Statement of Problem: There is a research-to-practice gap in which it can take up to 17 years to translate research into clinical practice. This gap can impact the ability of the Military Health System (MHS) to bridge behavioral health advances into healthcare delivery, exacerbating current challenges in the provision of behavioral health care. The Department of Defense works to address the growing needs and demands for behavioral health services. Efforts include, but are not limited to, increasing access to care, addressing the nationwide shortage of behavioral health providers, and leveraging non-clinical behavioral health resources (e.g., Military and Family Life Counselors). Current MHS efforts also include expanding telebehavioral health and implementing the Targeted Care initiative. The use of implementation science can support current and future efforts, stimulating innovation and advances in behavioral health and accelerating the application of research findings into healthcare practice across the MHS. There are multiple factors to consider for a system-level implementation science approach, such as effective leadership, skilled facilitators of change, and aligning the innovation to the local context. Successful application of implementation science can help preserve and improve the health of Service members and their families through timelier adoption of evidence-based practices and interventions for mental health needs. Methods & Results: Implementation science models and frameworks were assessed for validity. Two frameworks were identified for next level analysis, including Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (I-PARISH) framework (Harvey & Kitson, 2016) and Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) (Powell et al., 2015). These frameworks will be further assessed for use within the MHS. An application of a model/framework to key MHS mental health priorities will be developed to illustrate the potential for advancing implementation science across the MHS. Conclusion: Review and application of an implementation science framework to MHS priorities (e.g., access to care, evidence-based practice) can guide and improve the translation of mental health knowledge transfer, adoption, and sustainment. Application of frameworks should consider system-specific strategies and barriers and unique factors that impact the promote adoption of system-level approaches at the local context, such as Military Medical Treatment Facilities. References: Harvey, G., & Kitson, A. (2016). PARIHS revisited: From heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice. Implementation Science : IS, 11(1), Article 33. https://doi.org/10 .1186/s13012-016-0398-2 Powell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., Chinman, M. J., Damschroder, L. J., Smith, J. L., Matthieu, M. M., Matthieu, M. M., Proctor, E. K., & Kirchner, J. E.(2015). A refined compilation of implementation strategies: Results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implementation Science: IS, 10(1), Article 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1