II.1 Introduction

Since the late 1950s, and developing over a period of years, various groups have called for and obtained expanded access to research data for purposes of (1) assuring the reliability and quality of information generated in connection with products affecting public safety; (2) facilitating comparison of data by different reviewers; and (3) reducing manpower burdens required for data collection. The end result of these data availability reforms were improved systems for collection and management of data. Many of these practices have now been put into federal law or regulation or are used by the federal government in guidances addressing "good current practices."

With each initial call for broader data availability, however, vocal opposition was raised by some who claimed that the new openness would produce harmful, if unintended results. Chief among the perceived dangers cited were:

• invasion of personal and investigator privacy;
• interference with proprietary information;
• disincentive to develop new ideas and pursue new research; and
• increased cost of research and/or production.

All of these objections to data access ultimately were overcome, however, through development of more efficient data handling systems, through careful regulation and strategic applications that safeguarded privacy and proprietary rights, and through similar practices that fostered continued research and new ideas. Industries have adjusted to new regulatory requirements for disclosure of data, and yet there has been no deceleration in patent submissions, research and development, process improvement, or production.

FOIA itself, for example, has not interfered with the effectiveness, efficiency, or level of research and development of new approaches to societal needs. Notwithstanding the reluctance with which FOIA was greeted in some circles, science-based agencies such as NASA and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have continued and even accelerated their advances in the post-FOIA world.

History therefore demonstrates that broadening data access does not create insurmountable problems. CRE believes that OMB is on the right track in its proposed revisions to Circular A-110. The good faith objections that opponents of the proposed new data access policy raise, while challenging, therefore should not derail the current process for achieving public data access.

Part Two of these comments is devoted to allaying some of the principal concerns that have appeared in the media and elsewhere regarding the new data access legislation and OMB's proposed revisions to Circular A-110.