[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 22, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64889-64895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-26867]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY
Final Information Quality Guidelines and Discussion of Comments
AGENCY: Office of National Drug Control Policy.
ACTION: Publication of final Information Quality Guidelines and
discussion of comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is
publishing its final Information Quality Guidelines. These Information
Quality Guidelines describe ONDCP's predissemination information
quality control and an administrative mechanism for requests for
correction of information publicly disseminated by ONDCP. The
Information Quality Guidelines are also posted on ONDCP's Web site:
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov.
DATES: ONDCP's predissemination review applies to information first
disseminated by ONDCP on or after October 1, 2002. ONDCP's
administrative mechanism for correcting information that ONDCP
disseminates applies to information that ONDCP disseminates on or after
October 1, 2002, regardless of when ONDCP first disseminated the
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Terry S. Zobeck of the Office of
Planning and Budget, Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP),
Washington, DC 20503. Telephone (202) 395-6700 or e-mail to:
ondcp.info[email protected]">ondcp.info[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office of National Drug Control Policy
publishes these final guidelines in accordance with the Guidelines for
Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and
Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies
(``Government-wide Guidelines'') published in interim final form by OMB
in the Federal Register in Volume 66, No. 189 at 49718 on Friday,
September 28, 2001, and in final form in Volume 2, No. 67 at 8452 on
February 22, 2002. These published guidelines were issued pursuant to
section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act
for FY2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; HR 5658).
ONDCP published a notice of availability for proposed information
quality guidelines in the Federal Register on June 6, 2002 (67 FR
38959). ONDCP amended its proposed guidelines to reflect guidance
provided to all the agencies in a Memorandum from John D. Graham for
the President's Management Council, ``Agency Draft Information Quality
Guidelines'' (June 10, 2002) (``June 10 Memorandum'') and a Memorandum
from John D. Graham to the President's Management Council, ``Agency
Final Information Quality Guidelines'' (September 5, 2002) (``September
5 Memorandum''). These memoranda are available on OMB's Web site:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/infopoltech.html. ONDCP also
received public comments from two non-governmental organizations,
Citizens for Sensible Safeguards and the Center for Regulatory
Effectiveness which were helpful in clarifying ONDCP's guidelines. A
summary of significant amendments to the proposed guidelines follow, in
order of the text, followed by ONDCP's discussion of
[[Page 64890]]
specific comments received and ONDCP's final Information Quality
Guidelines.
Summary of Significant Amendments
In the introductory paragraph to these guidelines, ONDCP
establishes these guidelines as its performance standard, as called for
at page 7 of the June 10 Memorandum.
In a new paragraph I.A.6, ONDCP adds more specific language
involving the dissemination of influential scientific, financial, or
statistical information. (See June 10 Memorandum, page 9; Government-
wide Guidelines, paragraph V.b.ii.B).
ONDCP clarified its predissemination review procedures in
renumbered paragraph I.A.7.
In a new paragraph I.A.9, ONDCP links its clearance of proposed
collections of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act with
ongoing implementation of these information quality guidelines (See
June 10 Memorandum, p. 10).
In paragraph II.1, ONDCP stresses that the person seeking
correction of information has the burden of proof with respect to the
necessity for correction as well as with respect to the type of
correction requested. (See June 10 Memorandum, page 11). In addition,
ONDCP adds a description of the kinds of information that a person
seeking correction of information needs to provide to help meet that
burden of proof.
In paragraph II.9, ONDCP points out that if it needs to extend the
time it will take to notify the person seeking correction, it will
provide a reasoned basis for the extension and an estimated decision
date. (See September 5 Memorandum, Appendix, topic (3)).
In a new paragraph II.10, ONDCP adds a provision stating that
requests for correction of information will be considered, in cases
where ONDCP disseminates information for public comment, prior to
disseminating the final ONDCP product if (1) an earlier response would
not unduly delay dissemination of the ONDCP product; and (2) the
requestor had shown a reasonable likelihood of suffering actual harm
from the dissemination if the correction were not made until
dissemination of the final ONDCP product. (See September 5 Memorandum,
Appendix, topic (2)).
In paragraph III.3, ONDCP points out that if it needs to extend the
time it will take to notify the person seeking reconsideration of an
ONDCP response to a request for correction, it will provide a reasoned
basis for the extension and an estimated decision date. (See September
5 Memorandum, Appendix, topic (3)).
In paragraph IV.2, ONDCP modifies the exemption for a press release
to provide that the information in the press release has been
previously disseminated by ONDCP or another Federal agency in
compliance with the Government-wide Guidelines or the these ONDCP
guidelines. (See June 10 Memorandum, page 4).
In paragraph IV.4, ONDCP deletes from the exclusion from the
definition of ``information'' the provision referring to statements
that may reasonably be expected to become the subject of litigation.
(See June 10 Memorandum, page 5).
Otherwise, the ONDCP amendments were technical and conforming
textual edits, designed to clarify the ONDCP guidelines and conform
them to the Government-wide Guidelines.
Discussion of Comments
ONDCP received lengthy comments from two organizations: Citizens
for Sensible Safeguards (CSS) and the Center for Regulatory
Effectiveness (CRE). The comments are summarized below followed by
ONDCP's discussion of each comment.
General Comments
CSS commented that ONDCP's Information Quality Guidelines should
not inhibit public access to government information nor interfere with
existing rulemaking processes. ONDCP Agrees.
CSS commented that the Data Quality Act does not alter the
substantive mandates and primary missions of ONDCP. ONDCP Agrees.
Regarding interpretation and implementation of the Data Quality
Act, both CSS and CRE submitted comment. CSS commented that OMB's
guidance goes beyond what is statutorily required and that ONDCP should
look beyond OMB guidelines to the Data Quality Act itself in
determining the scope and components of its guidelines. CRE advocated
that OMB does not have discretion to exempt categories of information
from implementation of the Data Quality Act. ONDCP's response to both
comments is the same: Legislative interpretation is within the
discretion of the agency Congress has charged with implementation, in
this case, OMB. ONDCP defers to OMB's interpretation and implementation
of the Data Quality Act.
CSS commented that ONDCP should consider the benefits of timely
dissemination in carrying out its core mission. While this comment
exceeds the scope of ONDCP's proposed Information Quality Guidelines,
ONDCP does value timely dissemination of information in carrying out
its core mission.
CSS commented that ONDCP should retain maximum flexibility in
implementing guidelines and err on side of the public's right to know.
ONDCP agrees and feels that its final guidelines strike the proper
balance between the public's right to know and flexibility in
implementation that ONDCP has retained.
CRE commented that ONDCP should adopt data quality as a Performance
Goal in its Performance Plan under the Government Performance and
Results Act. ONDCP has adopted data quality as a Performance Goal as
reflected in the introduction to its final Information Quality
Guidelines.
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines must comply with OMB's
interagency Data Quality guidelines. ONDCP has adopted OMB's
guidelines.
Both CSS and CRE commented that ONDCP should be required to correct
information disseminations covered by its guidelines. ONDCP agrees as
provided in section II paragraphs 6 though 10 of its final guidelines.
CSS commented that ONDCP should include a statement to the effect
that its guidelines are not judicially reviewable and do not provide
any new adjudicatory authority. ONDCP has included a statement in
section IV paragraph 2 of its final guidelines, which states: These
guidelines do not impose any additional requirements on agencies during
adjudicative proceedings and do not provide parties to such
adjudicative proceedings any additional rights of challenge or appeal.
Comments Regarding Information Reliability
CSS commented that ONDCP should further build mechanisms into the
data collection process that flag errors before data is submitted to
ONDCP. ONDCP's final guidelines do include processes to verify data it
receives from other sources in section I part A. Paragraph A.1. states
``ONDCP is committed to disseminating reliable and useful information.
Before disseminating information, ONDCP staff and officials should
subject such draft information to an extensive review process. It is
the primary responsibility of the particular ONDCP Office (hereafter
collectively referred to as ``Lead Component'') drafting information
intended for dissemination to pursue the most knowledgeable and
reliable sources reasonably available to confirm the objectivity and
utility of such information.'' Paragraph A.2. continues ``Much of the
information ONDCP disseminates consists of or is
[[Page 64891]]
based on information submitted to ONDCP by other Federal Government
Agencies. ONDCP expects that agencies will subject information
submitted to ONDCP for purposes of public dissemination to adequate
quality control measures. In drafting the material to be disseminated,
the Lead Component should review and verify the data submitted by the
agencies, as necessary and appropriate. ONDCP also originates
information based on research, assessments, and other efforts
supporting drug policy development. The Lead Component should review
and verify the data, as necessary and appropriate. * * * Each Component
that disseminates information should maintain verification files of
materials that it originates.'' Section I.A. concludes, stating:
``ONDCP will maximize the quality of information it disseminates, in
terms of objectivity and utility, first by looking for input from a
range of sources and perspectives, to the extent practicable under the
circumstances, and second by subjecting draft materials to a review
process involving as many Components and offices as may be in a
position to offer constructive input, as well as other offices within
the Executive Office of the President and other government agencies.''
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines should exclude bias from risk
assessment. ONDCP does not perform risk assessment. ONDCP has therefore
adopted OMB's guidelines defining ``objectivity'' to mean that
information be ``unbiased'' without reference to elimination of bias in
risk assessment.
Both CSS and CRE submitted comments regarding adoption of the
science quality and risk assessment standards contained in the Safe
Drinking Water Act. CRE advocated that ONDCP's guidelines should adopt
the science quality and risk assessment standards contained in the 1996
amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, while CSS expressed three
cautions regarding the use of peer review in relation to risk
assessment consistent with the Safe Drinking Water Act. ONDCP's final
guidelines do not address the Safe Drinking Water Act or risk
assessment because ONDCP does not perform risk assessment.
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines should adopt the requirement
contained in OMB's guidelines of robustness checks for data, models, or
other information that ONDCP cannot disclose, but which are material to
information ONDCP does disclose. ONDCP has adopted OMB's guidelines as
reflected in section I, paragraph A. 6 of its final guidelines.
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines should generally prohibit the
use of third-party proprietary models, unless no other option is
available and OMB concurs. When no other option is available, CRE
advocates that ONDCP's guidelines should explain in detail what
``especially rigorous robustness checks'' will be applied to third-
party proprietary models and explain how the public will be notified
of, and permitted to comment upon, these ``robustness checks''. Section
I paragraph 5 of ONDCP's final guidelines adopt OMB's requirement that
influential scientific information be reproducible. Section I paragraph
5 also provides that ``In situations where public access to the data
will not occur, the Lead Component should apply especially rigorous
robustness checks and document what checks were undertaken''.
Comments Regarding Coverage of Guidelines
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines must apply to information
being disseminated on or after October 1, regardless of when the
information was first disseminated as explicitly enumerated in OMB's
guidelines. ONDCP has adopted OMB's guideline.
CSS commented that ONDCP should detail and expand on the types of
information and methods of dissemination that are not covered by its
guidelines. ONDCP agrees as reflected in its final guidelines in
section IV paragraph 2 defining ``Dissemination'' and paragraph 4
defining ``Information''.
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines should not exclude rulemaking
records. ONDCP's guidelines do not exclude rulemaking records.
Both CSS and CRE commented regarding third party information
submitted to ONDCP. CSS commented that ONDCP should clearly state that
its guidelines apply only to information disseminated by ONDCP and not
when ONDCP is merely acting as a conduit of information. CRE advocated
that when ONDCP uses, relies on, or endorses third party information,
the agency itself should have the burden of ensuring that the
information meets the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity
standards required by its data quality guidelines. ONDCP agrees as
reflected in section IV paragraph 2 of its final guidelines:
``Dissemination does not include the pass-through of public filings or
other information received from third-parties by ONDCP and made
available for public review through website posting or other means,
without ONDCP's official endorsement of its content. However, these
guidelines may apply to third-party information adopted or endorsed by
ONDCP, or used to formulate guidance or other ONDCP decision or
position''.
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines should use OMB's definition
of ``affected persons''. ONDCP has adopted OMB's definition in section
IV.
Both CSS and CRE commented regarding the definition of
``influential''. CSS advocated that ONDCP narrowly define ``influential
information'', employing a high threshold for coverage.
CRE advocated that ONDCP should adopt the definition of
``influential'' contained in OMB's guidelines. ONDCP's final guidelines
adopt OMB's definition of ``influential'' in section IV paragraph 3.
Comments Regarding Requests for Correction
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines should set an appropriate,
specific timeframe for agency decisions on information correction
petitions. ONDCP's final guidelines provide a 60 day timeframe in
section II paragraphs 5, 8, and 9.
CRE commented that ONDCP's guidelines should specify a party
responsible for acting on information correction petitions. ONDCP's
agrees and specifies the Chief of Staff or their designee in section II
of its final guidelines.
CSS commented that ONDCP should clearly state that the burden of
proof lies squarely with the requester. ONDCP agrees and has explicitly
stated that in section II paragraph 1 of its final guidelines.
CRE commented that ONDCP should adopt OMB's guidelines providing
that the presumption of objectivity is rebuttable ``based on a
persuasive showing by a petitioner in a particular instance.'' ONDCP
agrees and has adopted OMB's guidelines as reflected in section II
paragraph 1 of its final guidelines providing that the petitioner bears
the burden of proof and 1(d) providing that the requester submit all
supporting evidence which the petitioner believes provides a persuasive
case.
CSS commented that ONDCP should explicitly state that the
administrative mechanism will not consider interpretations of data and
information, or requests for de-publishing. ONDCP agrees that its
guidelines should not allow requests for correction that challenge the
interpretation of data and information, or seek de-publishing. However
such requests are not within the definitions contained in ONDCP's
[[Page 64892]]
final guidelines and therefore do not require an explicit statement
excluding them. See section IV paragraph 4 of the final guidelines
excluding from the definition of ``information'': opinions or policy;
statements of Administration policy; and testimony or comments of ONDCP
officials.
CSS commented that ONDCP should limit complaints under its
administrative mechanisms to information that is not already subject to
existing data quality programs and measures. ONDCP agrees and has
reflected that in section IV paragraph 2.e. of its final guidelines.
CSS commented that ONDCP should state that frivolous or duplicative
requests may be rejected. ONDCP agrees and has reflected that in
section III paragraph 1 of its final guidelines.
CSS commented that ONDCP should establish a timeliness requirement
for requests after which it has the option to reject a request. ONDCP's
final guidelines retain ONDCP's discretion to consider the timeliness
of requests as part of its review of (a.) the significance of the
information involved and (b.) the nature and extent of the request and
public benefit of making the requested correction as set out in section
II paragraph 7.
CSS commented that ONDCP should limit complaints for any data
quality standard that presents a potential moving target (i.e. ``best
available evidence'') to information available at the time of
dissemination. ONDCP has adopted OMB's guidelines.
Comments Regarding ONDCP Response To Requests for Correction
CSS commented that ONDCP's guidelines should specifically state
that responses to correction requests will be proportional to the
significance and importance of the information in question. ONDCP
agrees as reflected in section II. Paragraph 7 states ``When
considering covered requests to determine whether a corrective action
is appropriate, the reviewing Component may consider the following
factors: (a.) The significance of the information involved, and (b.)
the nature and extent of the request and the public benefit of making
the requested correction. Paragraph 9 states ``Subject to applicable
law, rules and regulations, corrective measures may be taken through a
number of forms, including (but not limited to) personal contacts via
letter or telephone, form letters, press releases or postings on the
ONDCP website * * * to correct a widely disseminated error or address a
frequently raised request. Corrective measures, where appropriate,
should be designed to provide reasonable notice to affected persons of
such correction.''
CSS commented that ONDCP should specify that it will establish a
running docket of requests and changes. Consistent with OMB's guidance
ONDCP has created a place on its website, www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov
where significant corrections made as a result of ONDCP's correction
process will be described.
Comments Regarding ONDCP Reconsideration of Requests for Correction
CRE commented that consistent with OMB's intent, ONDCP's guidelines
should include a meaningful appeals process. ONDCP agrees and has
adopted OMB's guidelines in section III.
CSS commented that ONDCP's reconsideration process should be fairly
informal and limited in scope. ONDCP agrees as reflected in section III
of its final guidelines.
CSS commented that ONDCP's reconsideration should be limited to
showing due diligence in the initial consideration of a request. ONDCP
disagrees. Consistent with OMB's guidance, section III paragraph 3 of
ONDCP's final guidelines provide that ``ONDCP's Chief of Staff * * *
will consider the request for reconsideration, applying the standards
and procedures set out in section II above * * *.''
CSS commented that ONDCP should establish a 30-day time limit for
requests for reconsideration. ONDCP agrees as reflected in section III
paragraph 2 of its final guidelines.
Office of National Drug Control Policy Information Quality Guidelines
The Office of National Drug Control Policy publishes these
guidelines in accordance with the Guidelines for Ensuring and
Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of
Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies (``Government-wide
Guidelines'') published in interim final form by OMB in the Federal
Register in Volume 66, No. 189 at 49718 on Friday, September 28, 2001,
and in final form in Volume 2, No. 67 at 8452 on February 22, 2002.
These published guidelines were issued pursuant to section 515 of the
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for FY2001 (Pub. L.
106-554; HR 5658). In response to the legislation and the published
guidelines, ONDCP identifies the following policies and procedures for
ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and
integrity of information disseminated by ONDCP; and it hereby
establishes additional procedures for affected persons to seek and
obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated by ONDCP
that does not comply with standards set out in the Government-wide
Guidelines. These ONDCP guidelines are intended to ensure and maximize
the quality of information disseminated by ONDCP. Through these ONDCP
guidelines, ONDCP establishes as its performance standard a goal of
disseminating reliable and useful information consistent with the
Government-wide Guidelines and these ONDCP guidelines.
Section I. Procedures for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality,
Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Prior to
Dissemination
In Government-wide Guidelines, ``quality'' is defined as an
encompassing term comprising utility, objectivity, and integrity.
A. Objectivity and Utility of Information
1. As defined in section IV, below, ``objectivity'' is a measure of
whether disseminated information is ``accurate, reliable, and unbiased
and that information is presented in an accurate, clear, complete, and
unbiased manner;'' ``utility'' refers to the usefulness of the
information to its intended audience for the intended audience's
anticipated purposes. ONDCP is committed to disseminating reliable and
useful information. Before disseminating information, ONDCP staff and
officials should subject such draft information to an extensive review
process. It is the primary responsibility of the particular ONDCP
Office (hereafter collectively referred to as ``Lead Component'')
drafting information intended for dissemination to pursue the most
knowledgeable and reliable sources reasonably available to confirm the
objectivity and utility of such information.
2. Much of the information ONDCP disseminates consists of or is
based on information submitted to ONDCP by other Federal Government
Agencies. ONDCP expects that agencies will subject information
submitted to ONDCP for purposes of public dissemination to adequate
quality control measures. In drafting the material to be disseminated,
the Lead Component should review and verify the data submitted by the
agencies, as necessary and appropriate. ONDCP also originates
information based on research, assessments, and other efforts
supporting drug policy development. The Lead Component should review
and verify the data, as necessary and appropriate. Underlying
information upon which the disseminated material
[[Page 64893]]
is based may be subject to these guidelines only if that information is
published by ONDCP. Being subject to these guidelines does not
necessarily mean that the material published by ONDCP is a policy
statement of the U.S. government. ONDCP contracts with organizations to
conduct research in support of drug policy, but their results are not
influenced by ONDCP policy. Each Component that disseminates
information should maintain verification files of materials that it
originates.
3. In seeking to assure the ``objectivity'' and ``utility'' of the
information it disseminates, ONDCP should generally follow a basic
clearance process coordinated by the Lead Component drafting
information intended for dissemination. The quality control process
places responsibility for action upon the Lead Component. The Lead
Component is encouraged to consult with all Components throughout ONDCP
having substantial interest or expertise in the material proposed to be
disseminated. Where appropriate, substantive input also should be
sought from other offices within the Executive Office of the President
(EOP), other government agencies, non-government organizations, and the
public.
4. The Lead Component should consider the uses of the information
from both the perspective of ONDCP and the public. When it is
determined that the transparency of information is relevant for
assessing the information's usefulness from the public's perspective,
the Lead Component should ensure that transparency is appropriately
addressed.
5. When the Lead Component determines that the information it will
disseminate is influential scientific, financial, or statistical
information, extra care should be taken to include a high degree of
transparency about data and methods to meet the Government-wide
Guidelines' requirement for the reproducibility of such information. In
this context, a high degree of transparency for published information
means that the methodology used to derive the results is readily
understandable to persons experienced in the appropriate field of
study. In determining the appropriate level of transparency, the Lead
Component should consider the types of data that can practicably be
subjected to a reproducibility requirement given ethical, feasibility,
and confidentiality constraints. In making this determination, the Lead
Component should hold analytical results to an even higher standard
than original data.
6. When the Lead Component determines that the information it will
disseminate is influential scientific, financial, or statistical
information, it should assure reproducibility according to commonly
accepted scientific, financial, or statistical standards. In situations
where public access to the data will not occur, the Lead Component
should apply especially rigorous robustness checks to analytic results
and document what checks were undertaken. Also, in such cases, the Lead
Component should disclose the specific data sources that have been used
and the specific quantitative methods and assumptions that have been
employed.
7. The Component responsible for the dissemination of information
should generally take the following basic steps to assure the
``objectivity'' and ``utility'' of the information to be disseminated:
a. Preparing a draft of the document after consulting the necessary
parties, including government and non-government sources, as
appropriate;
b. Determining/assuring accuracy and completeness of source data;
c. Determining the expected uses by the government and public;
d. Determining necessary clearance points;
e. Determining where the final decision shall be made;
f. Determining whether peer review would be appropriate and, if
necessary, coordinating such review;
g. Obtaining clearances; and
h. Overcoming delays and, if necessary, presenting the matter to
higher authority.
8. Hard-copy public dissemination of information and all
information published on ONDCP's website www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov
shall occur only after clearances are obtained from all appropriate
Components and, as appropriate, the Office of the Chief-of-Staff.
9. The quality control procedures followed by ONDCP should be
determined by the nature of the information and the manner of its
distribution. Any information collected by ONDCP and subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act should be collected, maintained, and used in a
manner consistent with ONDCP information quality standards. The ONDCP
clearance package will demonstrate that the proposed collection of
information will result in information that will be collected,
maintained, and used in a way consistent with the Government-wide
Guidelines and ONDCP guidelines.
10. These guidelines focus on procedures for the ``dissemination''
of ``information,'' as those terms are defined herein. Accordingly,
procedures specifically applicable to forms of communication outside
the scope of these guidelines, such as those for correspondence or
press releases, among others, are not included.
Conclusion: ONDCP will maximize the quality of the information it
disseminates, in terms of objectivity and utility, first by looking for
input from a range of sources and perspectives, to the extent
practicable under the circumstances, and second by subjecting draft
materials to a review process involving as many Components and offices
as may be in a position to offer constructive input, as well as other
offices within the Executive Office of the President and other
government agencies.
B. Integrity of Information
1. ``Integrity'' refers to the security of information--protection
of the information from unauthorized, unanticipated, or unintentional
modification--to prevent information from being compromised through
corruption or falsification.
2. Within the Executive Office of the President (EOP), the Office
of Administration has substantial responsibility for ensuring the
``integrity'' of information as defined in these guidelines. ONDCP also
has a Management and Administration Office that coordinates and works
with the EOP Office of Administration to ensure the integrity of
information. These offices implement and maintain new computer software
and hardware systems and provide operational support for systems and
system users.
3. Computer security is the responsibility of the EOP Office of
Administration's Chief Information Officer, Information Assurance
Directorate. This Office oversees all matters relating to information
integrity, including the design and implementation of the security
architecture for the EOP, periodic audits of security architecture
components, and review and approval of changes to the technical
baseline. Per law and ONDCP policy, EOP's IT security policy,
procedures, and controls are risk-based, cost-effective, and
incorporated into the lifecycle planning of every IT investment.
Additionally, the Office: Assesses risks to its systems and implements
appropriate security controls; reviews annually the security of its
systems; and develops plans to remediate all security weaknesses found
in independent evaluations and other security audits and reviews.
[[Page 64894]]
4. As an agency under the EOP, ONDCP is an integral part of the
overall EOP network, and is an active participant in all aspects of
information integrity at EOP. ONDCP adheres to both law and ONDCP IT
security policies, along with EOP security policies and operational
processes for the protection of ONDCP's data and information. This
includes ensuring that controls to protect the security of information
(and the integrity of information) are risk-based, cost-effective, and
incorporated into the life-cycle planning of every IT investment.
ONDCP's systems are reviewed annually in accordance with existing law
and policy and corrective action plans are developed to address all
security weaknesses, such as integrity issues.
Section II. Requests for Correction of Information Publicly
Disseminated by the Office of National Drug Control Policy
ONDCP works continuously to be responsive to users of its
information and to ensure quality. In furtherance of these objectives,
when ONDCP receives any information from the public that raises
questions about the quality of the information it has disseminated,
ONDCP duly considers corrective action.
1. Persons seeking to correct information affecting them that was
publicly disseminated by ONDCP may submit such requests to the ONDCP
Chief of Staff, addressed to the Office of National Drug Control
Policy, Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC 20503. A
member of the public who seeks correction of information under these
ONDCP guidelines as the burden of proof with respect to the necessity
for correction as well as with respect to the type of correction
requested. Requests for correction must include:
a. A statement that the communication is a Petition for Correction
under the ONDCP Information Quality Guidelines;
b. Identification of the ONDCP information or ONDCP information
dissemination product, and the specific aspect(s) thereof, that is the
subject of the petition;
c. A description of how the information does not comply with the
ONDCP guidelines or the Government-wide Guidelines and how they are
affected by the information;
d. All supporting evidence upon which the petitioner believes
provides a persuasive case and all supporting documentation necessary
to resolve the complaint; and the specific corrective action sought,
including (if applicable) temporary corrective action pending full
resolution of the complaint.
2. If the information disseminated by ONDCP and contested by an
affected person was previously disseminated by another Federal agency
in virtually identical form, then the complaint should be directed to
the originating agency.
3. Requests will be received by the ONDCP Chief of Staff.
Typically, requests raising substantive issues will be forwarded to the
Component within ONDCP responsible for the subject area.
4. These guidelines apply only to requests submitted as outlined
above. These guidelines will not be applied to any other form of
request and also may not be applied to a request submitted consistent
with the procedures outlined above, if ONDCP determines it is not
submitted by an affected person for the correction of publicly
disseminated information of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
5. If ONDCP determines that a request is not covered by these
guidelines, it will so advise the requester within 60 days, unless
there is a reasoned basis for an extension. If a request is deemed
frivolous, no response will be made.
6. For covered requests, the Component reviewing the request will
give the request due consideration, including a review of the
disseminated information at issue and other materials, as appropriate.
Where the reviewing Component or office determines that the information
publicly disseminated by ONDCP warrants correction, it should consider
appropriate corrective measures recognizing the potential implications
for ONDCP and the United States.
7. When considering covered requests to determine whether a
corrective action is appropriate, the reviewing Component may consider
the following factors:
a. The significance of the information involved, and
b. The nature and extent of the request and the public benefit of
making the requested correction.
8. If ONDCP determines that a request is covered by these
guidelines, but that corrective action is unnecessary or is otherwise
inappropriate, ONDCP will notify the requestor of its determination
within 60 days, unless there is a reasoned basis for an extension.
9. If ONDCP determines that a request is covered by these
guidelines and that corrective action is appropriate, it will notify
the requestor of its determination and what action has been or will be
taken within 60 days, unless there is a reasoned basis for an
extension. In which case, ONDCP will inform the requestor of the
extension, providing its reasons for the extension and an estimated
decision date. Subject to applicable law, rules and regulations,
corrective measures may be taken through a number of forms, including
(but not limited to): Personal contacts via letter or telephone, form
letters, press releases or postings on the ONDCP website,
www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov, to correct a widely disseminated error or
address a frequently raised request. Corrective measures, where
appropriate, should be designed to provide reasonable notice to
affected persons of such correction.
10. In cases where ONDCP disseminates information for public
comment prior to disseminating the final product, requests for
correction of information will be considered prior to disseminating the
final product in those cases where ONDCP has determined that an earlier
response would not unduly delay dissemination of the product and the
requestor has shown a reasonable likelihood of suffering actual harm
without the earlier response.
Section III. Procedures for Requesting Reconsideration
1. The following procedures are available to an affected person who
has filed a covered request for correction of public information in
accordance with section II, above; who received notice from the ONDCP
Chief of Staff of ONDCP's determination; and who believes that the
ONDCP did not take appropriate corrective action. Requests determined
by ONDCP to be not covered by the guidelines and requests determined to
be frivolous will not be reconsidered under these provisions. These
procedures apply to information disseminated by ONDCP on or after
October 1, 2002, regardless of when the information was first
disseminated.
2. To request reconsideration, persons should clearly indicate that
the communication is a ``Request for Reconsideration;'' should
reference the ONDCP Information Quality Guidelines; and should include
a copy of the request for correction previously submitted to ONDCP and
ONDCP's response. Resubmission should be made to the ONDCP Chief-of-
Staff by mail using the contact information in section II, paragraph 1,
above. Requests for Reconsideration must be submitted within thirty
(30) days of the date of ONDCP's notification to the requester of the
disposition of the underlying request for correction.
3. ONDCP's Chief of Staff or a delegee thereof will consider the
request for reconsideration, applying the standards
[[Page 64895]]
and procedures set out in section II, above and will make a
determination regarding the request. In most cases, the requestor will
be notified of the determination and, if appropriate, the corrective
action to be taken, within 60 days. If the request for reconsideration
requires more than 60 days, ONDCP will inform the requestor of the
extension, providing its reasons for the extension and an estimated
decision date. ONDCP will give reasonable notice to affected persons of
any corrections made.
Section IV. Definitions
1. ``Affected'' persons are those who may benefit or be harmed by
the disseminated information. This includes both: a. Persons seeking to
address information about themselves or about other persons to whom
they are related or associated; and b. persons who use the information.
2. ``Dissemination'' means agency initiated or sponsored
distribution of information to the public (see 5 CFR 1320.3(d)
``Conduct or Sponsor''). Dissemination does not include the pass-
through of public filings or other information received from third-
parties by ONDCP and made available for public review through website
posting or other means, without ONDCP's official endorsement of its
content. However, these guidelines may apply to third-party information
adopted or endorsed by ONDCP, or used to formulate guidance or other
ONDCP decision or position.
In addition, dissemination does not include distributions of
information or other materials that are:
a. Intended for government employees or agency contractors or
grantees;
b. Intended for U.S. Government agencies;
c. Produced in responses to requests for agency records under the
Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory
Committee Act or similar law;
d. Correspondence or other communication limited to individuals or
to other persons, within the meaning of paragraph 7, below; or
e. Communications such as press releases, interviews, speeches, and
similar statements containing information that ONDCP or another Federal
agency has previously disseminated in compliance with the Government-
wide Guidelines or the ONDCP guidelines; or
f. Documents (e.g., guidance, bulletins, policy directives)
intended only for inter-agency And intra-agency communications.
Also excluded from the definition are archival records; public
filings; responses to subpoenae or compulsory document productions; or
documents prepared and released in the context of adjudicative
processes. These guidelines do not impose any additional requirements
on agencies during adjudicative proceedings and do not provide parties
to such adjudicative proceedings any additional rights of challenge or
appeal.
3. ``Influential,'' when used in the phrase ``influential
scientific, financial, or statistical information,'' refers to
disseminated information that ONDCP determines will have a clear and
substantial impact on important public policies or important private
sector decisions.
4. ``Information,'' for purposes of these guidelines, including the
administrative mechanism described in sections II and III, above, means
any communication or representation of facts or data, in any medium or
form, including textual, numerical, graphic, cartographic, narrative,
or audiovisual forms. This definition does not include:
a. Opinions or policy, where the presentation makes clear that the
statements are subjective opinions, rather than facts. Underlying
information upon which the opinion or policy is based may be subject to
these guidelines only if that information is published by ONDCP;
b. Information originated by, and attributed to, non-ONDCP sources,
provided ONDCP does not expressly rely upon it. Examples include: non-
U.S. Government information reported and duly attributed in materials
prepared and disseminated by ONDCP; hyperlinks on ONDCP's website to
information that others disseminate; and reports of advisory committees
published on ONDCP's website;
c. Statements related solely to the internal personnel rules and
practices of ONDCP and other materials produced for ONDCP employees,
contractors, or agents;
d. Descriptions of the agency, its responsibilities and its
organizational components;
e. Statements, the modification of which might cause harm to the
national security, including harm to the national defense or foreign
relations of the United States;
f. Statements of Administration policy; however, any underlying
information published by ONDCP upon which a statement is based may be
subject to these guidelines;
g. Testimony or comments of ONDCP officials before courts,
administrative bodies, Congress, or the media;
h. Investigatory material compiled pursuant to U.S. law or for law
enforcement purposes in the United States.
5. ``Integrity'' refers to the security of information--protection
of the information from unauthorized access or revision, to prevent the
information from being compromised through corruption or falsification.
6. ``Objectivity'' is a measure of whether disseminated information
is accurate, reliable, and unbiased and whether disseminated
information is being presented in an accurate, clear, complete, and
unbiased manner.
7. ``Person'' means an individual, partnership, association,
corporation, business trust, or legal representative, an organized
group of individuals, a regional, national, State, territorial, tribal,
or local government or branch thereof, or a political subdivision of a
State, territory, tribal, or local government or a branch of a
political subdivision, or an international organization;
8. ``Quality'' is an encompassing term comprising utility,
objectivity, and integrity. Therefore, the guidelines sometimes refer
these four statutory terms, collectively, as ``quality''
9. ``Utility'' refers to the usefulness of the information to its
intended users, including the public.
Dated: October 1, 2002.
Daniel Schecter,
Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 02-26867 Filed 10-21-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3180-02-P