|
*Executive Committee Member
CHAIR
*C. Boyden Gray
2445 M Street NW
Washington, DC 20037-1435
CHAIR-ELECT
*Neil R. Eisner
U. S. Department of Transportation
400 7th Street, SW, Room 10424 (C-50)
Washington, DC 20590
VICE CHAIR
*Thomas D. Morgan
George Washington University Law School
720 20th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052
SECRETARY
*Cynthia A. Drew
U.S. Department of Justice
ENRD/PO Box 23986
Washington, DC 20552-3986
ASSISTANT SECRETARY
Jonathan J. Rusch
Washington, DC
BUDGET OFFICER
*David W. Roderer
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
1700 G Street, NW, 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20552
ASSISTANT BUDGET OFFICER
Daniel Cohen
Washington, DC
SECTION DELEGATES TO THE
HOUSE OF DELEGATES
*Ernest Gellhorn
George Mason University School of Law
2907 Normanstone Lane
Washington, DC 20008
*Ronald A, Cass
Boston University School of Law
765 Commonwealth Avenue
Boston, MA 02215
IMMEDIATE PAST CHAIR
*Ronald M. Levin
Washington University School of Law
Campus Box 1120
St. Louis, MO 63130
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Stephen Calkins
Detroit, MI
H. Russell Frisby
Washington, DC
Daniel B. Rodriguez
San Diego, CA
Lynne K. Zusman
Washington, DC
John F. Cooney
Washington, DC
David Frederick
Washington, DC
Lisa A. Whitney
New York, NY
Renee M. Landers
Boston, MA
John F. Duffy
Williamsburg, VA
Cynthia R. Farina
Ithaca, NY
Leonard A. Leo
Washington, DC
Sidney A. Shapiro
Lawrence, KS
COUNCIL MEMBERS EX OFFICIO STATE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Jim Rossi
Tallahassee, FL
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Viet Dinh
Washington, DC
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
Hannah Sistare
Washington, DC
JUDICIARY
Merrick Garland
Washington, DC
ADMINISTRATIVE JUDICIARY
Judith Ann Dowd
Washington, DC
ADMINISTRATIVE & REGULATORY
LAW NEWS
EDITOR
William F. Funk
Portland, OR
ASSOCIATE EDITOR
William S. Morrow, Jr.
Washington, DC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW REVIEW
CHAIR OF FACULTY BOARD
Thomas O. Sargentich
Washington, DC
STUDENT EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Allison Carle
Washington, DC
ABA BOARD OF GOVERNORS LIAISON
Hunter Patrick
Cody, WY
YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION LIAISON
Lori Davis
Lexington, KY
LAW STUDENT DIVISION LIAISON
Christine Monte
Washington, DC
|
740 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005-1022
(202) 662-1582
May
31, 2002
Ms.
T. M. O’Malley
Information Technology Center, Room N-1301
U.S. Dept. of Labor
2000 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington DC 20210
Re: Information Quality, 67 F.R.
21776
Dear
Ms. O’Malley:
The
Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice of the American Bar
Association is pleased to submit comments on the proposed guidance for data
quality that your agency has proposed under Section 515 of Public Law
106-554. The views expressed herein are presented on behalf of the Section
of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice. They have not been approved
by the House of Delegates or the Board of Governors of the American Bar
Association and, accordingly, should not be construed as representing the
position of the Association.These comments are focused on the mechanisms
proposed for implementation of section 515’s "correction of
information that does not comply with (OMB guidance)". In commenting
on the mechanisms we hope to improve them; these comments do not suggest
that any of the substantive objectives of the agency discussed in your
published proposal would or would not have our Section’s support. Because
many of the nation’s experts in the administrative process and information
policy are members of our Section, we hope to speak to the process and
procedural aspects of the proposed guidelines.
1.
We
applaud the clear invitation at p. 6 to resolve information disagreements
informally with the program officials.
2.
We
endorse the highlighted statement at page 6 that the section 515 correction
process is "not to resolve underlying substantive policy or legal issues".
This is a correct view of the OMB Guidance and of Section 515’s role.
3.
The
statement that Section 515 "is not intended to provide any right of
judicial review" (p. 6) is a fair statement of the Department’s
preference, but there is a substantial likelihood that courts may accept a
role in judicial review of denials of correction. Thus the Department
entities should be encouraged to carefully document the reasons for their
denials and for any response to an appeal of a denial of Correction. We as a
Section do not take any position on whether courts should allow judicial
review of section 515 disagreements.
4.
We
are very concerned that the Department says it will acknowledge that an
error exists in its information products but then refuse to make a correction
based on the sole discretion of the Department that it would not be
"cost effective" to correct the error (p. 7) OMB Guidance at 67
F.R. 8459 col. 1 suggests at 3(i) that there is a direct connection between
acknowledging the error and making the correction. To declare that no
correction will occur because of other "obligations" would be to
evade Section 515 whenever the agency had other priorities. We urge the
Department not to leave errors in the disseminated information products and
websites, but to make corrections where the error is acknowledged.
Thank you for considering these comments. If you wish clarification of any
portions, please contact Professor James O’Reilly, Chair of the Committee
on Government Information & Privacy, at (513) 556-0062.
Sincerely,
C.
Boyden Gray
Section Chair
|
