LINK Act

Bill overview

• Bill: S.4453, 119th Congress, 2nd Session
• Title: USDA–DOI Linking Information Networks for Knowledge-sharing Act (LINK Act)
• Sponsor(s): Sen. Richard Schiff (lead) with Sen. Pete Ricketts; co-sponsors include Adam Schiff and Pete Ricketts
• Introduction date: April 30, 2026
• Objective: Require the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to ensure interoperable information technology (IT) and cybersecurity/information security systems between the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of the Interior (DOI), enabling information sharing on specified activities while protecting sensitive data.

Purpose and intent

• Establish interdepartmental interoperability between USDA and DOI IT and cybersecurity systems.
• Facilitate information sharing on covered activities to improve coordination, especially in fields like wildfire operations, disaster/emergency response, and related business functions.
• Safeguard sensitive or proprietary data, Tribal data sovereignty, and cave location data as designated by law.

Key provisions and changes

1. Definitions

   • "Secretary" refers to the Secretary of Agriculture for the purposes of this section.

2. Interoperability obligation

   • USDA and DOI must coordinate to make their IT and cybersecurity systems interoperable.
   • Sharing is allowed for information related to covered activities, excluding certain sensitive data (Tribal proprietary data, sensitive cave locations, and other data designated by law).

3. Covered activities (non-exhaustive description)

   • Federal land management activities, with emphasis on leveraging existing integration efforts for wildfire operations.
   • Disaster and emergency preparedness and response activities.
   • Procurement, aviation management, personnel/workforce management, and other business system activities related to the above.

4. Applicable law

   • Implementation must comply with federal IT system laws, including Subtitle III of Title 40 U.S.C. (Federal Information Technology Management Reform) and Chapter 35 of Title 44 (Paperwork Reduction, Information Resources Management).

5. Consultation and tribal data sovereignty

   • Must consult with applicable Indian Tribes.
   • Must provide appropriate protections for Tribal data sovereignty.

6. Joint interoperability implementation plan

   • Development: ASAP after enactment, in consultation with firefighters, to enable information sharing between USDA and DOI.
   • Plan content: Include a phased approach for retiring siloed legacy IT/systems without reducing operational capacity or mission safety.
   • Implementation deadline: Fully implement the plan within 1 year of enactment.

7. Updates to USDA IT and security systems

   • After enactment, USDA must update their IT and cybersecurity systems as needed to support sharing in line with the interoperability plan.

Who would be affected

• Primary agencies: United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and United States Department of the Interior (DOI).
• Internal stakeholders: IT, cybersecurity, emergency management, wildfire operations, land management, procurement, aviation management, and human resources/workforce management divisions within USDA and DOI.
• Beneficiaries: Federal employees and agencies coordinating on land management, disaster response, and related operations; potentially affected tribes (with sovereignty protections) and wildfire responders.
• Data considerations: Sensitive and proprietary data, including Tribal data sovereignty concerns, would be protected and excluded from interoperable access as designated by law.

Procedural and timeline aspects

• Enactment steps: If passed, the act would require the development of an interoperability plan shortly after enactment, with broad coordination between USDA and DOI.
• Implementation timeline: The interoperability plan must be implemented no later than 1 year after enactment.
• Compliance framework: All activities must align with applicable federal IT/on IT governance laws (40 U.S.C. Subtitle III and 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
• Data governance: The bill emphasizes consultation with Tribes and protections for Tribal data sovereignty, shaping what data can be shared.

Potential impact and considerations

• Operational benefits: Improved coordination on wildfire management, disaster response, and shared administrative functions could enhance efficiency and situational awareness across land management and emergency operations.
• Risks and safeguards: Interoperability must balance information sharing with the protection of sensitive data, including tribal sovereignty considerations and other legally designated protections.
• Implementation risk: Requires timely modernization and de-siloing of legacy systems; success hinges on effective planning, funding, and cross-agency collaboration.

If you’d like, I can add a concise comparison to current interoperability efforts or outline potential funding implications and oversight considerations.