[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 5, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38690-38693]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-14029]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM


Solicitation of Public Comments on Agency Information Quality 
Guidelines for Ensuring Information Quality

AGENCY: Selective Service System.

ACTION: Notice; request for public comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    These are the Information Quality Guidelines required by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) in implementing section 515(a) of the 
Treasury and Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Public 
Law 106-554, section 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-153 (2000), reprinted 
at 44 U.S.C.A. 3516 Historical and Statutory Notes (``Data Quality 
Act'').

I. Background

    1. The Data Quality Act requires the development of government-wide 
standards on the quality of governmental information disseminated to 
the public. It directs the Director of OMB to issue guidelines under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3504(d)(1) and 3516, 
providing guidance to Federal agencies ``for ensuring and maximizing 
the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information 
(including statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies in 
fulfillment of the provisions of [the PRA].'' The Data Quality Act 
states that OMB guidelines shall apply to sharing by agencies of and 
access to information disseminated by agencies (section 515(b)(1)); 
requires agencies to issue their own guidelines (section 515(b)(2)(A)); 
and requires agencies to establish administrative mechanisms allowing 
affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information 
maintained and disseminated by an agency that does not comply with OMB 
guidelines (section 515(b)(2)(B)). Finally, the statute requires 
periodic reports by agencies to OMB concerning the number of complaints 
filed and how the complaints were handled (section 515(b)(2)(C)).
    2. OMB's guidelines implementing the Data Quality Act require each 
agency to publish in the Federal Register a notice of the availability 
of the agency's draft information quality guidelines. After considering 
public comment, agencies are required to provide OMB with appropriately 
revised draft guidelines by July 1, 2002. Finally, by October 1, 2002, 
agencies must publish in the Federal Register a notice that the 
agency's final guidelines are available on the Internet. In accordance 
with these requirements, the Selective Service System (hereafter 
identified as the SSS) makes available its Draft Information Quality 
Guidelines, set forth in Appendix A, for public review and comment 
between June 1, 2002 to June 28, 2002.

II. Summary of the Proposed Guidelines

    1. SSS' draft guidelines substantially follow the provisions of the 
OMB Guidelines. First, the OMB Guidelines interpret many key statutory 
terms, such as ``information,'' ``disseminate,'' ``quality,'' 
``objectivity,'' ``utility,'' and ``integrity.''
    2. SSS also proposes procedures for reviewing and substantiating 
the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information before 
it is disseminated by the SSS. SSS seeks comment on whether any 
variations may be necessary because of the nature of the SSS' practice 
and procedures.
    3. The Data Quality Act and OMB Guidelines require that SSS 
establishes an administrative mechanism to allow affected persons to 
seek and obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated 
by the agency that does not comply with the OMB or SSS guidelines. SSS' 
proposal provides that initial complaints are to be filed with a 
central office in the SSS that assigns the complaint to the Office 
where the information dissemination product in question originated. The 
Data Quality Act permits only ``affected persons'' to file complaints. 
SSS therefore proposes requiring that an information quality complaint 
contain a description of how a person is affected by the information 
dissemination product alleged to violate OMB or SSS guidelines.
    4. The OMB Guidelines require that agencies set time limits for 
action on complaints. SSS proposes that the relevant Office should 
respond to initial complaints within 60 days. As provided in the OMB 
Guidelines, the Office handling the initial complaint will respond in a 
manner appropriate to the nature and extent of the complaint. 
Inconsequential, trivial, or frivolous complaints may require no 
response at all. SSS may also reject complaints made in bad faith or 
without justification. SSS proposes that if a complaint requires 
corrective action, the appropriate level of correction shall occur 
within 60 days of the decision on the complaint. The OMB Guidelines 
require that persons who do not agree with the initial decision be 
afforded the opportunity to seek administrative review of that 
decision. The proposed procedures provide that applications for review 
should be presented to the Selective Service System for determination. 
SSS' proposed procedures provide that action on applications for review 
should occur within 120 days. Where warranted, the SSS may deny 
applications for review without providing reasons. SSS seeks comment on 
the proposed procedures.

III. Procedural Matters and Ordering Paragraphs

    1. Comment Filing. The OMB Guidelines require that upon 
consideration of public comments and after appropriate revision, SSS 
must submit a draft of final agency guidelines to OMB by July 1, 2002. 
Interested parties may file written comments on or before June 28, 
2002.
    2. Parties interested in commenting on these Draft Information 
Quality Guidelines must submit written comments on or before June 28, 
2002. Hand-delivered or messenger-delivered comments, including 
comments sent by mail must be addressed to Selective Service System, 
Office of Public and Congressional Affairs, 1515 Wilson Blvd., 
Arlington, Virginia, 22209-2425. This location is open 8 a.m. to 5:30 
p.m.
    3. Parties wishing to submit written comments by electronic mail 
should address them to [email protected] with a subject line that 
notes that this electronic communication contains comments on the SSS's 
Draft Information Quality Guidelines.
    4. All relevant and timely comments will be considered before these 
guidelines are finalized.
    5. Ex Parte. This proceeding is deemed exempt for purposes of the 
ex parte rules.
    6. Further Information. For further information, contact the 
Selective Service System, Office of Public & Congressional Affairs, 
1515 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Virginia, 22209-2425 or by e-mail to 
[email protected].

[[Page 38691]]

Appendix A

Draft Information Quality Guidelines

I. Purpose and Scope

    1. The Selective Service System (hereafter identified as the 
SSS) is publishing these guidelines to ensure and maximize the 
quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of specific types of 
information it disseminates, as required by section 515(a) of the 
Treasury and Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, 
Public Law 106-554, sec. 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-153 (2000), 
reprinted at 44 U.S.C.A. 3516 Historical and Statutory Notes (``Data 
Quality Act'').
    2. The purpose of this Appendix is to describe the SSS' policy 
and procedures for reviewing and substantiating the quality of 
information before it is disseminated to the public, and to describe 
the SSS' administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek 
and obtain, where appropriate, correction of information 
disseminated that does not comply with the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) Guidelines, Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the 
Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information 
Disseminated by Federal Agencies, 66 FR 49718 (Sept. 28, 2001) 
(interim final guidelines), and 67 FR 369 (Jan. 3, 2002) (final 
guidelines), corrected, 67 FR 5365 (Feb. 5, 2002), reprinted 
correcting errors, 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), or the SSS' final 
Information Quality Guidelines, which will be issued October 1, 
2002.
    3. These guidelines apply only to information disseminated by 
the SSS as defined in these guidelines. Other information 
distributed by the SSS that is not addressed by these guidelines may 
be subject to other SSS policies and correction procedures.
    4. This document provides guidance to SSS staff and informs the 
public of the SSS' policies and procedures. These guidelines are not 
rules or regulations. They are not legally enforceable and do not 
create any legal rights or impose any legally binding requirements 
or obligations on the SSS or the public. Nothing in these guidelines 
affects any otherwise available judicial review of SSS action. These 
guidelines may not apply to a particular situation based on the 
circumstances, and the SSS retains discretion to adopt approaches on 
a case-by-case basis that differ from the guidelines where 
appropriate. Any decisions regarding a particular case, matter or 
action will be made based on applicable statutes, regulations and 
requirements. Interested parties are free to raise questions and 
objections regarding the substance of the guidelines and the 
appropriateness of using them in a particular situation. The SSS 
will consider whether or not the guidelines are appropriate in that 
situation. Factors such as imminent threats to public health or 
homeland security, statutory or court-ordered deadlines, or other 
time constraints, may limit or preclude applicability of these 
guidelines.

II. Definitions

    For purposes of these guidelines, the following definitions 
apply:
    1. Affected person means anyone (including a group, organization 
or corporation as defined in the Paperwork Reduction Act) who may 
benefit or be harmed by the publicly disseminated information, 
including those who are seeking to correct information about 
themselves and those who use the information.
    2. Complaint refers to a written communication to the SSS that 
includes enough information so that the SSS can readily determine 
the specific information dissemination product the complaining party 
believes needs correcting, how the complaining party is affected by 
the information dissemination product sought to be corrected, the 
sections of these guidelines or the OMB Guidelines the complaining 
party believes have not been followed, what resolution the 
complaining party would like, and how to get in contact with the 
comment writer.
    3. Data are the basic or underlying elements of information. All 
information dissemination products covered by these guidelines are 
based upon data. Additionally, covered information dissemination 
products may contain analysis of the data and conclusions drawn from 
this analysis.
    4. Dissemination means SSS-initiated or sponsored distribution 
of information to the public. Dissemination does not include 
distribution limited to government employees or agency contractors 
or grantees; intra- or inter-agency use or sharing of government 
information; responses to requests for agency records under the 
Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, or other similar laws; 
correspondence with individuals or persons; archival records; press 
releases and other non-scientific/non-statistical general, 
procedural, or organizational information; and public filings, 
subpoenas, or adjudicative processes.
    5. Influential, when used in the phrase ``influential 
scientific, financial, or statistical information,'' means that the 
SSS can reasonably determine that dissemination of the information 
will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on important 
public policies or important private sector decisions.
    6. 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. This definition includes information disseminated from an 
Internet page, but does not include the provision of hyperlinks to 
information that others disseminate. This definition does not 
include opinions where the presentation makes it clear that what is 
being offered is someone's opinion rather than an official view.
    7. Information dissemination product means any book, paper, map, 
machine-readable material, audiovisual production, or other 
documentary material regardless of physical form or characteristic 
that is covered by these guidelines and disseminated to the public 
as an expression of an official SSS position. This definition can 
include electronic documents, CD-ROMs, or web pages.
    8. Integrity refers to the security of information--protection 
of the information from unauthorized access or revision to ensure 
that the information is not compromised through corruption or 
falsification.
    9. Non-scientific/non-statistical general, procedural, or 
organizational information includes but is not limited to:

a. Press releases
b. Fact sheets and brochures
c. Speeches/Remarks/Presentations and their accompanying visual 
materials
d. Listings of:
    i. Licensees, registrations, fees paid
    ii. Phone directories
    iii. Job openings
    iv. Transcriptions or minutes (video, audio, or print) of 
meetings
    v. Glossaries
    vi. Links to non-SSS sites
    vii. Standards
    viii. FAQ's
e. Organizational descriptions
    i. Organization charts
    ii. Budget submittals
    iii. Strategic and performance plans
    iv. Descriptions of laws, regulations, rules that underpin SSS 
activities
    v. Biographies
f. Applications, standards, and help products
g. Forms (for printing or on-line filing)
h. Database search results
i. How-to-file materials
j. Fee information
k. Electronic comment filings

    10. Objectivity involves two distinct elements, presentation and 
substance. In a substantive sense objectivity means that, where 
appropriate, data should have full, accurate, transparent 
documentation; and error sources affecting data quality should be 
identified and disclosed to users. In a scientific, financial, or 
statistical context, substantive objectivity means that the original 
and supporting data shall be generated, and the analytic results 
shall be developed, using sound statistical and research methods. 
Presentational objectivity involves a focus on ensuring clarity, 
accuracy, completeness, and reliability.
    11. Quality is a term encompassing utility, objectivity, and 
integrity. Therefore, the guidelines sometimes refer to these 
statutory terms, collectively, as ``quality.''
    12. Reproducibility means that the information is capable of 
being substantially reproduced, subject to an acceptable degree of 
imprecision. For information judged to have more influence or 
important impact, the degree of imprecision that is tolerated is 
reduced. With respect to analytic 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.
    13. Transparency refers to practices of describing the data and 
methods used in developing an information dissemination product in a 
way that it would be possible for an independent re-analysis to 
occur by a qualified individual or organization. Transparency does 
not require that information be disclosed where disclosure would 
result in harm to other compelling interests such as privacy, trade 
secrets,

[[Page 38692]]

intellectual property, confidentiality protections, or public 
safety.
    14. Utility refers to the usefulness of the information to its 
intended users, including the public. In assessing the usefulness of 
information that the SSS disseminates to the public, the SSS will 
consider the uses of the information not only from the perspective 
of the SSS but also from the perspective of the public.

III. Pre-Dissemination Information Review and Substantiation Process

    1. Beginning October 1, 2002, the following process will apply 
to information dissemination products distributed by the SSS to 
ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity 
of the information. The information dissemination products covered 
by these guidelines include reports prepared for Congress or 
required by legislation, such as the annual reports of services.
    2. Information exempt from these guidelines includes information 
associated with public filings, subpoenas, or adjudicative 
processes; non-scientific/non-statistical general, procedural, or 
organizational information; information that is not initiated or 
sponsored by the SSS; information that expresses personal opinions 
rather than formal agency views; information for the primary use of 
federal employees (inter- or intra-agency), contractors, or 
grantees; responses to requests made under the Freedom of 
Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, or similar laws; agency correspondence; archival records; trade 
secrets, intellectual property, confidential data or information; 
and non-routine or emergency public safety information.
    3. For each information dissemination product covered by these 
guidelines every Office shall conduct a pre-dissemination review 
using the standards below:
    A. Quality will be demonstrated through the incorporation of a 
methodological section or appendix that describes, at a minimum, the 
design and methods used during the creation, collection, and 
processing of the data; the compilation and/or analysis of the data; 
and the pre-release review of the information dissemination product 
for clarity, completeness, accuracy, and reliability.
    B. Objectivity will be demonstrated by including in the 
information dissemination product's methodology section or appendix 
a discussion of other scientifically, financially, or statistically 
responsible and reliable alternative views and perspectives, if 
these alternative views or perspectives are not already noted in 
other sections of the information dissemination product.
    C. Utility will be demonstrated by the responsible Office 
incorporating into the methodology section or appendix examples of 
the use of the information dissemination product. These examples 
could include, but are not limited to, listing of the legislation 
requiring the information dissemination product or the specific 
request for the information dissemination product.
    D. Integrity is demonstrated by the SSS' routine, day-to-day 
compliance across all operations and processes with relevant data 
protection and security sections of applicable statues and 
regulations and therefore does not have to be specifically addressed 
in information dissemination products covered by these guidelines.

IV. The Complaint and Appeals Process

1. Filing a Complaint

    A. Affected persons may seek timely correction of information 
dissemination products maintained and distributed by the SSS that do 
not comply with the SSS' or OMB's guidelines by completing the Data 
Quality Comment form that will be found, beginning October 1, 2002, 
at http://www.sss.gov/dataquality. This form can be submitted 
electronically by clicking on the link found at the end of the form, 
or by printing a copy and mailing it to the Selective Service 
System, 1515 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, Virginia, 22209-2425.
    B. Initial Correction Request.
    (1) Any person affected by the information SSS publicly 
disseminates, as intended by Section 515, may request the timely 
correction of that information.
    (2) Any ``affected person'' may submit a timely request for 
correction to the Office of the Director of SSS, who will direct the 
request to the appropriate Directorate Head for consideration.
    (3) The request for correction under Section 515 and these 
guidelines must--
    a. Be in writing;
    b. Clearly explain how the person is an ``affected person,'' as 
defined by these guidelines;
    c. Clearly identify the information dissemination product;
    d. Clearly identify the information within that product alleged 
to be incorrect;
    e. Suggest and explain appropriate corrective action, including 
the justifications for the changes or other remedial actions being 
sought;
    f. Identify the comment writer and how to contact him or her; 
and
    g. Be clearly marked ``Information Correction Request'' and 
addressed to: Selective Service System,1515 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, 
Virginia, 22209-2425. The request can also be emailed to 
[email protected].
    (4) If the information disseminated by SSS 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.
    (5) Once an Information Correction Request has been received, it 
is SSS' intention for the Office Director (OD) to respond within 60 
days, beginning at the time of SSS receipt. The OD may extend the 
response period for an additional 30 days if: The OD determines an 
extension is appropriate, and promptly provides the requestor the 
reasons why more time is needed. Such reasons may include the need 
to review multiple records encompassed by a single request, or the 
need to consult with other Federal agencies that have a substantial 
interest in the information at issue and the change being sought.
    (6) Once received, the OD shall initially determine whether the 
request meets threshold requirements for standing, such as whether 
the request:
    a. Is timely;
    b. Is from an ``affected person,'' as defined in these 
guidelines;
    c. Is appropriately directed to SSS;
    d. Alleges errors in information subject to correction (i.e., 
implicates ``information'' as defined in these guidelines); or
    e. Reasonably describes:
    (1) The information source,
    (2) The information alleged to be incorrect; and
    (3) A suggested remedy, including justifications for the remedy 
being sought.
    f. Contains information from the comment writer to facilitate 
his or her contact for response.
    (7) If the OD determines the request does not satisfy one or 
more of the threshold requirements for standing, the OD will respond 
to the requester explaining why the request was deficient. If the 
request was deficient due to an insufficient description of the 
disseminated information source or the information alleged to be 
incorrect, as a matter of discretion the OD may advise the requester 
what additional clarification is required and provide a reasonable 
time for a proper clarification to be submitted. Otherwise, the OD 
shall determine whether the request for correction has merit, as 
well as the type of remedy that is most appropriate for the alleged 
error at issue, if proven. Given the multiple types of information 
that may be involved, as well as the wide range in possible levels 
of the information's importance, a great variety of remedies may be 
appropriate. The OD has discretion to implement the requester's 
suggested remedy, or to choose another remedy the OD deems most 
appropriate in the given circumstances. The OD will respond to the 
affected person with an explanation of the decisions that were made 
on both the error at issue and the remedy, if any, selected to 
address it.

2. Complaint Resolution

    A. A determination will be made within 60 days of receipt of the 
complaint on whether correction is warranted.
    B. The decision on appropriate corrective action will be based 
upon the nature and timeliness of the information dissemination 
product involved and such factors as the significance of the 
correction on the use of the information dissemination product and 
the magnitude of the correction. Inconsequential, trivial, or 
frivolous complaints may require no response at all. If corrective 
action is warranted, the correction will occur within 60 days of 
this notification to the complaining party.
    C. If a correction is warranted, the appropriate Office handling 
the complaint will respond to the complaint in a manner appropriate 
to the nature and extent of the complaint. Examples of appropriate 
responses include personal contacts via letter or telephone, form 
letters, errata notices, press releases, or mass mailings that 
correct a widely disseminated error or address a frequently raised 
complaint.
    3. Right To Appeal
    If the person who requested correction does not agree with the 
initial decision (including corrective action, if any), the

[[Page 38693]]

person may file an application for review by the SSS within 30 days 
of the date of the notification of action on the complaint or the 
corrective action. Applications for review must be submitted in 
writing to the SSS, Office of the Director, 1515 Wilson Blvd., 
Arlington, Virginia, 22209-2425. E-mail copies of the written appeal 
may be sent, beginning October 1, 2002, to [email protected].
    A. The written appeal must include a copy of the original 
complaint and the response thereto, and an explanation of how the 
initial resolution of the complaint or the corrective action was 
contrary to the SSS' or OMB's information quality guidelines.
    B. Applications for review will be resolved within 120 days. The 
SSS, in appropriate cases, may deny an application for review 
without providing reasons.

V. Reporting Requirements

    1. On an annual fiscal-year basis, the SSS shall submit a report 
to the Director of OMB providing information (both quantitative and 
qualitative, where appropriate) on the number and nature of 
complaints received regarding compliance with OMB guidelines, and 
how such complaints were resolved.
    2. The report shall be submitted no later than January 1 of each 
following year.
    3. The first report shall be submitted by January 1, 2004.

VI. Effective Dates

    1. Pre-dissemination review under section III, above, shall 
apply to information dissemination products that the SSS first 
disseminates on or after October 1, 2002.
    2. The administrative mechanisms noted in section IV shall apply 
only to information dissemination products that the SSS disseminates 
on or after October 1, 2002, regardless of when the SSS first 
disseminated the information.
__________
    Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, 
Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal 
Agencies, 66 FR 49718 (Sept. 28, 2001) (interim final guidelines), 
and 67 FR 369 (Jan. 3, 2002) (final guidelines), corrected, 67 FR 
5365 (Feb. 5, 2002), reprinted correcting errors, 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 
22, 2002) (collectively referred to as ``OMB Guidelines'').

    Dated: May 30, 2002.
Norman W. Miller,
Chief Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 02-14029 Filed 6-4-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8015-01-P