Background

Section 515 of Public Law 106-554, the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, directs the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") to issue government-wide guidelines that "provide policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information (including statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies." Section 515 further requires that agencies subject to the OMB guidelines must establish "administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information that does not comply with [the OMB guidelines]."⁽¹⁾

The OMB guidelines direct that, by May 1, 2002, agencies publish for public comment individual draft guidelines. In response to this directive, on May 3, 2002, the Department of Commerce published in the Federal Register, a request for public comment on agency guidelines, information quality standards, and an administrative correction mechanism.⁽²⁾ The DOC-draft guidelines provided policy direction to the various operating units of the Department concerning issuance of quality standards applicable to disseminated information. Further, the DOC-draft guidelines set forth draft Department-wide quality standards to address information utility and integrity, as well as a quality standard for information that is other than scientific, financial, or statistical.

In its request for comment, the Department advised that, by October 1, 2002, each operating unit would document and make available to the public standards meeting the requirements of quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity for all non-exempt disseminated information. To this end, by May 31, 2002, each operating unit would post on its Web site for public comment the categories of information disseminated, the quality standard for each category, and an administrative correction mechanism.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration ("NTIA") Section 515 information quality standards are available for review at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/occ/infoquality/infostandards_05312002.htm.

Requests for Comments on these Information Quality Standards

Comments on these proposed standards are due by close of business June 22, 2002. Comments should be sent by first-class mail to Chief Information Officer, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 4888, Washington, D.C. 20230 or by e-mail to cio@ntia.doc.gov. 

Part 1 Information Quality Standards Applicable to all NTIA Disseminated Information

Section 1.1 Standard of Utility

Section 1.2 Standard of Integrity

All electronic information disseminated to the public by NTIA shall adhere to the standards set out in Appendix III, "Security of Federal Automated Information Resources," OMB Circular A-130; the Computer Security Act; and the Government Information Systems Reform Act. Confidentiality of data collected by the Department of Commerce Office of the Secretary is safeguarded under legislation including the Privacy Act, and Titles 13, 15, and 22 of the U.S. Code.⁽⁴⁾

Section 1.3 Standard of Objectivity

In addition, such information shall be reliable and accurate to an acceptable degree of error as determined by factors such as the importance of the information, its intended use, time sensitivity, expected degree of permanence, relation to the primary mission(s) of the disseminating office, and the context of the dissemination, balanced against the resources required and the time available. A body of information is considered to be reliable if experience shows it to be generally accurate. Accurate information, in the case of non-scientific, non-financial, non-statistical information, means information which is reasonably determined to be factually correct in the view of the disseminating office as of the time of dissemination.⁽⁵⁾

Part 2 Types of Information and Corresponding Pre-Dissemination Process

Section 2.1 Non-Statistical, Non-Financial, Non-Scientific Information

Section 2.1.1 Definition

Section 2.1.2 Pre-dissemination Review Process

Section 2.2 Scientific Information

Section 2.2.1 Definition

Section 2.2.2 Pre-dissemination Review Process

For scientific information that does not require technical measurement or analytic assessments, pre-dissemination review is accomplished through the following procedure. The author, who has basic responsibility for the substantive value, accuracy, and clarity of the draft manuscript ("scientific responsibility"), forwards it to his/her division chief. This official, who prior to publication will in effect certify that the author has met his/her scientific responsibility, reviews the draft manuscript and disseminates it within the division for peer review. This latter examination provides a critical mechanism for ensuring the author's compliance with his/her scientific responsibility.

After completion of the peer review process, the draft is returned to the division chief and author for substantive, technical, and editorial revisions, if necessary, before it is distributed to an ad hoc editorial review board (the "Board"). The Board, comprised of other division chiefs and senior members of the NTIA operating unit, examines the draft for scientific accuracy, technical legitimacy, and quality. The author incorporates the Board's comments, if any, and forwards the "revised manuscript," through the division chief, to the Associate Administrator of the program unit. Depending on the subject matter, the Associate Administrator might submit the revised manuscript to the Inter-Departmental Radio Advisory Committee for additional technical review and examination of regulatory and policy impact. The document is returned to the author for revisions, if necessary, before submission into the NTIA internal clearance procedure, set forth in section 2.1.2. above.

For manuscripts requiring technical measurement or analytic assessments, the Associate Administrator may forward the manuscript to the Institute for Telecommunication Sciences ("ITS"), for review by a technical experts panel. This panel is comprised of senior ITS employees selected by the Associate Administrator. Once the panel has reviewed the revised manuscript and has provided comments, it is returned to the Associate Administrator for further revision and submission into the NTIA internal clearance procedure.

For scientific documents originating from and to be disseminated directly from the Institute for Telecommunication Sciences, the pre-dissemination review process is set forth as follows. The author of the draft manuscript forwards it and a list of technical reviewers to his/her division chief. The division chief reviews the manuscript to ensure compliance with the author's scientific responsibility; identifies potential policy issues; assigns a project number; and selects two technical reviewers. The division chief also forwards a copy of the manuscript to the publications officer, who serves as the editorial reviewer. A review form ("NTIA-2") is prepared and the manuscript is forwarded to each technical reviewer and, if necessary, to an executive officer with request for a policy review. The executive officer coordinates any policy review with appropriate office heads at NTIA headquarters.

The technical reviewers, usually two peers, perform a rigorous review of the manuscript for technical significance and accuracy, and complete the NTIA-2 form. The editorial reviewer reviews the draft to ensure technical clarity before completing the review form. All reviewers return copies of the draft manuscript and completed NTIA-2 forms to the division chief. S/he is notified of any policy or technical issues identified by reviewers and returns the annotated copies of the manuscript and the review forms to the author. The author revises the draft manuscript, using the reviewers' comments, as appropriate.

A manuscript approval form ("NTIA-3") is attached to the "revised manuscript" and the package is submitted to the Editorial Review Board ("ITS-ERB"). This review body ensures technical integrity, substantive value, and scientific accuracy, as well as examines the regulatory and policy impact of the contents of the revised manuscript. (On rare occasions, the division chief approves the revised manuscript for immediate release.) The ITS-ERB reviews the package and assigns a sponsor, who examines a copy of the manuscript to determine that the author has responded appropriately to reviewers' comments and that there are no remaining policy issues. The sponsor may consult with the author and reviewers, and upon determination all concerns about the draft have been resolved, executes the NTIA-3 and returns the package to the ITS-ERB chair with recommendations concerning publication. The Chair of the ITS-ERB acts on the sponsor's recommendation, signs the NTIA-3 (thereby indicating the ITS-ERB's recommendation), and returns the manuscript package to the division office for revisions, as appropriate. Once finalized, the manuscript is delivered for dissemination. ITS-contact information is provided at the time of dissemination.

Section 2.3 Disclaimed Information

Part 3 NTIA Mechanism for Requesting Correction of Disseminated Information

(a) Definitions.

(1) affected person refers to a person who meets each of the following three criteria:

(i) The person must have suffered an injury -- harm to an identifiable legally-protected interest;

(ii) There must be a causal connection between the injury and the disseminated information -- the injury has to be fairly traceable to the disseminated information or decisions based on such information, and not the result of independent or unrelated action; and

(iii) It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision.

(2) person refers to an individual, partnership, corporation, association, public or private organization, or State or local government; and

(3) program office refers to a sub-organization of NTIA responsible for carrying out specified substantive functions of NTIA.

(b) Procedures for initial request for correction.

(1) An affected person would submit an initial request to correct disseminated information that does not comply with OMB or Department guidelines directly to Chief Information Officer, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 4888, Washington, D.C. 20230 or cio@ntia.doc.gov, the designated point of contact to receive such requests.

(2)(i) No initial request for correction will be considered under these procedures concerning:

(A) a matter not involving "information," as that term is defined in OMB's guidelines;

(B) information that has not actually been "disseminated," as that term is defined in OMB's guidelines; or

(C) disseminated information the correction of which would serve no useful purpose. For example, correction of disseminated information would serve no useful purpose with respect to information that is not valid, used or useful after a stated short period of time (such as a weather forecast). This limitation would not, however, preclude a request for correction alleging a systemic problem resulting in consistent errors in the dissemination of such information.

(ii) Such initial request will be accounted for in the Department's report to OMB.

(3) At a minimum, initial requests must include:

(i) the requester's current home or business address, and telephone number or electronic mail address (in order to ensure timely communication);

(ii) an accurate citation to or description of the particular information disseminated which is the subject of the request (including the date and information source from which the requester obtained the information); and

(iii) an explanation of:

(A) how the requester is an affected person;

(B) how the requester believes the office that disseminated the information failed to follow its applicable information quality standards; and

(C) why the requester believes that the subject information is not correct.

(4) Upon receipt of an initial request, the CIO will notify the requester of receipt as soon as administratively possible. The CIO will transmit the initial request to the program office that originated the information that the requester claims does not comply the OMB or Department guidelines ("responsible office"). Any Department employee receiving a misdirected request will take reasonable efforts to forward the request to the appropriate office, but the responsible office is not obligated to respond until it receives the request.

(5)(i) The Associate Administrator of the responsible office will make a determination as to whether the initial request meets the requirements of paragraph (b)(3). If so, the Associate Administrator will deem the request to be "proper."

(ii) No action will be taken regarding an initial request failing to meet the requirements of paragraph (b)(3), including a request made by a person unaffected by the dissemination of the information. The CIO will notify the requester of this disposition. Such a request will be accounted for in the Department's report to OMB.

(iii) A proper request made concerning information disseminated as part and during the pendency of the comment period on a proposed rule, including a request concerning the information forming the record of decision for a proposed rule, will be treated as a comment filed on that proposed rulemaking action, and will be addressed in issuance of any final rule. A proper request filed after the close of the comment period on any proposed rule may be considered to the same extent as any other late-filed comment or may be addressed through the procedures established in this guideline.

(6)(i) After designation of the request as "proper," the Associate Administrator will make a preliminary determination whether the request states a valid claim. A request for correction will be preliminarily determined to state a valid claim if it reasonably demonstrates, on the strength of the assertions made in the request alone, that the information disseminated was based on a misapplication or non-application of NTIA's applicable published information quality standards ("NTIA standards").

(ii) A determination that a request does not state a valid claim will be communicated by the Associate Administrator within the responsible office to the requester as soon as is administratively possible, but not longer than 15 days. There is no appeal from a decision that a request fails to state a valid claim.

(7)(i) If a request is preliminarily determined to state a valid claim, the responsible office will objectively investigate and analyze, in a manner consistent with established internal procedures, whether the information disseminated is in compliance with NTIA standards. The Associate Administrator will make an initial decision, based on the request and any internal investigation and analysis, whether

(A) the information should be corrected because it does not comply with NTIA standards ("granted request"),

(B) the information should not be corrected because it does comply with NTIA standards or,

(C) in the event that the information does not comply with NTIA standards, the results would have been substantially or statistically the same ("initial denial").

There will be no opportunity for an in-person hearing.

(ii) The Associate Administrator must communicate the initial decision to the requester within 60 days. The initial decision will contain a notice that the requester may appeal an initial denial to the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information, 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 4898, Washington, D.C. 20230, within 30 calendar days of the date of the initial denial. An initial denial will become a final decision if no appeal is filed within 30 days.

(iii) The Associate Administrator may determine to grant the request and not correct the disseminated information if to correct the information would require a commitment of resources unavailable to that official. The Associate Administrator will communicate such a determination to the requester and will consider, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information ("Assistant Secretary"), including a request for sufficient funds to undertake the correction in the next budget cycle.

(c) Appeals from initial denial.

 
(1) An appeal from an initial denial must be made within 30 calendar days of the date of the initial decision. Such appeal must be in writing and addressed to the Assistant Secretary. At a minimum, an appeal of an initial denial must include:

(i) the requester's current home or business address, telephone number or electronic mail address (in order to ensure timely communication);

(ii) a copy of the original request and any correspondence regarding the initial denial; and

(iii) a statement of the reasons why the requester believes the initial denial was in error. In describing why the requester believes the initial denial was in error, the requester must provide detailed reasons why:

(A) the failure to follow its information quality standards led the office that disseminated the information to disseminate information that is not within an acceptable degree of imprecision or error;

(B) the disseminated information is not within an acceptable degree of imprecision or error regardless of whether the office that disseminated the information correctly followed its information quality standards; or

(C) the standards covering the dissemination of the information at issue were so flawed that, even if they had been followed, they would lead to the dissemination of incorrect information.

(2) The Assistant Secretary will decide whether the information should be corrected based on all the information presented in the appeal and the evidence collected by the operating unit pertaining to that appeal. There will be no opportunity for an in-person hearing. The Assistant Secretary must communicate his/her decision to the requester within 60 calendar days after receipt of the appeal. This decision will constitute a final decision by NTIA.

(3) The Assistant Secretary may determine that an appeal meets one of the criteria in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) and not correct the disseminated information or the Department's guidelines, if to do so would require a commitment of unavailable resources. The Assistant Secretary will communicate such a determination to the requester and will consider including a request for sufficient funds to undertake the correction in the next budget cycle.

Dated: 31 may 2002

1. The OMB final guidelines are found at 67 Fed. Reg. 8452 (February 22, 2002).

2. See, United States Department of Commerce, Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Disseminated Information, Request for Comment, 67 Fed. Reg. 22398 (May 3, 2002).

3. Id.

4. Id.

5. Id.

6. The Associate Administrator may also seek comment on the revised manuscript from his/her counterparts in other program areas of NTIA, if appropriate.