[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 222 (Monday, November 18, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69642-69651]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-29195]



[[Page 69641]]

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

Part IV





Department of Housing and Urban Development





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



HUD Final Information Quality Guidelines; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 222 / Monday, November 18, 2002 / 
Notices  

[[Page 69642]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-4769-N-02]


HUD Final Information Quality Guidelines

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration/Chief 
Information Officer, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces HUD's final guidelines for ensuring and 
maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of 
information disseminated to the public by HUD (``Information Quality 
Guidelines''). The notice follows publication of a May 30, 2002, 
Federal Register notice inviting public comment on HUD's draft 
Information Quality Guidelines, and takes into consideration the public 
comments received on the earlier notice.

DATES: Effective Date: November 18, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Ciancio, Office of Departmental 
Grants Management and Oversight, Office of Administration, Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, Room 3156, 451 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20410-0500; telephone: (202) 708-0667 (this is not a 
toll-free number). Hearing- or speech-impaired individuals may access 
this number via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay 
Service at 800-877-8399.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 515 of the 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.'' Within one year after OMB issues 
its guidelines, agencies must issue their own guidelines that will 
describe internal mechanisms by which agencies will ensure that their 
information meets the standards of quality, objectivity, utility, and 
integrity. The mechanism also must allow affected persons to seek and 
obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated by the 
agency that does not comply with the guidelines.
    OMB issued its final guidelines on September 28, 2001 (66 FR 
49718), but requested additional comment on one component of the OMB 
guidelines.The OMB guidelines addressing additional public comment were 
published on January 3, 2002 (67 FR 369), and republished on February 
22, 2002 (67 FR 6452). In accordance with the statute, agencies must 
issue their final guidelines by October 1, 2002. The agencies' draft 
guidelines need not be published in the Federal Register but agencies 
should provide notification in the Federal Register that the draft 
guidelines are available on agencies' Web sites.

II. HUD's Information Quality Guidelines

    HUD announced the availability of its draft guidelines for review 
and comment on HUD's website through a Federal Register notice 
published on May 30, 2002 (67 FR 37851). The May 30, 2002, notice 
solicited public comments through July 1, 2002. HUD announced the 
extension of this public comment period by Federal Register notice 
published on June 17, 2002, (67 FR 41255). The June 17, 2002, notice 
solicited public comments through July 17, 2002. This notice makes 
HUD's final guidelines available to the public. This notice also 
notifies the public of the significant changes made as a result of 
internal HUD review, the public comments received on HUD's draft 
guidelines, and OMB comments received on HUD's proposed final 
guidelines.

III. Discussion of Public Comments on HUD's Draft Information Quality 
Guidelines

    In response to the draft guidelines, HUD received five public 
comments. The comments received involved a number of different sections 
of the draft guidelines. Comments were received from: A public interest 
group, a legal services organization, a coalition of organizations 
representing health, safety, civil rights, and environmental concerns, 
a mortgage company, and an association of home builders. A more 
detailed discussion of these comments follows:

A. General Comments

    Several general comments were received urging HUD to use, or adhere 
more strictly to the statutory terms, language, and definitions 
contained in OMB's interagency guidelines, including the definition and 
treatment of the terms ``quality'' and ``affected persons.'' Various 
sections of the final guidelines were modified to address these 
comments.
    Three comments were received generally urging HUD to avoid 
incorporating existing policies and procedures into new information 
quality requirements but rather to establish new, stand-alone policies 
and procedures to apply to the quality, objectivity, utility, and 
integrity of information HUD disseminates to the public. Another 
comment urged HUD to retain maximum flexibility in implementing OMB 
guidelines by incorporating the standards and procedures required by 
these guidelines into existing information resource management and 
administrative practices. In developing its final guidelines, HUD noted 
that OMB generally states in its guidelines to federal agencies that it 
designed its guidelines to be adaptable to a wide variety of government 
information dissemination activities, generic, and non-prescriptive, 
thus allowing agencies the flexibility to incorporate the requirements 
of the OMB guidelines into the agencies' own information resource 
management and administrative practices. HUD considered this when 
addressing the above comments by slight modifications that make it 
explicit that the Department's existing clearance and approval 
procedures for information disseminated to the public clearly address 
the requirements of section 515 and the OMB guidelines. Therefore, the 
guidelines do not replace existing HUD procedures but rather reaffirm 
HUD's existing procedures and the agency's adherence to them.

B. Designated Official

    Four comments were received generally urging HUD to provide more 
detailed contact information for the designated official, to more 
clearly define the responsible parties and the procedures they will use 
to ensure quality, and to assign the General Counsel the responsibility 
for compliance with OMB's final guidelines. With the exception of the 
latter comment, numerous modifications were made throughout the 
guidelines to address these comments.

C. Performance Measurement

    Three comments were received concerning adopting the guidelines as 
performance standards. In response to these comments, HUD revised the 
section of the guidelines titled ``Purpose,'' to state ``HUD reviews 
the standards defined in these guidelines as performance measures and 
will seek to attain the standards as defined. In implementing these 
guidelines, HUD

[[Page 69643]]

acknowledges that ensuring the quality of information is a management 
objective as important as any other for the Department, including the 
success of agency missions and observing budget and resources 
priorities and restraints. HUD will implement these guidelines so that 
they complement and support all other Departmental objectives.''

D. Administrative Correction Mechanism

    Approximately fifteen comments were received from three respondents 
concerning the mechanism for requesting information dissemination 
corrections and the mechanism for processing information dissemination 
corrections requests. Seven of the comments received generally 
recommended that HUD's guidelines should provide more clarity and/or 
add more structure to the process by: (1) Designating an official 
through which complaints and responses to complaints could be 
submitted; (2) establishing a formal, independent board to review and 
act on appeals in an ``ombudsman'' capacity; (3) more clearly defining 
terms to ensure that affected persons consistently receive corrections 
in a timely manner; (4) defining an objective standard for HUD 
decision-makers to follow when determining the degree and manner in 
which the disseminated information will be corrected; (5) expressly 
stating that separate HUD offices and officials shall resolve initial 
decisions and disagreements on appeals for correcting information; (6) 
notifying the public or establishing a running public docket of 
correction requests and changes; and, (7) providing detailed 
descriptions about how correction requests will be reviewed, who will 
conduct the reviews, what standards will be used, and how such reviews 
will be supervised.
    One respondent submitted the remaining eight comments on this topic 
and all eight comments strongly urged HUD to construct these mechanisms 
cautiously with adequate procedural safeguards to protect the agency 
from becoming mired down in minor data disputes, bad faith, frivolous, 
repetitive, or non-timely requests. Further, the respondent recommended 
limiting the mechanism to only what is required in the Data Quality Act 
so as to avoid any possibility of creating new rights under 
administrative law. The eight comments stated that HUD: (1) Should 
clearly state that the burden of proof lies squarely with the requestor 
to demonstrate both that they are an affected party and that the 
challenged information does not comply with OMB's guidelines; (2) limit 
the administrative mechanism to corrections of factual data and 
information, and explicitly state that administrative mechanisms will 
not consider interpretations of data and information, or requests for 
de-publishing; (3) should limit complaints to information that is not 
already subject to existing data quality programs and measures; (4) 
state that similar requests previously responded to may be rejected as 
frivolous or duplicative; (5) should establish a timeliness requirement 
for requests after which the agency has the option to reject a request; 
(6) 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; (7) should 
specifically state that responses to correction requests will be 
proportional to the significance and importance of the information in 
question; and (8) should establish a fairly informal reconsideration 
process consistent with the fact that neither the initial consideration 
nor the agency's reconsideration is a legally enforceable process as 
the Data Quality Act does not address reconsideration of complaints and 
that such a requirement is far outside the scope of the statutory 
requirements.
    In response to these 15 comments, the guidelines were modified 
under the section titled ``Designated Official'' to include specific 
language stating that HUD Assistant Secretaries are responsible for 
ensuring implementation of the guidelines within their respective areas 
of responsibility. The guidelines were further modified under the 
section titled ``Process for Requesting Correction to Disseminated 
Information'' by adding subsections titled ``Submitting Requests,'' 
``Rejecting Requests,'' ``Processing Requests,'' and ``Appealing 
Corrective Decisions.'' These subsections set forth specific 
requirements for the information to be submitted in an information 
dissemination request, the criteria HUD will use for determining valid 
correction requests, the process HUD will follow for processing 
requests determined to be valid, the process for appealing corrective 
decisions, and the procedures HUD will use for processing requests 
appealing corrective decisions. Further, these subsections specifically 
designate the responsible HUD official(s) at each stage of the 
described process.

E. Definition and Standard for ``Dissemination''

    Four commenters submitted comments on the definition and standard 
for ``dissemination.'' One comment stated that the exemptions were too 
broad and encompassing to be consistent with the new Information 
Quality Guidelines and that the guidelines should explain what is meant 
by ``statutorily mandated issuances.'' Two other comments generally 
stated that Congress intended the Data Quality Act standards to apply 
to all public information despite OMB's exemption of some types and 
categories of information in its interagency guidelines. Other comments 
stated that HUD should: (1) Make every effort to clearly assert the 
limits of these guidelines and preserve the agency's flexibility to 
accomplish core mandates unfettered; (2) clearly state that the agency 
does not consider the guidelines judicially reviewable, and that they 
do not provide any new adjudicatory authority, and (3) clearly state 
that the guidelines apply to information disseminated from the agency 
itself and not when the agency is merely acting as a conduit of 
information. Two commenters stated some uncertainty concerning the 
applicability of the guidelines to staff working papers made available 
to the public, including working papers posted on the HUD website. 
These comments argued that such papers are subject to the guidelines if 
made available to the public, unless an explicit disclaimer is included 
in the papers.
    In response to these comments and further direction received from 
OMB on its interagency guidelines, the guidelines were modified under 
the section titled ``Definitions and Standards,'' subsection titled 
``Dissemination'' by: (1) Adding specificity to the exemptions listed; 
(2) adding two exemptions for (a) information presented to Congress as 
part of the legislative or oversight processes (e.g., testimony of HUD 
officials, information or drafting assistance provided to Congress in 
connection with pending proposed legislation) that is not 
simultaneously disseminated to the public, and (b) procedural, 
operational, policy, and internal manuals prepared for the management 
and operations of HUD that are not primarily intended for public 
dissemination; (3) providing an example of a statutorily mandated 
issuance; (4) adding language explicitly stating that the guidelines do 
not impose any additional requirements on HUD during adjudicative 
proceedings and do not provide parties to such adjudicative proceedings 
any additional rights of challenge or appeal; and (5) adding new 
requirements in the guidelines for working papers

[[Page 69644]]

disseminated or otherwise made available to the public to carry a clear 
legend indicating that the papers represent the opinions of the author 
and are not the agency's official views.

F. Influential Information

    Several comments were received concerning ``influential 
information.'' One comment concerned the quality standards to be 
applied to information deemed ``influential.'' Another comment 
recommended that the guidelines set clear standards for ``influential'' 
information and explain how the requisite criteria for ``transparency'' 
and ``reproducibility'' would be achieved. Related to these comments 
were comments concerning the need for the guidelines to discuss how the 
agency will implement enhanced standards for influential information, 
including ``transparency'' and ``reproducibility'' or internal 
``robustness checks'' if privacy, confidentiality, or proprietary 
concerns prevent disclosure of certain information, making transparency 
and reproducibility infeasible. Another comment suggested that the 
agency adopt procedures for identifying influential information. 
Finally, one comment urged HUD to avoid labeling information as 
``influential.''
    Several areas of the guidelines were modified to address these 
comments. The ``quality'' definition and standard was enhanced by 
including transparency and reproducibility under the ``objectivity'' 
aspect of this standard. Peer review was more thoroughly defined to 
include ensuring that such reviews meet the general criteria 
recommended by OMB to the President's Management Council on September 
20, 2001. A definition and standard was added for robustness checks for 
disseminated influential information when transparency and 
reproducibility are infeasible. A definition and standard was added for 
influential information setting forth specific guidelines for 
determining whether scientific, financial, or statistical information 
is influential within the meaning of OMB's guidelines, thus determining 
the level of scrutiny and pre-dissemination review afforded such 
information. Finally, the guidelines were modified to reflect that each 
HUD Assistant Secretary is responsible for determining what constitutes 
influential information, for developing and documenting specific review 
and approval procedures for information deemed influential, and to 
state that these responsibilities and authorities may not be delegated.

G. Risk Assessment Information Relating to Human Health, Safety, or the 
Environment

    Two comments from different respondents were received concerning 
inclusion of the quality principles of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
(SDWA) for risk assessment information relating to human health, 
safety, or the environment. One comment suggested that HUD either adopt 
or adapt the quality principles of the SDWA as required by the OMB 
guidelines, while the other comment urged HUD to ``adapt'' the SDWA 
standards, further stating that OMB exceeded the congressional mandate 
and inappropriately asked agencies to either adopt or adapt the SDWA 
principles. These comments were addressed in the guidelines under the 
``reproducibility'' definition and standard by stating that HUD will 
use the best available, peer-reviewed science and supporting studies 
conducted in accordance with sound and objective scientific practices, 
and data collected by the accepted methods or best available methods 
(if the reliability of the method and the nature of the decision 
justifies use of the data).

IV. HUD's Final Information Quality Guidelines

    HUD's final Information Quality Guidelines are as follows--

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Final Guidelines for 
Ensuring and Correcting the Quality of Information (Information Quality 
Guidelines)

I. Purpose

    These guidelines fulfill the requirements of Section 515 of the 
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 
(Public Law 106-554, H.R. 5658, hereafter referred to as section 515), 
requiring federal agencies to issue implementing guidelines for 
ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and 
integrity of information they disseminate.
    The Department of Housing and Urban Development is committed to 
ensuring and maximizing the quality, utility, objectivity, and 
integrity of all information it disseminates to the public. To 
accomplish this objective, HUD is issuing these guidelines that the 
Department will follow for reviewing and substantiating the quality of 
information before it is disseminated to the public. In addition, these 
guidelines establish an administrative correction procedure by which an 
affected person may seek and obtain the correction of any information 
disseminated by HUD that does not comply with these guidelines or the 
existing clearance and approval procedures the guidelines reference.
    HUD views the standards defined in these guidelines and those of 
the Office of Management and Budget as performance measures and will 
strive to meet these standards. In implementing these guidelines, HUD 
acknowledges that ensuring the quality of information is a management 
objective as important as any other for the Department including the 
success of agency missions and observing budget and resource priorities 
and restraints. HUD will implement these guidelines so that they 
complement and support all other Departmental objectives.
    The Department's existing clearance and approval procedures for 
information disseminated to the public clearly address the requirements 
of section 515 and the OMB guidelines. Therefore, these guidelines do 
not replace existing HUD procedures. Rather, these guidelines simply 
reaffirm HUD's existing clearance and approval procedures for easy 
reference, to help ensure adherence to them, and thus ensure quality 
information products. Where HUD's existing clearance and approval 
procedures do not meet the intent of section 515, new pre-dissemination 
clearance and approval procedures are described. These new procedures 
are identified as such.

II. Authority

    Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-554; 114 Stat. 2763).

III. Background

    Section 515 directs 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.'' Agencies are required to issue 
their own implementing guidelines within one year after OMB issues its 
guidelines. For the convenience of the reader, OMB's final guidelines 
can be found on: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ fedreg/final--
information-- quality--guidelines.html.
    Section 515 also requires that agency guidelines include 
``administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and 
obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated by the 
agency.'' OMB

[[Page 69645]]

required agencies to prepare a draft report including their 
implementing guidelines no later than May 1, 2002. HUD developed these 
guidelines to meet this requirement. The goal of these guidelines is to 
ensure that information disseminated by HUD will be:
    [sbull] Useful to the intended users;
    [sbull] Presented in an accurate, reliable, and unbiased manner as 
a matter of substance and presentation; and,
    [sbull] Protected from unauthorized access or revision.

IV. Designated Official

    HUD's Assistant Secretary for Administration/Chief Information 
Officer serves as the agency official charged with overseeing HUD's 
compliance with OMB guidelines for the quality of information 
disseminated. HUD Assistant Secretaries, individuals of equivalent 
rank, or Assistant Secretary designates (hereinafter ``HUD Assistant 
Secretaries''), are responsible for ensuring implementation of these 
guidelines within their respective areas of responsibility. With 
respect to Office of Inspector General (OIG) information, however, the 
Inspector General is ultimately responsible for ensuring OIG 
information is objective, useful, and has integrity, and for 
determining whether such information should be corrected.

V. Effective Date

    As provided in OMB's guidelines, these guidelines apply only to 
information HUD disseminates on or after October 1, 2002, including the 
review of information to ensure quality before it is disseminated to 
the public. While previously released materials will continue to be 
used for decision-making and relied upon by the Department and the 
public as official, authoritative, government information, the 
materials are, in effect, constantly being re-disseminated and thus 
subject to these guidelines. Previously released information materials 
that do not meet these criteria are considered archived information and 
thus are not subject to these guidelines or to the request for 
correction process.

VI. Policy

    HUD will ensure that the information it disseminates to the public 
is objective (accurate, clear, complete, and unbiased), useful, and has 
integrity. Additional levels of quality standards may be adopted, as 
appropriate, for specific categories of disseminated information.

VII. Definitions and Standards

A. Information
    Any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts or 
data, conveyed in any form or medium, including textual, numerical, 
graphic, cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual, whether on paper, 
film, or electronic media, and whether disseminated via facsimile 
(fax), recording, machine-readable data, or website. This does not 
include hyperlinks provided to information originated by or in the 
custody of someone other than HUD. Information does not include 
opinion, unless that opinion is HUD's official point of view.
B. Dissemination
    Affirmative distribution to the public initiated or sponsored by 
HUD acting as a publisher, rather than release of information in 
response to a request from the public. HUD ``sponsors'' distribution of 
information if HUD collects the information, causes another agency to 
collect the information, contracts or enters into a cooperative 
agreement with a person to collect the information, or requires a 
person to provide information to someone else. HUD also sponsors 
information if HUD causes someone else to obtain, solicit, or require 
disclosure of information by or for HUD to third parties or to the 
public.
    The standards of these guidelines apply not only to information 
that HUD generates, but also to information that other parties provide 
to HUD, if the other parties seek to have the Department rely upon or 
disseminate this information or the Department decides to do so. For 
example, in commenting on a proposed rule, a trade association supplies 
a scientific or technical analysis in support of its position on what 
the final rule should say. In order for HUD to rely upon this 
information in a subsequent HUD dissemination of information (e.g., as 
part of the basis cited for decisions in the final rule), the quality 
of the trade association's information would have to be consistent with 
these guidelines. Likewise, if the Department disseminates information 
originally created by a non-HUD party (e.g., contractor or consultant), 
this disseminated information would be subject to these guidelines.
    Dissemination does NOT include the following types of information 
and hence this information is not subject to these guidelines:
    [sbull] Release of information to government employees, agency 
contractors, or grantees, where such information is restricted or 
limited to these entities;
    [sbull] Dissemination intended for intra- or interagency use or 
sharing of government information;
    [sbull] Information released under the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA), the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, or similar 
law;
    [sbull] Dissemination limited to correspondence with individuals or 
persons (regardless of media, example electronic mail);
    [sbull] Press releases and other information of an ephemeral 
nature, advising the public of an event or activity of a finite 
duration--regardless of medium;
    [sbull] Archival records disseminated by federal agency libraries 
or similar federal data repositories (e.g., inactive or historical 
materials in HUD libraries and other data collections--including 
bibliographies or responses to reference requests pertaining to such 
materials);
    [sbull] Library holdings;
    [sbull] Public filings;
    [sbull] Distributions intended to be limited to subpoenas or 
adjudicative processes and decisions;
    [sbull] Information presented to Congress as part of the 
legislative or oversight processes (e.g., testimony of HUD officials, 
information or drafting assistance provided to Congress in connection 
with pending or proposed legislation) that is not simultaneously 
disseminated to the public;
    [sbull] Statutorily mandated issuances (e.g., HUD's Five Year 
Strategic Plan);
    [sbull] HUD's release of third party information, views, or 
opinions, that are clearly identified as information that is not 
produced or sponsored by HUD; and,
    [sbull] Procedural, operational, policy, and internal manuals 
prepared for the management and operations of HUD that are not 
primarily intended for public dissemination.
    These guidelines do not impose any additional requirements on HUD 
during adjudicative proceedings and do not provide parties to such 
adjudicative proceedings any additional rights of challenge or appeal.
C. Quality
    Encompasses three main aspects of information--utility, 
objectivity, and integrity, as described below.
    1. Utility. Usefulness of the information to its intended users, 
including the public, measured by reference to established criteria, 
such as accessibility or timeliness.
    2. Objectivity. Accuracy, completeness, reliability, clarity, and 
lack of bias in the collection, manipulation, contextual presentation

[[Page 69646]]

of information, and substance with appropriate levels of statistical or 
scientific objectivity for the type and importance of the information 
disseminated.
    Objective presentation means that information is presented within a 
proper context to ensure an accurate, clear, complete, and unbiased 
presentation. Objective substance means the information, data, the 
analytical process, and the resulting reports are accurate, reliable, 
and unbiased.
    HUD aims to provide objective information but it is important to 
note that HUD must sometimes rely on outside data that it is unable to 
duplicate or control due to certain circumstances (e.g., cost). 
Nonetheless, HUD will seek to make publicly available the sources (to 
the extent possible, consistent with confidentiality protections), 
data, and methods/models used to develop the information so that the 
public can judge for itself whether there may be some reason to 
question the objectivity of the sources. This will ensure a high degree 
of transparency about the data and methods such that an independent 
reanalysis could be undertaken by a qualified member of the public. 
Making the data and methods publicly available will assist in 
determining whether analytic results are reproducible. However, the 
objectivity standard does not override other compelling interests such 
as privacy, trade secrets, intellectual property, and other 
confidentiality protections.
    Scientific or statistical information should be presented with 
supporting data and models to allow intended users to assess the 
objectivity of the information sources without revealing trade secrets 
or violating confidentiality and privacy.
    Disseminated analytical results that do, or may, have an important 
effect on development of governmental or private sector policies, or 
have important consequences for specific technologies, substances, 
products, or firms, must be capable of being substantially reproduced. 
This means that independent reanalysis of original or supporting data 
using the same methods would generate similar analytical results, 
within an acceptable range of error or imprecision.
    In situations involving influential scientific, financial, or 
statistical information, where public access to data and methods will 
not occur due to other compelling interests, HUD Assistant Secretaries 
shall apply especially rigorous robustness checks to analytic results 
and document the checks that were undertaken.
    Results already subjected to formal, independent peer review, 
before dissemination, are generally considered to be acceptably 
objective. Nonetheless, this presumption is rebuttable based on a 
persuasive showing by a petitioner in a particular instance. That is, 
the burden of proof is on the affected person petitioning HUD for a 
correction to disseminated information. If HUD uses a peer review, the 
review process used will meet the general criteria for competent and 
credible peer review recommended by OMB to the President's Management 
Council on September 20, 2001. 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.
    3. Integrity. Refers to protection of information from corruption 
or falsification by unauthorized access or revision.
D. Robustness Checks
    Refers to influential scientific, financial, or statistical 
information where public access to data and methods will not occur due 
to other compelling interests. In these situations, HUD Assistant 
Secretaries shall ensure that the data and methods used to develop the 
information product are reviewed for: (1) Appropriateness of the 
methodology; (2) soundness of the analysis and specific analytic 
methods; (3) soundness of hypotheses and assumptions; (4) statistical 
procedures; (5) sources of bias or other error, and (6) programmatic 
and policy implications.
E. Influential Information
    The following discussion is intended as guidance to HUD Assistant 
Secretaries and other interested persons in determining whether 
scientific, financial, or statistical information is influential within 
the meaning of OMB's guidelines. This definition is important because 
it determines the level of scrutiny and pre-dissemination review 
afforded to information. It is important to emphasize that this term 
applies only to scientific, financial, or statistical information. The 
definition does not address other types of information, no matter how 
important the information may seem to be. It should also be noted that 
the definition applies to ``information'' itself, not to HUD decisions 
that the information may support. That is, even if a decision or action 
by HUD is itself very important, a particular piece of information 
supporting it may or may not be ``influential.''
    The OMB guidelines define ``influential'' information as 
information that the agency reasonably can determine ``will have or 
does have a clear and substantial impact on important public policies 
or important private sector decisions.'' The OMB guidelines assign to 
HUD the task of defining this term in ways appropriate to the agency 
and its various programs.
    HUD emphasizes that, to be influential, information must have a 
clear and substantial impact. A clear and substantial impact, first of 
all, is one that has a high probability of occurring. If it is arguable 
that an impact will occur, or if it is a close judgment call, then the 
impact is probably not clear and substantial. The impact must be on 
``important'' public policy or private sector decisions. Even if 
information has a clear and substantial impact, it is not influential 
if the impact is not on a public or private decision that is important 
to policy, economic, or other decisions.
    Additionally, in determining if information has a clear and 
substantial impact, HUD will consider two factors--breadth and 
intensity--in determining whether information is influential.
    Every decision that HUD makes based on disseminated information is 
important to someone. That does not mean that disseminated information 
used for each decision is influential, as the term is used in the 
guidelines.
    In determining whether information is influential, HUD Assistant 
Secretaries shall consider whether information affects a broad range of 
parties. Information that affects a broad, rather than a narrow, range 
of parties (e.g., an entire industry or a significant part of an 
industry) is more likely to be influential.
    HUD Assistant Secretaries shall also consider whether information 
has an intense impact or high cost. Information that has a low cost or 
modest impact on affected parties is less likely to be influential than 
information that can have a very costly or crucial impact. In 
considering whether information has a high-intensity impact, HUD 
Assistant Secretaries shall use the definition of ``economic 
significance'' provided in Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Section 2.f.1, 
thus using the $100 million figure, as well as other criteria sited in 
the E.O. definition, to determine the degree of impact. HUD Assistant 
Secretaries may, however, find this level of intensity in information 
materials that fall below the benchmark figure.

[[Page 69647]]

    In most cases, information that has an intense impact on a broad 
range of parties is regarded as influential. Information that affects a 
broad range of parties with a low-intensity impact, or information that 
affects a narrow range of parties with a high-intensity impact, may or 
may not be influential.
    HUD Assistant Secretaries may designate certain classes of 
information as ``influential'' or not, in the context of their specific 
programs. Absent such designations, HUD Assistant Secretaries will 
determine whether information is influential on a case-by-case basis, 
using the principles articulated in these guidelines.
    The ``influential'' designation is intended to be applied to 
information where clearly appropriate. HUD Assistant Secretaries should 
not designate information products or types of information as 
influential on a regular or routine basis. Nor should an 
``influential'' label be placed on the title page or text of an 
information product.
F. Reproducibility
    The information is capable of being substantially reproduced, 
subject to an acceptable degree of imprecision. With respect to 
analytic results, ``capable of being substantially reproduced'' means 
that an independent analysis of the original and supporting data using 
identical methods would generate similar analytic results, subject to 
an acceptable degree of imprecision or error. For influential 
information regarding risks to human health, safety, and the 
environment, HUD will use the best available, peer-reviewed science and 
supporting studies conducted in accordance with sound and objective 
scientific practices, and data collected by the accepted methods or 
best available methods (if the reliability of the method and the nature 
of the decision justifies use of the data).
G. Affected Persons
    Any person or group who may benefit or be harmed by information 
disseminated by HUD. This includes persons who are seeking to address 
information about themselves as well as persons who use information. As 
defined by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, affected persons 
include groups, organizations, and corporations.

VIII. Guidelines

A. Scope
    HUD will review all information to be disseminated to the public 
for quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity before the information 
is disseminated to the public. These guidelines apply to information 
disseminated by HUD on or after October 1, 2002, regardless of when the 
agency first disseminated the information. Likewise, the agency's 
administrative mechanisms for correcting information shall apply to 
information the agency disseminates on or after October 1, 2002, 
regardless of when the agency first disseminated the information.
    HUD will ensure that the quality of its disseminated information, 
and its pre-dissemination review process, can be substantiated through 
documentation or other means appropriate to the information.
    These guidelines apply to HUD information dissemination products in 
all media and formats, including printed, electronic, and audio/visual. 
Information dissemination products include books, papers, CD-ROMs, 
electronic documents, or other documentary material disseminated to the 
public by HUD. The guidelines apply to information disseminated to the 
public by HUD from a web page, but they do not apply to hyperlinks from 
the HUD website to information that others disseminate. Nor do the 
guidelines apply to opinions if it is clear that what is being offered 
is someone's opinion, rather than fact or the agency's official views. 
For example, the guidelines do not apply to staff working papers that 
are preliminary in nature and do not represent the official views of 
the agency.
B. Process for Ensuring Quality of Information at the Basic Standard
    The Section 515 guidelines issued by OMB focus primarily on the 
dissemination of substantive information (i.e., reports, studies, 
summaries) rather than information pertaining to basic agency 
operations. HUD reviews all information dissemination products prior to 
dissemination and all products are expected to meet the basic OMB and 
HUD quality standards (see definitions and standards for objectivity, 
utility, and integrity). HUD currently has few information products 
that would require a standard of quality higher than the ``basic'' 
standard described by the OMB guidelines.
    As stated in the ``Policy'' section of these guidelines, HUD's 
basic quality standard for information involves objectivity, utility, 
and integrity. Objectivity has two distinct elements--presentation and 
substance. First, the information must be presented in an accurate, 
clear, and unbiased manner. Second, as a matter of substance, the 
information must be accurate, reliable, and unbiased. To the extent 
possible, and consistent with confidentiality protections, HUD will 
identify the source of disseminated information so that the public can 
assess whether the information is objective. The utility of information 
refers to its usefulness to its intended users, including the public. 
Integrity refers to the security of information (i.e., the protection 
of information from unauthorized access or revision). Security of 
information helps ensure that the information is not compromised 
through corruption or falsification.
    HUD Assistant Secretaries shall ensure that all information they 
disseminate to the public meets the basic quality standard. In that 
regard, they are responsible for ensuring that the pre-dissemination 
review and clearance process is performed and documented at a level 
appropriate for the type of information disseminated and in accordance 
with existing HUD clearance and approval policies and procedures. They 
will consider the costs and benefits of using a higher quality standard 
or a more extensive review process in deciding the appropriate level of 
quality for a given type of information, and the resulting appropriate 
level of review and documentation. Additionally, when developing 
information, HUD offices will treat information quality as integral to 
every step of information development, including creation, collection, 
maintenance, and dissemination. This will enable the agency to 
substantiate the quality of the information it has disseminated through 
documentation or other means appropriate to the information.
    With respect to draft information collection packages to be used to 
generate information products subject to these guidelines, HUD 
Assistant Secretaries shall ensure that such draft information 
collection packages submitted for OMB approval result in the 
information being collected, maintained, and used in a manner that is 
consistent with these and OMB's guidelines.
C. Disseminating Information That Establishes Program Procedures or 
Processing Requirements
    1. Existing procedures and processing requirements. The policies 
and procedures outlined below are existing HUD policies and procedures 
and were designed to ensure the quality of information HUD disseminates 
to the public. To the extent they apply to disseminated information as 
defined previously in these guidelines, HUD will assure they meet the 
standards set forth in these and OMB guidelines.

[[Page 69648]]

    HUD Directives Handbook, 000.2 REV-2, issued April 18, 2001, 
entitled ``HUD Directives System'' outlines the requirements for 
issuing information that establishes program procedures or processing 
requirements, whether binding on HUD staff or HUD program participants. 
It is HUD's policy that HUD Directives must go through Departmental 
clearance, whether issued as handbooks, direct notices, mortgagee 
letters, or memoranda, and whether issued in paper or electronic format 
or posted on HUD's website. HUD Directives advise staff and/or program 
participants about how to carry out their respective responsibilities 
under HUD programs or advise potential program participants how to 
participate in HUD programs. Directives supplement statutes, 
regulations, and other Federal Register documents. Consistent with HUD 
policies, HUD Directives will not be used to issue new or revised 
policy or binding requirements unless there is statutory or regulatory 
authority to do so. At a minimum, all handbooks, supplements, notices, 
special directives, and letters clarifying or elaborating on existing 
procedures or policy and used to issue guidance, are subject to the 
procedures in the Directives Handbook. HUD Assistant Secretaries are 
responsible for ensuring compliance with the Directives Handbook. In 
determining the applicability of, and the requirement for a pre-
dissemination review, HUD Assistant Secretaries must ensure that, at a 
minimum, HUD Directives originating in their offices are cleared in 
accordance with HUD existing Directives policy. Changes to the 
Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) mortgage-backed 
securities guide and the multiclass guides shall continue to be issued 
in accordance with its program procedures.
    Furthermore, Chapter 7 of HUD Handbook 2400.1 (revision currently 
in Departmental clearance) establishes policy for the use of electronic 
mail (e-mail), limiting its use to (1) brief, informal communications 
(e.g., an exchange of ideas related to government businesses); (2) 
coordination (e.g., meetings); and, (3) in place of the telephone and 
interoffice mail. The General Counsel affirmed this policy in a 
memorandum dated May 20, 2002, noting that e-mail should not be used to 
clear a document(s) that evidences policies, decisions, procedures, 
operations, or other activities of the government. Assistant 
Secretaries must ensure compliance with this policy.
    Questions about whether particular issuances constitute a HUD 
Directive should be referred to the Office of Administration, which 
oversees the Departmental clearance of HUD Directives.
    The Office of Administration is responsible for ensuring that the 
pre-dissemination review and clearance process outlined above, and in 
HUD Handbook 000.2 REV-2, is conducted in accordance with the standards 
contained in the Handbook and adequately documented.
    2. New Procedures and Processing Requirements. Dissemination of 
information, via automated systems and system user guides and manuals, 
that creates new procedures or processing requirements or expands upon 
existing procedures and requirements, is covered by existing HUD policy 
governing issuances that establish program procedures and processing 
requirements (see HUD Directives Handbook 000.2 REV 2). As such, these 
issuances must be approved through the existing clearance and approval 
processes noted in the guidelines in item ``1'' immediately above.
D. Disseminating Information That Establishes New HUD Policy or Revises 
HUD Policy
    The policies and procedures outlined in the following paragraph are 
existing HUD policies and procedures and were designed to ensure the 
quality of information HUD disseminates to the public. To the extent 
they apply to disseminated information as defined previously in these 
guidelines, HUD will assure they meet the standards set forth in these 
and OMB guidelines. Changes to the Ginnie Mae mortgage-backed 
securities guide and the multiclass guides shall continue to be issued 
in accordance with its program procedures.
    The Administrative Procedure Act and HUD's Regulations in 24 CFR 
part 10 require the Department to publish in the Federal Register 
substantive rules and statements of policy and interpretations of 
general applicability. The Federal Register is used to announce new or 
revised policy or binding and enforceable requirements. The Office of 
General Counsel has responsibility for Departmental pre-dissemination 
review and clearance procedures for Federal Register publications. 
Federal Register notices provide the necessary information and 
instructions to the public for providing comments.
E. Disseminating Information via Press Conferences, Press-Related 
Events, Editorials, Columns, Letters to the Editor, Speeches, 
Publications, Newsletters, Reports, Brochures, Videos, the Daily HUD 
Focus Message, Public Service Announcements and Advertisements, and 
News Media Contact
    1. Existing procedures and processing requirements. The policies 
and procedures outlined in the following paragraph are existing HUD 
policies and procedures designed to ensure the quality of information 
HUD disseminates to the public. To the extent they apply to 
disseminated information as defined previously in this guidance, HUD 
will assure they meet the standards set forth in these and OMB 
guidelines.
    All such information is approved by and/or coordinated with the 
Headquarters' Office of Public Affairs. The ``Public Affairs 
Protocol,'' as well as the Office's procedures (both are available on 
HUD's intranet at the Public Affairs Web page) provides information 
regarding clearance of the above-mentioned issuances.
    With respect to OIG Audit Reports, the OIG has standards and review 
procedures in place that assure that information disseminated to the 
public is reviewed for objectivity, utility, integrity, the use of 
sound statistical methods, and transparency of methods, sources, 
assumptions, and outcomes. In that regard, the OIG adheres to the 
Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the 
United States (the Yellow Book), and the OIG Audit Operations Manual 
(IG Manual). The Yellow Book prescribes generally accepted government 
auditing standards, including auditee review and comment on draft 
findings and recommendations. The IG Manual establishes the policies 
and procedures to be followed by the OIG, including the supervisory 
review of audit working papers and reports and the independent 
referencing of all audit reports prior to issuance. Headquarters staff 
also reviews audit reports prior to issuance. Further, the OIG 
undergoes both management and peer reviews on a recurring basis.
    2. New procedures and processing requirements. All working papers 
disseminated or otherwise made available to the public (e.g., posted on 
HUD's public web site) are to carry a clear legend indicating that the 
``papers represent the opinions of the author only and are not the 
agency's official views.''

[[Page 69649]]

F. Disseminating Information via HUD's Public Web Site
    As previously noted, these guidelines apply to information 
disseminated to the public by HUD from a web page, but they do not 
apply to hyperlinks from the HUD website to information that others 
disseminate.
    1. Existing procedures and processing requirements. The policies 
and procedures outlined in the paragraph below are existing HUD 
policies and procedures designed to ensure the quality of information 
HUD disseminates to the public. To the extent that they apply to 
disseminated information as defined previously in this guidance, HUD 
will assure they meet the standards set forth in these and OMB 
guidelines.
    HUD's existing web procedures dated April 30, 1998, and revised 
September 2, 2001, are available to the public at http://www.hud.gov/library/bookshelf15/policies/wwwpol.cfm. They establish clear 
responsibility at the Assistant Secretary and Regional Director level 
for developing and maintaining relevant program information, processes, 
and local office materials on HUD's Web sites. These policies also 
require web managers to ensure that materials are properly approved 
prior to posting, including program policies and procedures.
    2. New procedures and processing requirements. HUD is currently 
formalizing its web posting procedures (including requirements on the 
types of information that may be posted, publication standards, design 
guidelines, and accessibility guidelines). These new procedures will be 
made available to the public.
    Meanwhile, it is HUD's policy that the Office of Public Affairs 
review and provide pre-dissemination approval of all website content of 
a political or policy nature. It is the responsibility of the 
appropriate Assistant Secretary or Regional Director to ensure that 
this review and approval occurs. Additionally, all working papers 
posted on HUD's public website are to carry a clear legend indicating 
that the ``papers represent the opinions of the author only and are not 
the agency's official views.''
    Text which establishes program procedures, processing requirements, 
new or revised policy, or binding and enforceable requirements will not 
be posted to the web without first being approved through the 
established clearance and approval processes (see ``Disseminating 
Information that Establishes Program Procedures or Processing 
Requirements'' and ``Disseminating Information that Establishes New HUD 
Policy or Revises HUD Policy''). The procedures for removing web 
postings that are not properly approved will be included in HUD's 
formal web posting procedures. HUD Assistant Secretaries may request 
that the responsible posting office remove any Web site content that 
has not been approved through established clearance and approval 
processes.
    Each Assistant Secretary and Regional Director is responsible for 
ensuring adherence to these policies. Each must submit written 
certification that the content of HUD's public website and kiosks for 
which his/her organization is responsible is both current and accurate. 
These certifications must be made to the Deputy Secretary on a 
quarterly basis.
G. Protecting the Integrity of Information via HUD Automated Systems
    The policies and procedures outlined in this section are existing 
HUD policies and procedures designed to ensure the quality of 
information HUD disseminates to the public. To the extent they apply to 
disseminated information as previously defined in these guidelines, HUD 
will assure they meet the standards set forth in these and OMB 
guidelines.
    HUD's information integrity standards ensure that appropriate 
safeguards are in place to prevent unauthorized access or revision, 
thus helping to ensure that the information is not compromised through 
corruption or falsification. HUD's existing information integrity 
standards are set forth in the following issuances:
    1. National Security Information (HUD Handbook 1750.1 Rev-4, CHG-3) 
dated April 18, 1991. This Handbook identifies methods for ensuring 
that information disseminated by or on behalf of HUD remains protected. 
It is available via HUD's Web site at http://www.hudclips.org/subscriber/cgi/legis.cgi?legis.
    2. Common Data Element Cleanup Method, A Guidebook Version 1.1 
(currently being revised). This Guidebook provides the concepts, step-
by-step processes, examples of application, and worksheet forms to 
guide and assist with a data element cleanup process. It also assists 
in the information quality management of internal HUD systems and data, 
including information utility, objectivity, and integrity.
    3. Enterprise Security Program Plan. The Plan establishes the 
framework for developing and implementing a HUD-wide Enterprise 
Security Program. The Plan outlines the requirements for complying with 
federal guidelines to protect HUD's critical infrastructure and 
implementing the HUD Remediation Plan.
    4. The Information Systems Security Program Policy. The Policy 
ensures that adequate security is provided for the information 
collected, processed, transmitted, stored, or disseminated in HUD's 
general support systems and major applications. It does this by 
requiring each HUD office and program area to implement policies, 
standards, and procedures consistent with government-wide policies, 
standards, and procedures issued by OMB, the Department of Commerce, 
the General Services Administration, and the Office of Personnel 
Management.
H. Process for Ensuring Quality of Information at a Level Higher Than 
the Basic Standard
    The OMB guidelines for implementing Section 515 recognize that some 
government information may need to meet higher quality standards than 
the basic standard. The more important the information, the higher the 
quality standards to which it should be held. In particular, the OMB 
guidelines require ``influential scientific, financial, or statistical 
information'' to meet a high standard of quality. The OMB definition of 
``influential'' is set forth in Section VII, Paragraph E of these 
guidelines.
    HUD is committed to the standards stated in OMB's information 
quality guidelines, specifically with respect to applying especially 
rigorous robustness checks to analytic results and to document the 
checks that were undertaken. At this time, HUD is not prepared to 
identify the kinds of original and supporting data to be subject to the 
reproducibility standard. Nonetheless, HUD shall assure reproducibility 
for those kinds of original and supporting data according to commonly 
accepted scientific, financial, or statistical standards. Additionally, 
the standards of these and OMB guidelines apply not only to information 
that HUD generates, but also to information that other parties provide 
to HUD, if the other parties seek to have the Department rely upon or 
disseminate this information or the Department decides to do so.
    1. New Procedures and Processing Requirements for Influential 
Information. The responsibility for determining what constitutes 
influential information to be disseminated, and hence the quality 
standards to which the information should be held rests with each HUD 
Assistant Secretary. Each HUD Assistant Secretary is

[[Page 69650]]

currently developing and documenting, and will make available upon 
written request, specific review and approval procedures for 
information he/she determines will have or does have a clear and 
substantial impact on important public policies or important private 
sector decisions. These procedures will include references to the types 
of issuances covered, as well as examples of such issuances. These 
procedures may include independent peer reviews (internal and/or 
external) of the information to ensure statistical and/or analytical 
integrity. Finally, each HUD Assistant Secretary is responsible for 
ensuring that this type of information is reviewed and approved, prior 
to dissemination, according to the written procedures he/she has 
established, and that the review and approval of each issuance is 
adequately documented. The above-mentioned responsibilities and 
authorities may not be delegated.
    Any issuance of information that has not been subjected to the 
procedures identified in the previous paragraph, but which, in the view 
of the responsible HUD Assistant Secretary, requires a higher quality 
standard than outlined under the procedures for ensuring quality of 
information at the basic standard, must be cleared through Departmental 
clearance.
I. Administrative Correction Mechanisms
    To facilitate review by affected persons, this section establishes 
administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and obtain, 
where appropriate, timely correction of information maintained and 
disseminated by HUD. These administrative mechanisms have been designed 
to be flexible, appropriate to the nature and timeliness of the 
disseminated information, and incorporated into HUD's existing 
information resources management and administrative practices.
    An affected person (see Section VII, Paragraph G under 
``Definitions and Standards'') may request the timely correction of 
information disseminated by HUD. This includes persons who are seeking 
to address information about themselves as well as persons who use 
information.
    In determining whether to respond to a complaint, the Department 
will consider whether the information or the request for correction is 
``stale.'' If HUD did not disseminate this information recently (i.e., 
within one year of the information correction request), or it does not 
have a continuing impact on HUD projects or policy decisions or on 
important private sector decisions, the Department may regard the 
information as ``stale'' for purposes of responding to a correction 
request, unless the complainant demonstrates that the information has 
an impact on the affected person.
    The correction process is designed to address the genuine and valid 
needs of HUD and its constituents without disrupting agency operations. 
HUD, in making a determination of whether or not to correct 
information, may reject claims made in bad faith or without 
justification. HUD will explain decisions to deny or limit corrective 
actions in annual reports to OMB on complaints regarding agency 
compliance with these guidelines.
    Documents and information disseminated, but not sponsored, by HUD 
are not covered by these guidelines. In disseminating such materials, 
HUD assumes no responsibility for their accuracy and is simply ensuring 
that the public has quicker and easier access to such materials.
    Rulemakings and Other Public Comment Procedures--HUD will consider 
requests for correction of a study, analysis or other information prior 
to the final agency action or information product if: (1) HUD 
determines that its response would not unduly delay final issuance of 
the HUD action or information product, and (2) the complainant shows a 
reasonable likelihood of suffering actual harm from HUD's dissemination 
if HUD does not resolve the complaint prior to the final agency action 
or information product.
    With respect to the correction of OIG information, as used below: 
``Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration'' shall be 
understood to mean the Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of 
Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Room 8256, 
Washington, DC 20410; the ``Assistant Secretary of the office that 
originated the subject information,'' the ``responsible Assistant 
Secretary'' and/or the ``Assistant Secretary'' shall be understood to 
mean the Assistant Inspector General for Audit; and the ``Assistant 
Secretary for Administration'' shall be understood to mean the Deputy 
Inspector General.
J. Process for Requesting Correction to Disseminated Information
    1. Submitting Requests. If an affected person believes that 
disseminated information does not comply with the standards set forth 
in these guidelines, he/she may submit a written request for correction 
to the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration which will 
assign the request to the Assistant Secretary of the office that 
disseminated the subject information. The request may be submitted by 
letter or by e-mail through HUD's website and should contain the 
following items:
    a. A statement that a request for correction of information is 
submitted under HUD's Information Quality Guidelines;
    b. The complainant's name, mailing address, e-mail address, 
telephone number, facsimile (fax) number, and organizational 
affiliation, if any. HUD will not respond to anonymous requests;
    c. A clear identification of the information dissemination source 
(e.g., report, data set, or other document) and the information 
asserted to be incorrect;
    d. A description of how the information in question affects the 
complainant or the affected person(s) for whom the correction request 
is being submitted (e.g., how an alleged error causes harm, and/or how 
the correction will be of benefit or use);
    e. A description of the specific information that the complainant 
wants the Department to correct. Where possible, the request should 
include such identifying characteristics as the name of the HUD office 
that originated the data, title, date, etc.;
    f. A description of why the complainant believes the information in 
question is inconsistent with the Department's or OMB's information 
quality guidelines (i.e., how the information fails to meet standards 
of integrity, utility, and/or objectivity);
    g. Specific recommendations for what corrections HUD should make to 
the information in question and reasons for believing that these 
recommended corrections would make the information consistent with the 
Department's information quality guidelines; and,
    h. Documentary evidence believed to be relevant to the request 
(e.g., comparable data or research results on the same topic).
    Written requests sent via letter should be addressed to: U.S. 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Assistant Secretary for 
Administration, Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410.
    HUD currently is evaluating both new and existing e-mail response 
software to further facilitate implementing these final procedures for 
responding to information correction requests received via HUD's web 
mail system. HUD's internal operating procedures and associated 
responsibilities/authorities for appropriately responding to and 
tracking information correction requests will be included in HUD's 
formal web

[[Page 69651]]

posting procedures. These procedures will be available to the public.
    2. Rejecting Requests. Once the responsible Assistant Secretary 
receives a request for correction of information, he/she will review 
the request to determine if it is valid using the following guidelines:
    a. Did HUD (as opposed to some other person or organization) 
actually disseminate the information HUD is being asked to correct?
    b. Is the complainant affected by the information in question or is 
the person(s) for whom the correction request is being submitted 
affected by the information in question?
    c. Did HUD disseminate this information recently (i.e., within one 
year of the request), or does the information have a continuing impact 
on HUD projects or policy decisions, on important private sector 
decisions, or on affected persons?
    d. With respect to information in a final rule, final environmental 
impact statement, or other final document where there was an 
opportunity for public comment or participation, could interested 
persons have requested the correction of the information in question at 
the proposed stage and, if so, has the complainant shown a reasonable 
likelihood of an affected person suffering actual harm from HUD's 
dissemination if HUD does not resolve the complaint prior to the final 
agency action or information product?
    e. Is the information in question exempt from these Guidelines?
    f. Is the request frivolous or not germane to the substance of the 
information in question?
    g. Has HUD responded previously to a request that is the same or 
substantively very similar?
    If the responsible Assistant Secretary determines that the answer 
to Question a, b, c, or d is ``no'' or that the answer to Question e, 
f, or g is ``yes,'' then HUD will reject the request. If the request is 
rejected, the responsible Assistant Secretary will respond in writing 
within 60 calendar days of receiving the request. Written responses may 
be sent via letter, e-mail or facsimile (fax).
    3. Processing Requests. If a request is not rejected, the 
responsible Assistant Secretary will review the request to determine if 
it contains sufficient information to address items ``a'' through ``h'' 
above under ``Submitting Request.'' If it does not, he/she will either 
advise the requester of the additional information required or 
otherwise state why the request is insufficient. The responsible 
Assistant Secretary will respond to a request within 60 calendar days 
from the date of receipt. However, if the request requires more than 60 
calendar days to respond, the responsible Assistant Secretary will 
inform the complainant that more time is required, and indicate the 
reason why and an estimated decision date. All responses will be in 
writing and may be done via letter, e-mail or facsimile (fax). 
Circumstances warranting an extension may include, but are not limited 
to, a need to: review many records identified in a single request; 
consult with another federal agency having a substantial interest in 
the request; or, consult with two or more HUD offices having a 
substantial interest in the request.
    The responsible Assistant Secretary will coordinate with HUD 
officials as appropriate to determine whether or not to correct 
information. HUD will correct information and disseminate the corrected 
information only to the degree and in the manner that the responsible 
Assistant Secretary, in consultation with HUD officials as he/she deems 
appropriate, concludes is appropriate for the nature and timeliness of 
the information involved. Each Assistant Secretary will maintain a 
record of all information dissemination correction requests and 
decisions for a period of at least five years. Each Assistant Secretary 
will aggregate the data for his/her area annually, and provide the 
aggregated data to the Assistant Secretary for Administration, who is 
responsible for preparing HUD's annual report to OMB regarding requests 
for correcting information (see ``Submitting Annual Reports to OMB''). 
The report prepared by the Assistant Secretary should differentiate 
between requests for correction to website information and corrections 
requested to other information disseminated under the jurisdiction of 
the Assistant Secretary.
    4. Appealing Corrective Decisions. If the affected person 
requesting a correction does not agree with HUD's decision (including 
the corrective action, if any), the person may petition for 
reconsideration. The written request for reconsideration must be 
submitted within 60 calendar days of the date of the decision letter. 
Generally, the Assistant Secretary for Administration (or his/her 
designee), in consultation with such other HUD Assistant Secretaries as 
appropriate, and the office from which the information was 
disseminated, will review HUD's decision and basis thereof and respond 
to requests for appeal within 60 calendar days of the date of receiving 
the petition for reconsideration. Additionally, if the Assistant 
Secretary for Administration believes that another agency(ies) may have 
an interest in the resolution of an appeal, he/she should consult with 
those other agencies about their possible interest in the matter. If 
the request requires more than 60 calendar days to resolve, the 
Assistant Secretary for Administration will inform the complainant that 
more time is required, indicating the reason why and an estimated 
decision date. The Assistant Secretary for Administration will notify 
the Assistant Secretary and the complainant of the final decision and 
what corrective action, if any, the agency will take. Decisions on 
petitions for reconsideration are final and further petitions or 
appeals will be disregarded.
    Appeals for reconsideration must be in writing. The envelope and 
the reconsideration request both should be clearly marked ``Information 
Correction Reconsideration Request'' and addressed to: U.S. Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, Assistant Secretary for 
Administration, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410.
K. Submitting Annual Reports to OMB
    HUD will submit annual reports to the Director of OMB on the number 
and nature of complaints received concerning agency compliance with 
these guidelines beginning January 1, 2004. Reports, prepared by the 
Assistant Secretary for Administration, will contain complaint and 
correction information dealt with during each fiscal year and will be 
submitted no later than January 1 of the following year. The report is 
to contain both quantitative and qualitative information about the 
complaints received, the nature of the complaints, and the resolution 
of those complaints. The report is to include an explanation of agency 
decisions to deny or limit corrective action. HUD will develop a 
uniform process for tracking, collecting, and reporting on the 
disposition of information correction requests.
    The first report will cover Fiscal Year 2003 and be submitted to 
OMB by January 1, 2004.

    Dated: November 8, 2002.
Alphonso Jackson,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 02-29195 Filed 11-13-02; 1:53 pm]
BILLING CODE 4210-01-P