Subject: Draft Report Implementing Office of Management and
[Federal Register: July 22, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 140)]
[Notices]
[Page 47777-47783]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22jy02-44]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Draft Report Implementing Office of Management and Budget
Information Dissemination Quality Guidelines
AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Officer, Department of Energy
(DOE).
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DOE invites public comment on a draft report to the Office of
[[Page 47778]]
Management and Budget (OMB) that contains draft DOE guidelines setting
forth policy and procedures to ensure and maximize the quality,
utility, objectivity, and integrity of the information that DOE
disseminates to members of the public. DOE has prepared this draft
report pursuant to OMB government-wide guidelines under section 515 of
the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year
2001 (Act) (Pub. L. 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763).
DATES: Public comments are due August 21, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent by regular mail or electronic mail.
To ensure receipt of comments by the due date, DOE recommends
submission by electronic mail to the Office of the Chief Information
Officer, Attention: DOE Quality Guidelines Review at
cio.webmaster@hq.doe.gov. Comments sent by regular mail should be
addressed to: Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attention: DOE
Quality Guidelines Review, U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal
Building--Room 8H-089, 1000 Independence Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20585, or via Fax to (202) 586-7966.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of the Chief Information
Officer, Attention: Ms. Deborah Henderson, at the electronic and
regular mail addresses provided above. The draft DOE report and
guidelines in this notice are available on the DOE CIO Web site at
http://cio.doe.gov/informationquality.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The draft report and guidelines in this
notice are in response to OMB's Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing
the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information
Disseminated by Federal Agencies (OMB guidelines), 67 FR 8452 (February
22, 2002) under section 515 of the Act. DOE's draft guidelines would
apply to a wide variety of information disseminated to members of the
public. The DOE draft guidelines are modeled on the OMB guidelines with
modifications specific to DOE. The principal modifications with
explanations, are as follows:
1. DOE inserted the definitions before the operative portions of
its draft guidelines, and in order to enhance readability, opted to
relocate some of the language in the OMB definitions (namely, that
which provided policy as distinguished from strictly definitional
material) among the operative sections of guidelines.
2. DOE included general pre-dissemination review procedures which
would provide for the originating DOE office to review information in
light of the quality standards in the OMB and DOE guidelines and, in
appropriate cases, for higher level internal review of the originating
office's conclusions to ensure that the procedures are followed.
3. DOE opted to propose its own definition of ``influential'' when
that term is applied to financial, scientific, or statistical
information. Under the OMB guidelines, ``influential'' information of
that type is supposed to meet the highest standards of transparency
(consistent with countervailing considerations such as confidentiality)
and data must be capable of reproduction by a qualified individual
outside of the agency. DOE proposes to define ``influential
information'' as information that DOE routinely embargoes because of
its potential effect on markets, information on which a regulatory
action with a $100 million per year impact is based, and other
information products on a case-by-case basis. Routine embargo
information occurs with regard to certain of the information products
of DOE's Energy Information Administration. Currently, only some of the
appliance energy conservation standards rulemakings under the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295) have $100 million impacts
on the economy. While DOE is committed to maintaining high standards of
quality for all its information products aimed at the public, DOE is
not of the view that the impact of other information products warrants
holding them to the most rigorous standards of transparency and
reproducibility.
4. DOE proposes mandatory procedures, including content
requirements, to be followed by members of the public in submitting
requests for correction of information under the Guidelines. With
respect to information related to DOE actions subject to public
comment, members of the public generally would be required to submit
requests for correction in the form of timely comments made through the
comment process. With respect to DOE actions that are not subject to
public comment, members of the public would be required to submit
requests for correction to the DOE CIO who would direct the request to
the originating DOE program office. That office should provide at least
an initial response within 60 days. A member of the public could
request review of an adverse response to the DOE CIO. The CIO would
direct the request for review to a higher level official of the DOE
program office to whom the originating program office reports for a
final decision within 60 days.
In addition to the four foregoing points, DOE is considering
whether, consistent with the OMB guidelines (67 FR 8460), to add a
variation to the portion of the DOE guidelines calling for use of the
criteria in the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 (42 U.S.C
300g-1(b)(3)(A) and (B)) in the preparation of risk assessments. The
possible adaptation would be to add a variation of the Safe Drinking
Water Act criteria for ecological risk assessments which may not
involve health and medical information. More specifically, DOE is
considering adding the following provision on ecological risk
assessment procedures to its guidelines:
``1. To the degree that a DOE Element's action is based on science,
the DOE Element should use:
a. The best available peer-reviewed science and supporting studies
conducted in accordance with sound and objective scientific practices
to evaluate adverse effects to local populations or communities of
affected biota; and
b. Data collected by accepted methods (if the reliability of the
method and the nature of the decision justifies use of the data),
including, where feasible, site-specific data.
2. In the dissemination of public information about risks, the DOE
Element should ensure that the presentation of information about risk
effects is comprehensive, informative, and understandable.
3. In a document made available to the public, the DOE Element
should specify, to the extent practicable:
a. Each population addressed by any estimate of applicable risks;
b. The expected risk or central estimate of risk for the specific
populations affected;
c. Each appropriate upper-bound or lower-bound estimate of risk
developed through probabilistic risk assessment techniques where
feasible;
d. Each significant uncertainty identified in the process of the
assessment of risk effects and the studies that would assist in
resolving the uncertainty; and
e. Peer-reviewed studies known to the DOE Element that support, are
directly relevant to, or fail to support any estimate of risk effects
and the methodology used to reconcile inconsistencies in the scientific
data, including, where feasible, a weight of the evidence analysis and
causation criteria analysis.''
DOE particularly invites comments on its draft guideline provisions
reflecting the four points discussed above; DOE also invites comments
on the advisability of adopting the ecological
[[Page 47779]]
risk assessment language set forth above.
DOE plans to review all relevant comments submitted in response to
its draft guidelines and will respond to the major issues they raise.
Publication of a final report to OMB is due on October 1, 2002.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 16, 2002.
Karen S. Evans,
Chief Information Officer.
Draft Report to the Office of Management and Budget on Guidelines for
Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and
Integrity of Information Disseminated by the Department of Energy
Introduction
This report is submitted to the Office of Management and Budget,
(OMB) by the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to OMB's Guidelines
for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and
Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies (OMB
guidelines), 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002) under section 515 of the
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001
(Pub. L. 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763). The report includes DOE's guidelines
to implement the policies and procedural guidance set forth in the OMB
guidelines.
Background
DOE is responsible for the administration of a wide variety of
national defense, energy supply, energy conservation, and nuclear waste
cleanup programs authorized by law. DOE administers a system of
national laboratories with active scientific research programs. DOE
also disseminates a large volume of statistical reports through its
Energy Information Administration. Although DOE is not a major
regulatory agency, DOE has some rulemaking mandates and authorities,
such as the appliance energy conservation program of test procedures
and standards, that require the dissemination of financial, scientific,
and statistical information. Like other agencies, DOE publishes draft
and final environmental impact statements and environmental assessments
under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq. to
4370d.
Discussion of Guidelines
DOE has always maintained high standards of quality in the
production of information disseminated to members of the public. As a
source of scientific and statistical information on which members of
the public and other government officials rely, DOE has long had
procedures to assure adequate information quality. DOE's Energy
Information Administration is a leader in this regard and has elaborate
procedures to ensure the quality of its information products. DOE's
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy has elaborate special
procedures for some of its rulemakings. That office has codified a
general statement of policy in Appendix A to Subpart C of 10 CFR part
430 with regard to its information quality review procedures for
information used in its appliance energy conservation standards
rulemakings.
The DOE guidelines set forth below are modeled on OMB guidelines
and incorporate a basic standard of quality (including objectivity,
utility, and integrity) in the development and dissemination of DOE or
DOE-sponsored information to the public. They also incorporate the
procedures that DOE has traditionally followed to review information
products for adequate quality. In addition, the DOE guidelines provide
a uniform set for procedures for members of the public who wish to
request correction of information on a timely basis. These procedures
will ensure that final DOE decisions with respect to requests for
correction will be made by high-level management officials.
In DOE's view, section 515 of the Act requires procedures and
performance goals for the internal management of the Executive Branch.
Although the draft DOE guidelines provide procedures by which a member
of the public may request correction of information DOE has
disseminated, they are not intended to result in DOE actions that are
subject to judicial review. Rather, section 515(b)(2)(C) contemplates
that each agency shall ``report periodically to the Director'' of OMB
concerning ``(i) the number and nature of complaints received by the
agency regarding the accuracy of information disseminated by the
agency; and (ii) how such complaints were handled by the agency.''
The DOE Guidelines were prepared by the DOE Chief Information
Officer, who is responsible for coordinating DOE's response to OMB's
guidelines, in cooperation with other affected DOE offices.
Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity,
Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated to the Public by the
Department of Energy
I. Background
Section 515, Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554), directed 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.'' The OMB guidelines, published in the Federal Register on
February 22, 2002 (67 FR 8452), require agencies to issue by October 1,
2002, their own implementing guidelines that include administrative
mechanisms allowing members of the public to seek and obtain correction
of information disseminated by the agency that does not comply with the
agency guidelines.
The Department of Energy (DOE) Information Quality Guidelines,
issued by the Department's Chief Information Officer (CIO) pursuant to
OMB's Guidelines, are intended to provide guidance to Departmental
Elements ( i.e., major DOE offices) on maximizing the quality,
objectivity, utility, and integrity of information, including
statistical information, disseminated to the public.
The DOE Guidelines also establish mechanisms for members of the
public to seek and obtain administrative correction of disseminated
information that does not comply with the quality requirements of these
Guidelines. Finally, the Guidelines explain how the CIO will comply
with OMB's annual reporting requirement concerning complaints from
members of the public.The DOE Information Quality Guidelines will
become effective on October 1, 2002.
II. Introduction
The CIO has designed these Guidelines to apply to a wide variety of
DOE information dissemination activities that may range in importance
and scope. They are intended to be sufficiently generic to fit all
media, printed, electronic, or other forms. The CIO has sought to avoid
the problems that would be inherent in developing detailed,
prescriptive, ``one-size-fits-all'' DOE-wide guidelines that would
artificially require different types of dissemination activities to be
treated in the same manner.
[[Page 47780]]
The Guidelines are designed so that DOE Elements can apply them in
a common sense and workable manner. It is important that these
guidelines not impose unnecessary administrative burdens that would
inhibit DOE Elements from continuing to take advantage of the Internet
and other technologies to disseminate information to the public. In
this regard, DOE Elements may incorporate the standards and procedures
required by these guidelines into their existing information resources
management and administrative practices rather than create new and
potentially duplicative or contradictory processes. DOE Elements may
rely on their implementation of the computer security provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., to
establish appropriate security safeguards for ensuring the integrity of
the information that they disseminate.
III. DOE Information Quality Guidelines
A. What Definitions Apply to These Guidelines?
1. DOE Element means a major DOE office headed by an official whose
position is subject to Senate confirmation or an office which directly
reports to the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, or either of the DOE Under
Secretaries.
2. Dissemination means DOE Element initiated or sponsored
distribution of information to the public.
3. Influential means, when used in the context of scientific,
financial, or statistical information, information (1) that is subject
to embargo until the date of its dissemination by the Department or DOE
Element disseminating the information because of potential market
effects; (2) that is the basis for a DOE action that may result in an
annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; or (3) that is
designated by a DOE Element as ``influential.''
4. Information means any communication or representation of
knowledge such as facts or data, in any medium or form, including
textual, numerical, graphic, cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual
forms, including information that a DOE Element disseminates from a web
page, but excluding the provision of hyperlinks to information that
others disseminate.
5. Information dissemination product means any book, paper, map,
machine-readable material, audiovisual production, or other documentary
material, regardless of physical form or characteristic, a DOE Element
disseminates to the public, including any electronic document, CD-ROM,
or Web page.
6. Integrity means the information has been secured and protected
from unauthorized access or revision, to ensure that the information is
not compromised through corruption or falsification.
7. Objectivity means the information is presented in an accurate,
clear, complete, and unbiased manner and the substance of the
information is accurate, reliable, and unbiased.
8. Quality means utility, objectivity, and integrity.
9. Reproducibility means capability of being substantially
reproduced, subject to an acceptable degree of imprecision, and with
respect to analytical results, ``capable of being substantially
reproduced'' means that independent analysis of the original or
supporting data using identical methods would generate similar analytic
results, subject to an acceptable degree of imprecision or error.
10. Subject to public comment means that DOE has made the
information available for comment by members of the public, preliminary
to making a final determination, through a notice in the Federal
Register including, but not limited to, a notice of inquiry, an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking, a notice of proposed rulemaking, a
notice reopening or extending a comment period due to receipt of new
information, a notice of availability of a draft environmental impact
statement, or any other Federal Register notice that provides an
opportunity for comment by members of the public regarding information
on which a final adjudicatory determination may be based.
11. Transparent means clear and concise
12. Utility means the usefulness of the information to its intended
users, including the public.
B. Which Public Disseminations of Information Are and Are Not Subject
to These Guidelines?
These Guidelines apply to any public dissemination of information.
The definitions of ``information'' and ``dissemination'' establish the
scope of the applicability of the guidelines. ``Information'' means
``any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts or
data.'' Consequently, ``information'' does not include opinions.
``Dissemination'' is defined to mean agency initiated or sponsored
distribution of information to the public,'' including, for example, a
risk assessment prepared by a DOE Element to inform the agency's
formulation of possible regulatory or other action. A DOE Element does
not ``initiate'' the dissemination of information when a Federally
employed scientist or Federal grantee or contractor publishes his or
her research findings, even if the DOE retains ownership or other
intellectual property rights because DOE paid for the research. In such
cases, to avoid confusion, the DOE Element should ensure that the
researcher includes an appropriate disclaimer that the views are the
researcher's and do not necessarily reflect the views of DOE. However,
if a DOE Element directs a Federally employed scientist or Federal
grantee or contractor to disseminate information and retains authority
to review and approve the information before release, then the DOE
Element has sponsored the dissemination of the information.
``Dissemination'' also does not include the following
distributions:
(1) Press releases, including but not limited to fact sheets, press
conferences or similar communications in any medium that announce,
support the announcement or give public notice of information a DOE
Element has disseminated elsewhere;
(2) Any inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of information
intended only for inter-agency and intra-agency communications;
(3) Correspondence with individuals or persons;
(4) Testimony and other submissions to Congress containing
information a DOE Element has disseminated elsewhere;
(5) Responses to requests for DOE records under the Freedom of
Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act or
similar laws;
(6) Information in public filings (such as public comments received
by DOE in rulemaking proceedings), except where the DOE Element
distributes information submitted to it by a third party in a manner
that suggests that the DOE Element endorses or adopts the information,
or indicates in its distribution that it is using or proposing to use
the information to formulate or support a regulation, guidance, or
other DOE Element decision or position.
(7) Information contained in subpoenas or documents filed in
adjudicative proceedings, including DOE adjudicatory orders, opinions,
amicus and other briefs;
(8) Procedural, operational, policy and internal manuals and
memoranda prepared for the management and operation of DOE Elements
that are not
[[Page 47781]]
primarily intended for public dissemination;
(9) Archival records (including information made available to the
public on a DOE web site to document historical DOE actions); and
(10) Communications limited to government employees or DOE
contractors or grantees.
C. What Are the Responsibilities of DOE Elements for Ensuring Quality
of Information Disseminated to the Public and Responding to Requests
>From Members of the Public for Correction of Information?
1. Ensuring quality. As a guiding principle, DOE Elements should
have as a performance goal that information disseminated to the public
meets a basic level of quality. The quality of information disseminated
by DOE Elements is measured by its utility, objectivity, and integrity.
``Objectivity'' focuses on whether the disseminated information is
being presented in an accurate, clear, complete and unbiased manner and
as a matter of substance, is accurate, reliable and unbiased. This
includes whether the information is presented in the proper context.
Sometimes, in disseminating certain types of information to the public,
other information must also be disseminated in order to ensure an
accurate, clear, complete, and unbiased presentation.
Also, DOE Elements should (to the extent possible, consistent with
security, privacy, intellectual property, trade secrets, and
confidentiality protections) identify the sources of the disseminated
information and, in a scientific, financial, or statistical context,
the supporting data and models, so that the public can assess for
itself whether there may be some reason to question the objectivity of
the sources. Where feasible, data should have full, accurate,
transparent documentation, and possible sources of error affecting data
quality should be identified and disclosed to users.
In addition, ``objectivity'' involves a focus on ensuring accurate,
reliable, and unbiased information. In a scientific, financial, or
statistical context, the original and supporting data should be
generated, and the analytical results developed, using sound
statistical and research methods. If the data and analytical results
have been subjected to formal, independent, external peer review, the
information may generally be presumed to be of acceptable objectivity.
However, this presumption is rebuttable based on a persuasive showing
by a member of the public seeking correction of information in a
particular instance. If DOE Element-sponsored peer review is employed
to help satisfy the objectivity standard, the review process employed
should meet the general criteria for competent and credible peer review
recommended by OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs to
the President's Management Council (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
inforeg/oira_review-process.html), namely ``that (a) peer reviewers be
selected primarily on the basis of necessary technical expertise, (b)
peer reviewers be expected to disclose to agencies prior technical/
policy positions they may have taken on the issues at hand, (c) peer
reviewers be expected to disclose to agencies their sources of personal
and institutional funding (private or public sector), and (d) peer
reviews be conducted in an open and rigorous manner.''
Influential information. If a DOE Element is responsible for
disseminating and disseminates influential scientific, financial
information, a high degree of transparency of data and methods should
be ensured to facilitate the reproducibility of such information by
qualified third parties.
``Influential'' when used in the context of scientific, financial
or statistical information, means information: (1) That is subject to
embargo until its dissemination by DOE or a DOE Element disseminating
the information because of potential market effects; (2) that is the
basis for a DOE action that may result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more; or (3) that is designated by a DOE
Element as ``influential.''
With regard to original and supporting data related thereto, these
Guidelines do not require that all disseminated original and supporting
data be subjected to the reproducibility requirement applicable to
influential information. DOE Elements may identify, in consultation
with the relevant scientific and technical communities, those
particular types of data that may practicably be subjected to the
reproducibility requirement, given ethical, feasibility,
confidentiality, privacy, trade secret, security, and intellectual
property constraints. It is understood that reproducibility of data is
an indication of transparency about research design and methods and
thus a replication exercise (i.e. a new experiment, test, or sample)
should not be required prior to each dissemination. At a minimum, DOE
Elements should assure reproducibility for those kinds of original and
supporting data according to ``commonly accepted scientific, financial,
or statistical standards.''
With regard to analytic results related thereto, DOE Elements
generally should demonstrate sufficient transparency about data and
methods that an independent reanalysis could be undertaken by a
qualified member of the public. These transparency standards apply to
analysis of data from a single study as well as to analyses that
combine information from multiple studies.
Making the data and models publicly available will assist in
determining whether analytical results are capable of being
substantially reproduced. However, the objectivity standard does not
override other compelling interests such as privacy, trade secret,
security, intellectual property, and other confidentiality protections.
In situations where public access to data and methods will not
occur due to other compelling interests, DOE Elements should apply
rigorous robustness checks to analytic results and document what checks
were undertaken. DOE Elements should, however, disclose the specific
data sources that have been used and the specific quantitative methods
and assumptions that have been employed. However, each DOE Element
should define the type of robustness checks and the level of detail for
documentation thereof, in ways appropriate for it given the nature and
multiplicity of issues for which the DOE Element is responsible.
With regard to the dissemination of information containing analyses
of risks to human health, safety and the environment, DOE Elements
should either adopt or adapt the quality principles applied by Congress
to risk information used and disseminated pursuant to the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments of 1996. DOE Elements responsible for
dissemination of vital health, environmental and medical information
should interpret the reproducibility and peer-review standards in a
manner appropriate to assuring the timely flow of vital information to
medical providers, patients, health agencies, and the public.
Information quality standards may be waived temporarily by DOE Elements
in urgent situations (e.g. imminent threats to public health or
homeland security).
``Utility'' refers to the usefulness of the information to intended
users including the public. In assessing the usefulness of information,
DOE Elements need to consider the uses of the information they plan to
disseminate not only from their perspective but also from the
perspective of the public. As a result, when transparency of
information is relevant for assessing the information's usefulness from
the public's
[[Page 47782]]
perspective, DOE Elements should take care to ensure that transparency
has been addressed in its review of the information.
``Integrity'' refers to security--the protection of information
from unauthorized access or revision to ensure that information by DOE
or DOE Elements is not compromised through corruption or falsification.
Pre-dissemination review procedures. Before disseminating
information to members of the public, the originating office of the DOE
Element must ensure that the information is consistent with the OMB and
DOE guidelines and must determine that the information is of adequate
quality for dissemination. If the information is influential financial,
scientific, or statistical information, then the DOE Element should
provide for higher level review of the program office's conclusions.
Each DOE Element should identify for the CIO a high ranking official at
the rank of at least a deputy assistant secretary who is responsible
for ensuring the accountability of the DOE Element's program offices in
reviewing information to be disseminated to members of the public under
the OMB and DOE guidelines.
As a matter of good and effective information resources management,
DOE Elements may develop and post on their websites supplemental
guidelines for the process they will follow for reviewing the quality
(including objectivity, utility and integrity) of information before it
is disseminated. DOE Elements should treat information quality as
integral to every step of development of information, including
creation, collection, maintenance, and dissemination. This process will
enable every DOE Element to substantiate the quality of the information
it has disseminated through documentation or other means appropriate to
the information.
Paperwork Reduction Act. It is important that DOE Elements make use
of OMB's Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) clearance process to help
improve the quality of information that the DOE Elements collect and
disseminate to the public. DOE Elements already are required to
demonstrate in their PRA submissions to OMB the ``practical utility''
of a proposed collection of information the DOE Element plans to
disseminate. Additionally, for all proposed collections of information
that will be disseminated to the public, DOE Elements should
demonstrate in their PRA clearance submissions to OMB that the proposed
collection of information will result in information that will be
collected, maintained, and used in a way consistent with the OMB and
DOE information quality guidelines.
2. Responding to requests from members of the public. To facilitate
public review of information disseminated to the public, these
Guidelines provide procedures allowing members of the public to seek
and obtain correction of information disseminated to the public that
does not comply with the quality provisions of these Guidelines. The
procedures, set out in Part IV below, provide separate mechanisms for
information set forth or referenced in a DOE or DOE-sponsored document
subject to public comment and all other DOE or DOE-sponsored
information.
IV. Requests From Members of the Public for Correction of Publicly
Disseminated Data
A. How Does a Member of the Public Request Correction of Publicly
Disseminated Information?
1. Requests from members of the public seeking correction of DOE or
DOE-sponsored documents subject to public comment. (A) With respect to
information set forth or referenced in a DOE or DOE-sponsored document
subject to public comment, a member of the public must request
correction within the comment period in a comment that:
(1) Specifically identifies the information in question and the
document(s) containing the information;
(2) Explains with specificity the reasons why the information is
inconsistent with the applicable quality standards in the OMB or DOE
guidelines; and
(3) Presents substitute information, if any, with an explanation
showing that such information is consistent with the applicable quality
standards in the OMB and DOE guidelines.
(B) With respect to information set forth or referenced in a DOE
notice of final rulemaking or a final Environmental Impact Statement
(and any related Record of Decision), a member of the public may only
file a request for correction of information in the form of a petition
for rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(e) or a petition for a supplemental
environmental impact statement under 10 CFR part 1021, whichever is
appropriate.
(C) A member of the public must file a request for correction under
this paragraph at the address for comments set forth in DOE's notice
providing for public comment.
(D) If the request for correction concerns information in or
referenced in a document subject to comment at an early stage of the
public comment process (e.g., an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking), any response prior to publication of the final document is
a preliminary response.
(E) A member of the public who files a request for correction under
this paragraph has the burden of proof with respect to the necessity
for correction as well as with respect to the type of correction
requested.
2. Requests from members of the public seeking correction of DOE or
DOE-sponsored documents not subject to public comment. (A) With respect
to information set forth or referenced in a DOE or DOE-sponsored
document that is disseminated or redisseminated on or after October 1,
2002, and is not subject to public comment, a member of the public must
request correction by letter to the Office of the Chief Information
Officer, Attention: DOE Quality Guidelines, U.S. Department of Energy,
Forrestal Building--Room 8H-089, 1000 Independence Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20585, or via Fax to (202) 586-7996, or by filling out
the form provided at the CIO Web site: http://cio.doe.gov/
informationquality. This form will request the information set forth in
paragraph (B) below.
(B) If a member of the public requests correction of DOE or DOE-
sponsored information by letter, addressed to the CIO, then the letter
must:
(1) Specifically identify the information in question and the
document(s) containing the information;
(2) Explain with specificity the reasons why the information is
inconsistent with the applicable quality standards in the OMB
Guidelines or DOE guidelines; and
(3) Present substitute information, if any, with an explanation
showing that such information is consistent with the OMB guidelines and
the DOE implementing guidelines.
(C) If a member of the public complains about information set forth
or referenced in a DOE or DOE-sponsored document and does not request
correction under the OMB or DOE guidelines, then the complaint is not
subject to processing as a request for correction under those
guidelines.
(D) A member of the public who files a request for correction under
this paragraph has the burden of proof with respect to the necessity
for correction as well as with respect to the type of correction
requested.
B. How Does DOE Process Requests for Correction?
(A) Incomplete requests. If a request for correction is incomplete,
DOE may seek clarification from the person
[[Page 47783]]
submitting the request or return it without prejudice to resubmission.
(B) Public notice of a request for correction. In selected cases,
DOE may publish notice of the receipt of a request for correction and
may invite public comment.
(C) Participation by other interested persons. By letter, DOE may
invite or allow other interested persons to comment on a request for
correction.
(D) Initial decisions. If the request for correction concerns
information that does not involve a document subject to public comment,
then the originating office of the DOE Element responsible for
dissemination of the information should provide at least an initial
response within 60 days (with a copy to the CIO). The response should
contain a statement of reasons for the disposition.
(E) Administrative appeals. In the event DOE initially denies a
request for correction of information not subject to public comment and
the person who submitted the request would like additional review, then
that person must submit a request for review, including a statement of
reasons for modifying or reversing the initial decision, no later than
30 days from the date of that decision. A request for review under this
paragraph must be submitted by e-mail to cio.webmaster@hq.doe.gov, or
by regular mail to Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attention:
DOE Quality Guidelines, U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building--
Room 8H-089, 1000 Independence Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20585, or via
Fax to (202) 586-7996. The CIO will direct the request for review to
the DOE Element which supervises the originating DOE program office,
and the DOE Element, with the concurrence of the Office of General
Counsel, should issue a final decision for DOE (with a copy to the CIO)
within 60 days from the date that the request for review is received.
(F) Any corrective action will be determined by the nature and
timeliness of the information, the magnitude of the error, and the cost
of undertaking a correction. DOE Elements are not required to change,
or in any way alter, the content or status of information simply based
on the receipt of a request for correction. DOE Elements need not
respond substantively to frivolous or repetitive requests for
correction. Nor do DOE Elements have to respond substantively to
requests that concern information not covered by the OMB or DOE
Guidelines or from a person whom the information does not affect.
(G) If DOE determines that a request for correction of information
not subject to public comment has merit, DOE may respond by correcting
the information in question and without issuing a decision explaining
the reasons for accepting the request.
(H) If DOE receives multiple requests for correction of information
not subject to public comment, DOE may consolidate the requests and
respond on a DOE web site, or by notice in the Federal Register, or by
issuing a correction in similar form and manner as the original
information was issued.
V. DOE Reporting Requirements
On an annual fiscal-year basis, the CIO will report to the Director
of OMB concerning requests for correction received under these
Guidelines. DOE Elements must designate a reporting official, except as
agreed otherwise between the DOE Element and the CIO, for example,
where the CIO might compile the data for the DOE Element. Where a DOE
Element reporting official has been designated, that official must
report to the CIO no later than November 1 every year concerning
requests received during the previous fiscal year and their
resolutions, including requests with regard to information subject to
public comment. The first reports are due November 1, 2003. The CIO
will compile the DOE consolidated report and submit it annually to OMB
beginning January 1, 2004. DOE Element reports should contain the
number of complaints received, nature of complaints (e.g., request for
deletion or correction) and how they were resolved (e.g., number
corrected, denied, or pending review). The report must also include a
compilation of the number of staff-hours devoted to handling and
resolving such complaints and preparing reports.
[FR Doc. 02-18378 Filed 7-19-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P