During the March 21st National Academy of Sciences (NAS)Workshop on Ensuring the Quality of Data Disseminated by the Federal Government," Executive Branch officials expressed their opinion that denials of agency petitions under the Data Quality Act will be judicially reviewable. While the views expressed do not necessarily represent those of their Departments, they expressed a viewpoint long held by CRE and other stakeholders.

The officials went on to note, however, that there may be a difference between what constitutes an "affected person" who may bring a Data Quality petition and a litigant who would have standing to bring a court challenge. It was also noted that agencies will certainly rely upon the administrative record to defend their actions in denying an appeal during the informal adjudication phase so that a court does not later find these actions to be arbitrary and capricious.

Other points raised included:

• It was noted that under OMB's Data Quality guidelines, it would be possible for an affected party to appeal an agency's decision on a Data Quality petition if that person is dissatisfied with the quality of the relief provided. Thus, an appeal may be made upon the substance of the agency's decision, not just on procedures related to the Data Quality petition process. Thus, the OMB guidelines in interpreting the Data Quality Act appear to have broadened the basis for appeal.
• It was suggested that there should be a time limit for filing an appeal of an agency's initial decision on a Data Quality period.
• Should an agency be required to correct information which no longer makes any difference (e.g. yesterday's weather forecast)?
• What if an agency agrees with a petition regarding a Data Quality problem but does not have the resources to remedy the situation (e.g. fixing a complex model)?

• Such situation could rob the agency of its ability to set its own agenda.
• But at the same time, how can an agency leave such data in the public domain which it knows to be incorrect? Perhaps, at a minimum, the agency should post notice of the problem.
• Should agencies provide notice to the public when certain information is being challenged under the Data Quality Act? Would notice to the public of a Data Quality Act challenge to certain information ultimately undermine confidence in the data, even if the Data Quality petition is turned down?
• Should Data Quality Act requests pertaining to the same data be dealt with together? Obviously, such approach would be good in terms of efficiency, but it could also lead to an adversarial process among opposing petitioners.