Industry Targets EPA Data Quality

Government agencies are busy working on their data quality guidelines in order to release drafts for public comment by May 1, as they move toward the implementation deadline of Oct. 1, set by the Office of Management and Budget in January. A great deal of concern surrounds these guidelines, as business groups are gearing up to use them to challenge regulatory protections. Indeed, William Kovacs of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently told BNA (a Washington trade publication) that the guidelines would have the most profound impact on federal regulation since the Administrative Procedure Act of the 1940s. "This is the biggest sleeper there is in the regulatory area and will have an impact so far beyond anything people can imagine," Kovacs said. Not surprisingly, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) appears to be a primary target of these industry groups. The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness, for instance, didn't even wait for the guidelines to be finalized before using them to challenge the National Assessment on Global Climate Change. Kovacs also pointed to EPA's pollution rules on fine particulate matter as another prime target. Industry's intentions have not gone unnoticed in Washington. Sen. Jim Jeffords (I-VT) effectively summarized the situation stating, "Opponents of government action to protect the public's health and the environment have latched on to the Data Quality Act and are attempting to misuse it to prevent the public from getting valid information about threats to their well being and quality of life." He noted that while the goal of the law is laudable -- high quality data is important and useful in the policy process and decision-making -- it could easily work against effective government action. Similarly, OMB Watch is worried that the new guidelines will allow certain stakeholders to bog down EPA's efforts to protect public health and environment. EPA should make specific efforts to structure its guidelines in such a way as to safeguard itself from this potential outcome. To its credit, EPA seems to be engaging in an extremely deliberative process for developing its information quality guidelines, certainly the most transparent and participatory process among the agencies. An internal workgroup comprised of representatives from EPA program offices and regions has been formed to draft the agency's guidelines. In March 2002, prior to even drafting the guidelines, EPA held an online conference to solicit public input. Once the draft guidelines are released, EPA will have an official public comment period from May 1 to June 1, during which time comments can be submitted through the same web page or via mail. Additionally, EPA has scheduled an all-day public meeting on the data quality guidelines in Washington, D.C., for the middle of the public comment period, May 15. Register online here. Despite the threatening words from certain business interests, the hopeful possibility exists that the data quality process will actually engender greater dissemination of information with constructive efforts to correct errors and improve data after its release. The data quality guidance issued by OMB specifically states that these standards and procedures should not be an impediment to agencies disseminating information to the public. In this regard, EPA already has a model system to promote data quality and correct database errors called the Integrated Error Correction Process (IECP). The mechanism has been up and running for 18 months, receiving over 1,000 correction requests that resulted in 120 actual data corrections. Importantly, information that is questioned is not removed from public view, but rather flagged to acknowledge its status as under review. This is a case where dissemination has been a boon to data quality by allowing broader efforts to improve EPA databases. EPA should model its data quality guidelines on the principles that guided the establishment and operation of IECP, building upon its experience from this system in its efforts to deal with other forms of information outside of databases. Encouragingly, EPA lists the IECP, along with the original OMB data quality guidelines, as the only "Related Links" on its Information Quality Guidelines homepage. Hopefully, this indicates EPA's intention to utilize the IECP as a model for its new data quality guidelines. While EPA should encourage and assist data correction (while avoiding removal of information), EPA should also minimize any undue burden on the agency in its data quality guidelines -- for example, by requiring that challenges to data be submitted in a timely manner (limit of 90 days after dissemination) and that submitters establish that they are "an affected party," explaining how they have been "harmed." Such measures are especially important as regulated interests sharpen their knives.
back to Blog