The White House’s newly formed Super Intelligence (SI) Force is working to develop recommendations that keep the United States competitive in artificial intelligence (AI) while ensuring the technology is developed and deployed responsibly, according to Scott Kupor, vice chair of the task force and director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Speaking during an Oct. 12 CNBC interview, Kupor said the task force is examining the risks and opportunities of increasingly advanced AI systems, including the government’s role in overseeing their development and holding technology companies accountable.
“The goal is to make sure that we continue to win, which we are winning, and ensure that we do so responsibly,” Kupor said.
Trump announced the creation of the “Super Intelligence Force” on Oct. 4, bringing together federal officials to coordinate the administration’s AI strategy amid its opposition to broader AI regulation.
AI safety and industry accountability
As the task force weighs how to balance those priorities, Kupor said AI developers must test their products before release and notify the government when problems arise.
“The industry bears a lot of responsibility here to make sure that when they release things, they’re safe, they’re appropriately vetted,” he said.
The task force is also considering how the government can independently verify companies’ safety claims rather than relying solely on industry self-reporting.
“We’re not just going to sit around and wait for the companies to tell us they’ve done their work,” Kupor said.
Kupor discussed the potential role of third-party security audits, suggesting that independent auditors could report findings to corporate boards while government officials retain the ability to verify compliance and pursue enforcement.
He pointed to existing product-liability and corporate-responsibility laws as part of the framework for holding AI developers accountable.
Kupor also acknowledged concerns about controlling increasingly capable systems but said safeguards would continue to evolve alongside the technology.
Asked about differing views among technology executives on AI safety, Kupor declined to speculate about their motivations. However, he said companies that believe they are releasing products they cannot control, and that could cause harm, should take their responsibilities under existing laws seriously.
Kupor also cautioned against broadly slowing AI development, arguing that such a move would not prevent competing nations from advancing their own capabilities.
“There is no magical kill switch somewhere where if we decide to slow this down, that doesn’t mean other adversaries won’t continue to advance the technology,” he said.
Data center energy and water demands
Beyond AI safety, Kupor urged technology companies to address growing concerns about AI data centers’ electricity and water demands rather than waiting for technological advances to reduce those pressures.
“We don’t need to debate whether water is going to get better, or energy is going to get better. We should just take care of that,” Kupor said.
He suggested companies could address concerns about rising electricity rates or provide their own power, though he did not specify what measures the task force might recommend.
Kupor’s comments come as the Trump administration pushes AI companies to cover the electricity costs of expanding data centers.
Following President Donald Trump’s Feb. 24, 2026, State of the Union address, seven major technology companies signed a voluntary Ratepayer Protection Pledge on March 4, committing to cover power generation and infrastructure costs rather than pass them on to consumers. On July 23, the administration expanded the initiative to utilities, state officials, and data center developers, but the pledge remains voluntary and imposes no binding federal requirements.
Kupor did not say whether the task force would recommend additional federal requirements for data center operators.
The Trump administration recently began referring to AI as “super intelligence,” or “SI,” and Trump directed the executive branch to use the new terminology in official documents and communications.