Page 1
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
Before the
CORRECTED
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the matter of
Implementation of Guidelines for Ensuring and
Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and
Integrity of Information Pursuant to Section 515 of
Public Law No. 105-554
)
)
)
)
)
)
INFORMATION QUALITY GUIDELINES
Adopted: October 4, 2002
Released: October 8, 2002
By the Commission:
1.
By this Notice, the Federal Communications Commission (“Commission”) publishes in
Appendix A of this document its Information Quality Guidelines as required by Office of Management
and Budget (“OMB”) guidelines implementing section 515(a) of the Treasury and Government
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Pub. L. No. 106-554, § 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-153 (2000),
reprinted at 44 U.S.C.A. § 3516 Historical and Statutory Notes (“Data Quality Act”).
I. BACKGROUND
2.
The Data Quality Act requires the development of government-wide standards on the
quality of governmental information disseminated to the public. It directs the Director of OMB to issue
guidelines under the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”), 44 U.S.C. §§3504(d)(1) and 3516, providing
guidance to Federal agencies “for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity
of information (including statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies in fulfillment of the
provisions of [the PRA].” The Data Quality Act states that OMB guidelines shall apply to sharing by
agencies of and access to information disseminated by agencies (section 515(b)(1)); requires agencies to
issue their own guidelines (section 515(b)(2)(A)); and requires agencies to establish administrative
mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information maintained and
disseminated by an agency that does not comply with OMB guidelines (section 515(b)(2)(B)). Finally,
the statute requires periodic reports by agencies to OMB concerning the number of complaints filed and
how the complaints were handled (section 515(b)(2)(C)).
3.
OMB’s guidelines implementing the Data Quality Act
1
required all federal agencies to
publish in the Federal Register by May 1, 2002 a notice of the availability of the agency’s draft
1
Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information
Disseminated by Federal Agencies, 66 FR 49718 (Sept. 28, 2001) (interim final guidelines), and 67 FR 369 (Jan. 3,
2002) (final guidelines), corrected, 67 FR 5365 (Feb. 5, 2002), reprinted correcting errors, 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22,
2002) (collectively referred to as “OMB Guidelines”).
Page 2
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
2
information quality guidelines.
2
After considering public comment, agencies were required to provide
OMB with appropriately revised draft guidelines by August 1, 2002.
3
Finally, by October 1, 2002,
agencies must publish in the Federal Register a notice that the agency’s guidelines are available on the
Internet.
4
4.
The Commission published a notice of its proposed guidelines
5
and posted the proposed
guidelines on its website.
6
We received comments from OMB,
7
the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness,
Citizens for Sensible Safeguards, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
8
These latter three comments
were exact duplicates or customized versions of letters sent to all federal agencies, and for the most part
were already reflected in existing Commission practice, were not applicable to the Commission’s mission,
or suggested actions that only OMB has the authority to undertake. Nevertheless, in response to the
comments, we made some revisions to the draft guidelines and submitted them to OMB, who provided
further minor suggested changes. In total, eleven changes were made to the guidelines.
II. SUMMARY OF THE GUIDELINES
5.
The Commission is dedicated to ensuring that all data it disseminates reflect a level of
quality commensurate with the nature of the information. Further, the Commission seeks to disseminate
all its data as broadly and promptly as possible. This commitment applies to all data and information
disseminated by the Commission, whether or not they are specifically covered by these guidelines. Since
public comment plays an important role in ensuring data quality, the Commission provides numerous
opportunities and ways for the public to comment on and interact with the Commission regarding its data
and information. In addition to the standards established in these guidelines, these opportunities for
interaction are described throughout the Commission’s Internet site at http://www.fcc.gov.
6.
Our guidelines substantially follow the provisions of the OMB Guidelines, which
interpret many key statutory terms, such as “information,” “disseminate,” “quality,” “objectivity,”
“utility,” and “integrity.”
9
We will utilize definitions of these terms for our guidelines that largely
incorporate OMB’s definitions, with some modifications to take into account the Commission’s unique
processes. For example, we provide additional clarifying definitions related to FCC adjudicative
processes but do not elaborate on terms such as “influential.”
2
See OMB Guidelines, 67 FR at 8259, date extended 67 FR 9797 (Mar. 4, 2002).
3
See OMB Guidelines, 67 FR at 40755, date extended 67 FR at 21779 (June 13, 2002).
4
See id.
5
67 FR at 21682 (May 1, 2002).
6
http://www.fcc.gov/omd/dataquality/guidelines050102.html.
7
OMB Comments on Agency Proposed Information Collections, email correspondence from Jefferson B. Hill with
attached memorandum from John D. Graham (June 10, 2002).
8
Letter from 11 signatories comprising Citizens for Sensible Safeguards to Karen Wheeless (June 14, 2002); letter
from Jim Tozzi, Center for Regulatory Effectiveness to Karen Wheeless (June 20, 2002); and email correspondence
from U.S. Chamber of Commerce Regulatory Affairs with attached letter from William Kovacs to Karen Wheeless
(June 28, 2002).
9
See OMB Guidelines, 67 FR at 8453-54, 8459-60.
Page 3
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
3
7.
We also publish procedures for reviewing and substantiating the quality, objectivity,
utility, and integrity of information before it is disseminated by the Commission.
8.
The Data Quality Act and OMB Guidelines require that we establish an administrative
mechanism to allow affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information maintained and
disseminated by the agency that does not comply with the OMB or our guidelines.
10
Our guidelines
provide that initial complaints about matters within the scope of the guidelines are to be filed with a
central office in the Commission that assigns the complaint to the Bureau or Office where the information
dissemination product in question originated. Beginning October 1, 2002, the initial complaint may be
filed
electronically
by
answering
the
series
of
questions
found
at
http://www.fcc.gov/omd/dataquality/complaints. If affected persons are concerned about information
disseminated in the context of a rulemaking proceeding, such concerns should be raised as comments in
the rulemaking process. For concerns raised within the context of rulemaking, the Commission may
choose to provide a response to the concern prior to the completion of rulemaking, if doing so is
appropriate and will not delay the issuance of the final action in the matter. If affected persons have legal
access to and complaints about information outside the scope of these guidelines (as defined in Appendix
A, Section III, Number 2), they should raise such concerns directly with the originator of the information.
9.
The OMB Guidelines require that agencies set time limits for action on complaints.
11
The FCC standard is that the relevant Bureau or Office will respond to initial complaints within 45 days.
As provided in the OMB Guidelines, the Bureau or Office handling the initial complaint will respond in a
manner appropriate to the nature and extent of the complaint.
12
Complaints deemed to be
inconsequential, trivial, or frivolous may require no response at all.
13
We may also reject complaints
made in bad faith or without justification.
14
If a complaint requires corrective action, the appropriate level
of correction
15
shall occur within 60 days of the decision on the complaint. The OMB Guidelines require
that persons who do not agree with the initial decision be afforded the opportunity to seek administrative
review of that decision.
16
Applications for review should be presented to the Commission for
determination within 120 days.
17
Where warranted, the Commission may deny applications for review
without providing reasons.
III. PROCEDURAL MATTERS AND ORDERING PARAGRAPHS
10.
Further Information. For further information, contact Dr. Karen Wheeless, Office of
Managing Director, 445 12
th
Street SW, Room 1-A807, Washington, DC 20554 or by e-mail to
10
See OMB Guidelines, 67 FR at 8458-59.
11
OMB Guidelines, 67 FR at 8459.
12
Id.
13
Id.
14
Id..
15
Id.
16
OMB Guidelines, 67 FR at 8459.
17
See 47 U.S.C. § 405(a).
Page 4
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
4
KWheeles@fcc.gov.
11.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 515(a) of the Treasury and
Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Pub. L. No. 106-554, § 515, 114 Stat. 2763,
2763A-153 (2000), and section 4(i), of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 154(i),
the Information Quality Guidelines are hereby ADOPTED as set forth in the Appendix.
12.
The Information Quality Guidelines shall be effective upon publication of a Notice in the
Federal Register directing interested parties to the Information Quality Guidelines posted on the Internet
on October 8, 2002. See 5 U.S.C. § 553(d).
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Page 5
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
5
APPENDIX A
INFORMATION QUALITY GUIDELINES
I. Purpose and Scope
1.
The Federal Communications Commission (hereafter identified as the Commission) is
publishing these guidelines to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of
specific types of information it disseminates, as required by section 515(a) of the Treasury and
Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Pub. L. No. 106-554, § 515, 114 Stat. 2763,
2763A-153 (2000), reprinted at 44 U.S.C.A. § 3516 Historical and Statutory Notes (“Data Quality Act”).
The Commission is committed to the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information throughout
the information life cycle and will ensure that Paperwork Reduction Act clearance packages will result in
information that will be collected, maintained, and used in a way consistent with the Commission’s and
OMB’s information quality standards.
2.
The purpose of this Appendix is to describe the Commission’s policy and procedures for
reviewing and substantiating the quality of information before it is disseminated to the public, and to
describe the Commission’s administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and obtain,
where appropriate, correction of information disseminated that does not comply with the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Guidelines, Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality,
Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies, 66 FR 49718 (Sept.
28, 2001) (interim guidelines), and 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), or the Commission’s Information Quality
Guidelines, which will be issued October 8, 2002.
3.
These guidelines apply only to information disseminated by the Commission as defined
in these guidelines. Other information distributed by the Commission that is not addressed by these
guidelines may be subject to other Commission policies and correction procedures.
4.
This document provides guidance to Commission staff and informs the public of the
Commission’s policies and procedures. These guidelines are not rules or regulations. They are not
legally enforceable and do not create any legal rights or impose any legally binding requirements or
obligations on the Commission or the public. Nothing in these guidelines affects any otherwise available
judicial review of Commission action. Factors such as imminent threats to public health or homeland
security, or statutory or court-ordered deadlines may cause these guidelines to be temporarily waived.
II. Definitions
For purposes of these guidelines, the following definitions apply:
1
Adjudicative processes refer to the findings and determinations made in the course of
formal and informal adjudications. Because there are well-established procedural safeguards and rights to
address the quality of factual allegations and adjudicatory decisions, and to provide persons with an
opportunity to contest decisions, these guidelines do not generally impose additional procedural
requirements on the Commission during adjudicative proceedings. Examples of adjudicative processes
include:
Page 6
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
6
i.
Formal and informal complaint processes;
ii.
Notices, Opinions, or Orders that assign liability, assess damages, issue fines,
revoke licenses, require forfeitures, seek consent, deny requests and pleadings, or
any other action on the part of a non-Commission party;
iii.
Consent decrees;
iv.
Cease and desist orders;
v.
Pleadings, petitions, filings, requests, motions;
vi.
Items on the Accelerated Docket;
vii.
Cases before or decisions of Administrative law judges;
viii.
Settlement negotiations;
ix.
Decisions and orders related to licensing;
x.
Applications for approval under section 271 of the Communications Act (as
amended); and
xi.
Tariff investigations under sections 204 and 205 of the Communications Act (as
amended).
2.
Affected persons are people who may benefit from or be harmed by the dissemination or
use of a specific information dissemination product.
3.
Complaint refers to a written communication to the Commission that includes enough
information so that the Commission can readily determine the specific information dissemination product
the complaining party believes needs correcting, how the complaining party is affected by the information
dissemination product sought to be corrected, the sections of these guidelines or the OMB Guidelines the
complaining party believes have not been followed, what resolution the complaining party would like,
and how to get in contact with the comment writer.
4.
Data are the basic or underlying elements of information. All information dissemination
products covered by these guidelines are based upon data.
Additionally, covered information
dissemination products may contain analysis of the data and conclusions drawn from this analysis.
5.
Dissemination means Commission-initiated or sponsored distribution of information
intended for the public. Dissemination does not include: distribution limited to government employees or
agency contractors or grantees; intra- or inter-agency use or sharing of government information;
responses to requests for agency records under the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, or other similar laws; correspondence with individuals or persons;
archival records; press releases, in which the factual information has been previously released, and other
non-scientific/non-statistical general, procedural, or organizational information; and public filings,
subpoenas, or adjudicative processes.
6.
Influential, when used in the phrase “influential scientific, financial, or statistical
information,” means that the Commission can reasonably determine that dissemination of the information
will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or important private
sector decisions.
7.
Information means any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts or
data, in any medium or form, including textual, numerical, graphic, cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual
forms. This definition includes information disseminated from an Internet page, but does not include the
provision of hyperlinks to information that others disseminate. This definition does not include opinions
where the presentation makes it clear that what is being offered is someone's opinion rather than an
official view.
Page 7
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
7
8.
Information dissemination product means any book, paper, map, machine-readable
material, audiovisual production, or other documentary material regardless of physical form or
characteristic that is covered by these guidelines and disseminated to the public as an expression of an
official Commission position. This definition can include electronic documents, CD-ROMs, or web
pages.
9.
Integrity refers to the security of information – protection of the information from
unauthorized access or revision to ensure that the information is not compromised
through corruption or
falsification.
10.
Non-scientific/non-statistical general, procedural, or organizational information
includes:
i.
Press releases, in which the factual information has been previously released
ii.
Information flyers and brochures
iii.
Speeches/Remarks/Presentations and their accompanying visual materials
iv.
Listings of:
a. Licensees, registrations, fees paid
b. Phone directories
c. Job openings
xvi.
Transcriptions or minutes (video, audio, or print) of meetings
xvii.
Glossaries
xviii. Links to non-Commission sites
xix.
Standards
xx.
FAQ’s
xxi.
Organizational descriptions
xi.
Organization charts
xii.
Budget submittals
xiii.
Strategic and performance plans
xiv.
Descriptions of laws, regulations, rules that underpin Commission activities
xv.
Biographies
xxii.
Applications, standards, and help products
xxiii. Forms (for printing or on-line filing)
xxiv. Database search results
xxv.
How-to-file materials
xxvi. Fee information
xxvii. Electronic comment filings
11.
Objectivity involves two distinct elements, presentation and substance. In a substantive
sense objectivity means that, where appropriate, data should have full, unbiased, reliable, accurate,
transparent documentation; and error sources affecting data quality should be identified and disclosed to
users. In a scientific, financial, or statistical context, substantive objectivity means that the original and
supporting data shall be generated, and the analytic results shall be developed, using sound statistical and
research methods. Presentational objectivity involves a focus on ensuring unbiased clarity, accuracy,
completeness, and reliability.
12.
Quality is a term encompassing utility, objectivity, and integrity. Therefore, the
guidelines sometimes refer to these four statutory terms, collectively, as "quality."
13.
Reproducibility means that the information is capable of being substantially reproduced,
subject to an acceptable degree of imprecision. For information judged to have more influence or
Page 8
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
8
important impact, the degree of imprecision that is tolerated is reduced. With respect to analytic results,
"capable of being substantially reproduced" means that independent analysis of the original or supporting
data using identical methods would generate similar analytic results, subject to an acceptable degree of
imprecision or error.
14.
Transparency refers to practices of describing the data and methods used in developing
an information dissemination product in a way that it would be possible for an independent reanalysis to
occur by a qualified individual or organization. Transparency does not require that information be
disclosed where disclosure would result in harm to other compelling interests such as privacy, trade
secrets, intellectual property, confidentiality protections, or public safety.
15.
Utility refers to the usefulness of the information to its intended users, including the
public. In assessing the usefulness of information that the Commission disseminates to the public, the
Commission will consider the uses of the information not only from the perspective of the Commission
but also from the perspective of the public.
III. Pre-Dissemination Information Review and Substantiation Process
1.
Beginning October 1, 2002, the following process will apply to information
dissemination products distributed by the Commission, regardless of when the information was first
disseminated, in order to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of the
information. The information dissemination products covered by these guidelines include reports
prepared for Congress or required by legislation, such as the annual reports of services, prices, and
competition in various communication industries.
2.
Information exempt from these guidelines includes information limited to: public filings,
subpoenas, or adjudicative processes; non-scientific/non-statistical general, procedural, or organizational
information; information that is not initiated or sponsored by the Commission; information that expresses
personal opinions rather than formal agency views; information for the primary use of federal employees
(inter- or intra-agency), contractors, or grantees; responses to requests made under the Freedom of
Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, or similar laws; agency
correspondence; archival records; trade secrets, intellectual property, confidential data or information; and
non-routine or emergency public safety information.
3.
For each information dissemination product covered by these guidelines every Bureau or
Office shall conduct a pre-dissemination review using the standards below
:
a.
Quality will be demonstrated through the incorporation of a methodological
section or appendix that describes, at a minimum, the design and methods used during the
creation, collection, and processing of the data; the compilation and/or analysis of the data; and
the pre-release review of the information dissemination product for clarity, completeness,
accuracy, and reliability
.
For covered information dissemination products that contain analytic
results, the FCC is committed to applying rigorous robustness checks and will document what
checks were undertaken as part of the required methodological section or appendix.
b.
Objectivity will be demonstrated by including in the information dissemination
product’s methodology section or appendix a discussion of other scientifically, financially, or
statistically responsible and reliable alternative views and perspectives, if these alternative views
or perspectives are not already noted in other sections of the information dissemination product.
Page 9
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
9
c.
Utility will be demonstrated by the responsible Bureau/Office incorporating into
the methodology section or appendix examples of the use of the information dissemination
product. These examples could include, but are not limited to, listing of the legislation requiring
the information dissemination product or the specific request for the information dissemination
product.
d.
Integrity is demonstrated by the Commission’s routine, day-to-day compliance
across all operations and processes with relevant data protection and security sections of
applicable statues and regulations and therefore does not have to be specifically addressed in
information dissemination products covered by these guidelines.
IV.
The Complaint and Appeals Process
1.
Filing a Complaint.
a.
Except as provided in subsection (b) below, affected persons may seek timely
correction of information dissemination products maintained and distributed by the Commission
that do not comply with the Commission’s or OMB’s guidelines by providing the information
identified at www.fcc.gov/omd/dataquality/complaint, beginning October 1, 2002,. This
information can be submitted electronically by clicking on the link found at the end of the page,
or by printing a copy and mailing it to the Federal Communications Commission, 445 12
th
Street,
SW, Room 1-A807, Washington, DC 20554.
b.
The procedures for filing and resolving complaints set forth in these guidelines,
including the timetables set forth herein, do not apply to information disseminated in rulemaking
proceedings. Affected persons seeking correction of information disseminated in the context of a
rulemaking proceeding should raise concerns about the quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of
the information in accordance with the procedures for public comment in the rulemaking process
rather than the complaint process set forth in these guidelines. Because there are well-established
procedural safeguards and rights to address the quality of factual allegations as part of the
rulemaking process, and to provide persons with an opportunity to contest decisions, these
guidelines do not impose any additional requirements on the Commission during rulemaking
proceedings and do not provide parties to such rulemaking proceedings any additional rights of
challenge or appeal. Commenters’s concerns will be addressed, as appropriate, in the context of
decisions in those proceedings.
2.
Complaint Resolution.
a.
A determination will be made within 45 days of receipt of the complaint on
whether correction is warranted.
b.
The decision on appropriate corrective action will be based upon the nature and
timeliness of the information dissemination product involved and such factors as the significance
of the correction on the use of the information dissemination product and the magnitude of the
correction. Inconsequential, trivial, or frivolous complaints may require no response at all. If
corrective action is warranted, the correction will occur within 60 days of this notification to the
complaining party.
Page 10
Federal Communications Commission
FCC 02-277
10
c.
If a correction is warranted, the appropriate Bureau or Office handling the
complaint will respond to the complaint in a manner appropriate to the nature and extent of the
complaint. Examples of appropriate responses include personal contacts via letter or telephone,
form letters, errata notices, press releases, or mass mailings that correct a widely disseminated
error or address a frequently raised complaint.
3.
Right to Appeal.
If the person who requested correction does not agree with the initial decision (including
corrective action, if any), the person may file an application for review by the Commission within 30
days of the date of the notification of action on the complaint or the corrective action. Applications for
review must be submitted in writing to the Federal Communications Commission, Office of Managing
Director/Data Quality Appeal, 445 12
th
Street SW, Washington, DC 20554. E-mail copies of the written
appeal may be sent, beginning October 1, 2002, to DataQualityAppeal@fcc.gov.
a.
The written appeal must include a copy of the original complaint and the
response thereto, and an explanation of how the initial resolution of the complaint or the
corrective action was contrary to the Commission’s or OMB’s information quality guidelines.
b. Applications for review will be resolved within 120 days. The Commission, in
appropriate cases, may deny an application for review without providing reasons.
V.
Reporting Requirements
1.
On an annual fiscal-year basis, the Commission shall submit a report to the Director of
OMB providing information (both quantitative and qualitative, where appropriate) on the number and
nature of complaints received regarding compliance with OMB guidelines, and how such complaints were
resolved.
2.
The report shall be submitted no later than January 1 of each following year.
3.
The first report shall be submitted by January 1, 2004.
VI.
Effective Dates
1.
Pre-dissemination review under section III, above, shall apply to information
dissemination products that the Commission disseminates on or after October 1, 2002, regardless of
when the information was first disseminated.
2.
The administrative mechanisms noted in section IV shall apply only to information
dissemination products that the Commission disseminates on or after October 1, 2002.