acquisition, and use of AI. AI use case owners are accountable for implementing and enforcing appropriate safeguards for the proper use and functioning of their application of AI and shall monitor, audit, and document compliance with those safeguards. Additionally, AI use case owners must ensure that AI use cases are regularly tested against the principles in this paragraph.
(a) Policies should outline governance and who is held responsible for all aspects of the AI solution (e.g., initiation, development, outputs, decommissioning).
(6) Bureaus should contact M/SS/CfA with any questions about the development and/or implementation of policies and procedures involving AI.
20 FAM 302.2-2 AI and Information Security
(CT:DATA-2; 04-24-2023)
a. Policy and procedures outlined in this chapter should be implemented and overseen by individual bureaus and offices. This requires each bureau and office, prior to instituting an AI use case, to implement and document its oversight and governance processes for its AI use cases, including by identifying individuals and positions that will perform these functions.
b. M/SS/CfA and the designated Responsible AI Official (RAIO) work through the Enterprise Data Council (EDC), which reports to the Enterprise Governance Board, to centrally promulgate and coordinate policy and standards for AI governance in the Department.
c. Bureaus and offices that do not have positions and individuals with the requisite skills and experience can request assistance from other bureaus, such as M/SS/CfA, to institute and perform these oversight and governance functions.
d. Bureaus should contact M/SS/CfA with any questions about the development and/or implementation of policies and procedures involving AI.
20 FAM 302.2-3 AI Use Case Inventory
(CT:DATA-13; 02-20-2025)
a. The Department must collect and maintain an inventory of AI Use Cases, in part, to ensure that such work is consistent with applicable law and policy.
b. Each year, the RAIO in M/SS/CfA will initiate an update to the Department’s AI Use Case Inventory. The RAIO will collect AI Use Cases from domestic bureaus and offices and overseas posts, provide a version to OMB according to their requirements, and post a public version of the AI Use Case Inventory in accordance with criteria detailed below. The public version of AI inventories from previous years may be helpful in illustrating the nature and scope of AI Use Cases the inventory is intended to capture.
c. AI Use Case Inventory Exemptions: All Department AI Use Cases will be collected in the annual AI Use Case Inventory. The following AI uses will not be included in the inventory, in accordance with E.O. 13960:
(1) AI used in defense or national security systems (as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6) or as determined by the Department), in whole or in part, although the Department shall adhere to other applicable guidelines and principles for defense and national security purposes, such as those adopted by the Department of Defense and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence;
(2) AI embedded within common commercial products, such as word processors or map navigation systems, while noting that Government use of such products must nevertheless comply with applicable laws and policies to ensure the protection of safety, security, privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties;
NOTE: This exemption extends to uses of common commercial generative AI tools on the internet, such as chatbots that return text when prompted with a question, image generators that create pictures using a descriptive prompt, and the like.
(3) AI research and development (R&D) activities, although the principles and OMB implementation guidance should inform any R&D directed at potential future applications of AI in the federal government.
d. Public AI Use Case Inventory: The RAIO will publish a version of the AI Use Case Inventory for public consumption to the extent practicable and in accordance with applicable laws and policies, including those concerning the protection of privacy and of sensitive law enforcement, national security, and other protected information. See 20 FAM 102.2-3(B)a for additional guidance on AI Use Case owner responsibilities to support the AI Use Case Inventory. An AI Use Case that is SBU as defined in 12 FAM 541 should presumptively not be included in the public AI Use Case Inventory. The RAIO will not publish an AI Use Case that is SBU unless the AI Use Case Owner has cleared on release of the information and obtained approval from someone at the DAS-level or above or a subject matter expert at the bureau(s)/office(s) with equities in the AI Use Case. The same procedure will be followed in situations where the AI Use Case Owner has identified that an AI Use Case is SBU and would like to include it in the public AI Use Case Inventory.
(1) Information included in the public AI Use Case Inventory will include the bureau/office that owns the use case, the name of the use case, and a description. The public AI Use Case Inventory will not include any underlying data or findings.
(2) An AI Use Case can be withheld from the Public AI Use Case Inventory, if the existence of an application or use of AI is SBU. For example, an AI Use Case might be considered SBU where the existence of an application or use of AI reveals law enforcement techniques used in ongoing investigations. The definition of SBU information can be found at 12 FAM 541(a).
(3) Types of unclassified information to which SBU is typically applied can be found at 12 FAM 541(b).
e. Annual Compliance Certification: AI Use Cases must be certified as compliant with the principles in this section annually. See 20 FAM 102.2-3(B)a4 for AI Use Case Owner responsibilities to ensure AI Use Case compliance.
(1) The Department RAIO will share the inventories with other agencies, to the extent practicable and consistent with applicable laws and policies, including those concerning protection of privacy and of sensitive law enforcement, national security, and other protected information.
20 FAM 302.2-4 AI Terms of Service
(CT:DATA-2; 04-24-2023)
a. The provider of an AI service will generally have in place standard Terms of Service (TOS) that apply to use of that AI service. As with TOS in other contexts (e.g., the TOS of social media platforms; see 10 FAM 185), the TOS of AI service providers, being commercially oriented, often contain various terms not legally compatible with or advisable for U.S. Government agencies under Federal law.
b. As such, acceptance of an AI service provider’s TOS on behalf of the Department may only occur after review and approval of the TOS by the Office of the Legal Adviser (L). L may find it necessary for the TOS to be amended or otherwise modified. Additionally, only direct-hire Department employees may accept/agree to such TOS on behalf of the Department.
c. Creation of a user account with an AI service typically involves acceptance of the TOS applicable to that AI service. Department personnel may not create user accounts in their official capacity with an AI service unless the TOS associated with that AI service has been approved by L and the AI service is authorized for official use by appropriate Department policy components.
20 FAM 302.2-5 AI and Intellectual Property
(CT:DATA-2; 04-24-2023)
a. AI services--especially those based upon generative AI technology--are typically "trained" by their providers on voluminous datasets, and often also allow end users to themselves input datasets when entering prompts. Upon entering a textual or other prompt in an AI service, a user prompts the AI service to generate a work or works based upon the dataset training the service has received.
b. Because such datasets may contain/utilize publicly available data/works subject to or protected by copyright and other intellectual property (IP) rights, both the input into and generation of works via AI services can raise IP infringement considerations depending upon the circumstances. Further, the use (e.g., copying, distribution, display, creation of derivatives) of works generated via AI services can likewise raise IP infringement considerations depending upon the circumstances.
c. When utilizing AI services in an official capacity, Department personnel are not to input into AI services (whether through user prompts or datasets) any content protected by copyright or other IP rights absent appropriate permission from the relevant rightsholders.
d. Because an AI-generated work is not typically accompanied by any attribution to the party that produced it or any information as to the inputs entered into the AI service by the producing party, Department personnel are not to use AI service-generated works produced by third parties (e.g., AI service-generated works appearing on third-party websites).
e. Department personnel are advised to consult with L when initiating development of AI Use Cases, in particular those expected to involve public-facing use of works generated via AI services.
20 FAM 302.2-6 AI Risks and Risk Management
(CT:DATA-13; 02-20-2025)
Introduction to Risk Management - This section outlines key concepts in managing risk from use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Department applications or use cases which could be rights-impacting or safety-impacting. OMB Guidance and other sources of law or guidance provide a framework for managing the risks associated with the use of rights-impacting or safety-impacting AI.
a. See 20 FAH-1 H-304 for guidance on how to seek and obtain approval to use rights-impacting or safety-impacting AI.
b. See 20 FAM 302.1 for Essential AI Risk Management Concepts (as defined in OMB M-24-10, Section 6 & Appendix I) including:
1. Rights-Impacting AI
2. Safety-Impacting AI
c. See 20 FAM 301.1-2 for AI Risk Management Business Drivers.
d. See 102.1-1(B)b for Chief AI Officer (CAIO) Risk Management Responsibilities.
See 20 FAM 102.2-3(B) for AI Use Case Owner Minimum Risk Management Practices for Rights and Safety-Impacting AI.20 FAM 302.2-7 AI Procurement
(CT:DATA-7; 10-15-2024)
Reserved.
20 FAM 302.2-8 Department Use of AI for Defense and National Security
(CT:DATA-13; 02-20-2025)
a. Consistent with Sections 1 and 9 of E.O. 13960, Department use of AI for the purposes of national security or defense (including all AI used, in whole or in part, in defense or national security systems, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6) or as otherwise determined by the Department) are subject to the principles described in this section. As such, please consult 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6) (national security) and M/SS/CFA (defense) to determine whether an AI Use Case is outside of the scope of the Department’s AI Use Case Inventory and is subject to the principles detailed below.
b. Questions about how to categorize AI Use Cases should be directed to the Department’s Chief Data Officer and Chief Data Scientist in M/SS/CfA for assistance.
20 FAM 302.2-8(A) Use for Purposes of Defense
(CT:DATA-7; 10-15-2024)
Questions about whether AI is being used for the purposes of defense should be directed to the Department’s Chief Data Officer and Chief Data Scientist in M/SS/CfA for assistance in coordination with any other appropriate Department defense program office. Any Department use of artificial intelligence for the purposes of defense shall be subject to the principles below (as derived from “The Department of Defense (DoD) Artificial Intelligence Principles and Framework”):
(1) Responsible. Department personnel will exercise appropriate levels of judgment and care, while remaining responsible for the development, deployment, and use of AI capabilities.
(2) Equitable. The Department will take deliberate steps to minimize unintended bias in AI capabilities.
(3) Traceable. The Department’s AI capabilities will be developed and deployed such that relevant personnel possess an appropriate understanding of the technology, development processes, and operational methods applicable to AI capabilities, including with transparent and auditable methodologies, data sources, and design procedure and documentation.
(4) Reliable. The Department’s AI capabilities will have explicit, well‐defined uses, and the safety, security, and effectiveness of such capabilities will be subject to testing and assurance within those defined uses across their entire life‐cycles.
(5) Governable. The Department will design and engineer AI capabilities to fulfill their intended functions while possessing the ability to detect and avoid unintended consequences, and the ability to disengage or deactivate deployed systems that demonstrate unintended behavior.
20 FAM 302.2-8(B) Use for Purposes for National Security
(CT:DATA-7; 10-15-2024)
Questions about whether AI is being used for the purposes of national security should be directed to the Department’s Chief Data Officer and Chief Data Scientist in M/SS/CFA for assistance in coordination with any other appropriate Department program office (also see 44 U.S.C. 3552(b)(6)). Any Department use of artificial intelligence for the purposes of national security (see definitions in 12 FAM 013 and 12 FAM 271.2) shall be subject to the principles below (as derived from “The Principles of Artificial Intelligence Ethics for the Intelligence Community”):
(1) Respect the Law and Act with Integrity. The Department will employ AI in a manner that respects human dignity, rights, and freedoms. The Department’s use of AI will fully comply with applicable legal authorities and with policies and procedures that protect privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.
(2) Transparent and Accountable. The Department will provide appropriate transparency regarding its AI methods, applications, and uses within the bounds of security, technology, and releasability by law and policy, and will develop and employ mechanisms to identify responsibilities and provide accountability for the use of AI and its outcomes.
(3) Objective and Equitable. Consistent with its mission the Department will take affirmative steps to identify and mitigate bias.
(4) Human-Centered Development and Use. The Department will develop and use AI to augment our national security and enhance our trusted partnerships by tempering technological guidance with the application of human judgment, especially when an action has the potential to deprive individuals of constitutional rights or interfere with their free exercise of civil liberties.
(5) Secure and Resilient. The Department will develop and employ best practices for maximizing reliability, security, and accuracy of AI design, development, and use, and will employ security best practices to build resilience and minimize potential for adversarial influence.
(6) Informed by Science and Technology. The Department will apply rigor in its development and use of AI by actively engaging both across the federal government and with the broader scientific and technology communities to utilize advances in research and best practices from the public and private sector.