Contact TheIPD.US




Regulatory Actions
View Public Comments
Submit Comments

NMFS ITA for Gulf of Mexico
NMFS Acoustic Guidelines
NMFS IHA for Scripps

Science
  Best Available Science on Acoustic Effects on Marine Mammals
  Seismic vs. Sonar
  Physical Effects
 Behavioral Effects
  Models
  Sound Propagation
  Mitigation
 Extrapolation From Terrestrial Mammal Acoustic Effects to Marine Mammals
  Cumulative and Synergistic Effects
 Indirect Effects

  NMFS
 MMS
 MMC
 NAS
  US Navy
 Sperm Whale Seismic Study
 ICES
 Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Institute
 NRDC
 ACCOBAMS
 The Acoustic Ecology Institute
 ASCOBANS
 Fisheries and Oceans Canada
 Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited

Library
  Statutes
 Regulations
 Relevant NMFS Permits
 Major Studies and Reports

Comment on IPD
  Potential Research Projects
  Research Underway
  Structure of the IPD

CRE Interventions
  Agency Administrative Actions
  Rulemaking
  Litigation



















 

Soundings Archive

Happy Birthday Wishes to the Data Quality Act
December 21, 2010 marks the tenth anniversary of the Data Quality Act (DQA), also known as the Information Quality Act, 44 U.S.C 3516, note.

The DQA has deep roots developed over nearly a half-century as the result of a seed planted during the Johnson Administration which germinated in the Nixon Administration, was watered by the Carter Administration and whose product was harvested by the Reagan Administration, made available to the public in the Bush I Administration and subsequently enhanced by the Clinton Administration and promoted by the Bush II and Obama Administrations. See here and here.

The DQA was made possible by two crucial precursor actions: 1) establishment of a centralized regulatory review process; and 2) a statutory grant of authority to the Office of Management and Budget to manage the centralized regulatory review process.

The DQA recognizes the emergence of the internet as the primary means for federal information disseminations including publication of reports and other documents. Even though these publications are not the result of a rulemaking process they often have a material impact on persons and organizations; that is to say the reports constitute regulation by information and prior to the passage of the DQA they were not reviewable by the courts -- an issue currently in play.

To counter agency use of the internet as a backdoor Federal Register the DQA requires data in federal reports and regulations to be reproducible and unbiased , prohibits the introduction of policy into scientific risk assessments and allows any affected member of the public to seek correction of data disseminated by federal agencies.

The alleged shortcoming of the DQA was that it was born out of wedlock; namely that it was not subject to Congressional hearings. In that the DQA was included in an omnibus spending bill, as it the case with every element in such bills, it was not subject to hearings.

However, the language that was included as the DQA in the omnibus spending bill was subject to extensive hearings as part of the appropriation process going back to as early as June , 1998 -- please click here to see.

OMB continued to reject numerous Congressional requests to issue the DQA regulations mandated by the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act. Finally the Congress passed the DQA legislation after receiving a letter from OMB on April 18, 2000 which denied all their requests to issue DQA regulations.

Lastly, concerns that the DQA would lead to onerous demands on federal agencies proved to be unfounded.

For a chronological history of the DQA see the website DataQualityAct.US which is also accessible through the CRE website.

See "A Decade of the Data Quality Act".

 
Copyright 2005 The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness.
All rights reserved.