[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47777-47783]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-18378]


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

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 
[email protected]. 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 [email protected], 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