*Year-End Information Quality Report Format*

I. Cover Sheet: Requests for Correction Received FY 2003

Department Name: U.S. Department of Agriculture

Period Covered: FY 2003

Agency Name Number of Number\
Requests Designated as\
Received Influential

Farm and Foreign Agriculture Service

-   Farm Service Agency (FSA) None None

-   Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS) None None

-   Risk Management Agency (RMA) None None

Food Safety

-   Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) None None

Natural Resources and Environment

-   Forest Service (FS) -8- None

-   Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) None None

Rural Development

-   Rural Business Coop Service (RBS) None None

-   Office of Community Development (OCD) None None

-   Rural Housing Service (RHS) None None

-   Rural Utilities Service (RUS) None None

Food, Nutrition and Consumer Service

-   Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) -1- None

-   Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP) None None

Marketing and Regulatory

-   Ag. Marketing Service (AMS) None None

-   Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) None None

-   Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Admin (GIPSA) None None

*Year-End Information Quality Report Format*

I. Cover Sheet: Requests for Correction Received FY 2003

Department Name: U.S. Department of Agriculture

Period Covered: FY 2003

Agency Name Number of Number\
Requests Designated as\
Received Influential

Research, Education, and Economics

-   Ag. Research Service (ARS) None None

-   COOP State Research Education and Extension service (CSREES) None
    None

-   Economic Research Service (ERS) None None

-   National Ag. Statistics Service (NASS) None None

-   National Agricultural Library None None

Offices

-   Departmental Administration None None

-   Civil Rights None None

-   Office of Chief Financial Officer None None

-   Office of Chief Information Officer None None

-   Office of Communications None None

-   Office of Congressional Relations None None

-   Office of Budget and Program Analysis None None

-   Office of Chief Economist None None

-   Office of Executive Secretariat None None

-   National Appeals Division None None

-   Office of Inspector General None None

TOTAL -9- None

-   **Agency Receiving Correction Request:** USDA/NRE/FS

-   **Requestor:** W.K. Olsen and Associates, L.L.C.\
    Washington Contract Loggers Assn.\
    Northern Arizona Loggers Assn.\
    Coalition of Arizona/New Mexico Counties

-   **Date Received:** 17-January-2003, via email

-   **Summary of Request:** The Complainant(s) submitted five different
    complaints contending that: (1) on March 25, 2002, the Forest
    Service had published *Management Recommendations for the Northern
    Goshawk in the Southwestern United States*, in error; and (2) four
    other Forest Service publications had cited the publication. The
    purported errors in the management recommendations placed "incorrect
    restrictions on forest and range management, recreation and other
    uses of U.S. Forest Service lands. These restrictions errantly
    reduce timber harvests, timber quality, forage utilization,
    recreational opportunities and forest access. The restrictions
    severely limit the availability and application of silvicultural
    tools that improve forest health, timber size and quality, forage
    production, and that reduce the risks of catastrophic
    stand-replacing fires." The effect of the errors would be "to harm
    local and regional economies and communities, including the natural
    resources sector as a whole, and to subsequently cause harm to the
    requestors."

-   **Description of Requested Correction:** Complainant(s) requested
    that the Forest Service withdraw the initial publication, and the
    ensuing publications that had used the initial publication as a
    basis, in an expeditious manner.

-   **Influential:** \_\_\_\_Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_[X]{.underline}\_
    Undetermined

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **First Agency Response** \_\_\_\_ in progress [\_X\_]{.underline}
    completed

> Forest Service responded March 21, 2003

-   **Resolution:** The request for retraction was denied because
    significant errors were not found in the initial publication, or in
    the ensuing publications, and so substantive changes were not
    needed.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Request:** \_\_\_\_ none \_\_\_\_ in
    progress [\_ X \_]{.underline} completed

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Summary of Request for Reconsideration**

> On September 4, 2003, the complainants filed for reconsideration,
> contending that the decision of the Forest Service was "arbitrary and
> capricious."

-   **Type of Request for Reconsideration Process Used**: Independent
    panel review by one expert from within the Forest Service, and
    employees, who had participated in the development of the Department
    of Agriculture's Quality of Information guidelines, from two other
    agencies within the Department.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Resolution**: The independent review
    panel affirmed the Forest Service response and found no compelling
    evidence to support retraction or amendment of the original Forest
    Service response.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Agency Receiving Correction Request:** USDA/NRE/FS

-   **Requestor:** John Muir, Project/Earth Island Institute; Sierra
    Club; Heartwood

-   **Date Received:** 10-March-2003, via email

-   **Summary of Request:** The Complainant(s) requested, "correction of
    data and information used to monitor timber sales," related to the
    Forest Service's proposed limited timber categorical exclusions.

-   **Description of Requested Correction:** Complainant(s) requested
    that the Forest Service correct its reliance on observation as a
    monitoring technique and instead rely on the use of measurement on
    all parameters and data points of monitoring soils, water quality,
    and measurable data for other resources where appropriate.

-   **Influential:** \_\_\_\_Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_[X]{.underline}\_
    Undetermined

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **First Agency Response** \_\_\_\_ in progress [\_X\_]{.underline}
    completed

> Forest Service responded July 29, 2003

-   **Resolution:** The request for correction was denied because the
    Forest Service "concluded that the documented on-site observations
    of Forest Service resource specialists provide sufficient precision
    to determine the individual and cumulative significance of effects
    of limited timber harvest activities on the human environment."

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Request:** \_\_\_\_ none
    \_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_ in progress [\_ \_]{.underline} completed

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Summary of Request for Reconsideration**

> On September 10, 2003, the Complainants filed for reconsideration,
> demanding the use of a 3-member panel, contending that the Forest
> Service response was "not conducted with due diligence." Complainants
> contend that the contested information is "influential" and
> "regulatory" under the Department of Agriculture's Quality of
> Information Guidelines.

-   **Type of Request for Reconsideration Process Used**: The Forest
    Service determined that the information under consideration does not
    fit the definition of "influential" as set forth in the Department's
    Guidelines. Requests for reconsideration on influential information
    are subject to panel review; the decision as to whether information
    is influential is the decision of the agency that received the
    request for correction.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Resolution: In process.**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Agency Receiving Correction Request:** USDA/NRE/FS

-   **Requestor:** Bryan Bird, Sierra Club National Forest Campaign;
    John Muir Project of Earth Island Institute; Heartwood; Gifford
    Pinchot Task Force; National Forest Protection Alliance

-   **Date Received:** 7-April-2003, via email

-   **Summary of Request:** The Complainant(s) requested that the Forest
    Service reopen the comment period upon the proposed rulemaking for
    *National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning*,
    which had been published in the Federal Register on December
    6, 2002. Complainant(s) contend that the review conducted by the
    Forest Service as the basis for the proposed rulemaking was not
    "available to the public in a format that was readily accessible and
    understandable."

-   **Description of Requested Correction:** Complainant(s) requested
    that the Forest Service reopen the comment period upon the
    rulemaking, providing the proceedings of an April 2001 workshop with
    field level planners as referred to the Federal Register notice as
    "justification for the changes to the National Forest System Land
    and Resource Management Planning."

-   **Influential:** \_\_\_\_Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_[X]{.underline}\_
    Undetermined

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **First Agency Response** \_\_\_\_ in progress [\_X\_]{.underline}
    completed

> Forest Service responded June 9, 2003

-   **Resolution:** Forest Service provided a letter of acknowledgement,
    stating that: (1) the information requested was enclosed for the
    Complainants' use and was available to the public at
    <http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/nfma/index3.html>; and (2) the Forest
    Service was still in the process of considering all responses
    received on the proposed rule.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Request:** \_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_
    none \_\_ \_\_ in progress [\_ \_]{.underline} completed

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Summary of Request for Reconsideration**

> Not applicable.

-   **Type of Request for Reconsideration Process Used**: Not
    applicable.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Resolution:** Not applicable.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Agency Receiving Correction Request:** USDA/NRE/FS

-   **Requestor:** Dennis Parker, Attorney at Law for client Eddie
    Johnson

-   **Date Received:** March 21, 2003, via email

-   **Summary of Request:** The Complainant requested correction of
    "Guidance Criteria for Determining the Effects of On-Going Grazing
    and Issuing Term Grazing Permits on Selected Threatened and
    Endangered Species, and Species Proposed for Listing and Proposed
    and Designated Critical Habitat," Region 3, Wildlife, Fisheries and
    Rare Plants, USDA Forest Service, April 15, 2002. Relied upon by
    District Ranger to select an E.A. alternative for the Johnson Ranch,
    February 27, 2003. Complainant contends that the information
    presented at pages 64-70 of the guidance criteria was not accurate,
    clear, complete, and unbiased, because of its failure "to
    incorporate substantial, highly relevant information published by
    the Forest Service that was readily available to the Forest Service
    when this Criteria was developed."

-   **Description of Requested Correction:** Complainant requested that
    the Forest Service correct the information challenged to reflect the
    current state of knowledge.

-   **Influential:** \_\_\_\_Yes \_\_ [X]{.underline}\_\_ No \_ \_
    Undetermined

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **First Agency Response** \_\_\_\_ in progress [\_X\_]{.underline}
    completed

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Resolution:** Forest Service responded on August 22, 2003, denying
    the request. The data did not meet the definition of "disseminated"
    under either the Department of Agriculture or the Office of
    Management and Budget information quality guidelines.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration:** \_\_ \_\_ none
    \_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_ in progress [\_ \_]{.underline} completed

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Summary of Request for Reconsideration**

> On October 6, 2003, the complainants filed for reconsideration,
> contending that the decision of the Forest Service "has no lawful
> authority to exempt publicly disclosed information from Data Quality
> Act Challenge" and that the Forest Service "had initiated and
> sponsored distribution of the information" when it "made Mr. Johnson's
> agents aware of the information's existence and then provided them
> with a copy of this same information free of any charge."

-   **Type of Request for Reconsideration Process Used**: The Forest
    Service determined that the information under consideration does not
    fit the definition of "influential" as set forth in the Department's
    Guidelines. Requests for reconsideration on influential information
    are subject to panel review; the decision as to whether information
    is influential is the decision of the agency that received the
    request for correction.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Resolution: In process.**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Agency Receiving Correction Request:** USDA/FNCS/FNS

-   **Requestor:** The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness

-   **Date Received:** September 9, 2003

-   **Summary of Request:** The Center for Regulatory Effectiveness
    informed the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer
    Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that it will be
    necessary for either USDA or the Department of Health and Human
    Services (HHS) to carry out a predissemination review of the
    information contained in the World Health Organization\'s Technical
    Report 916, *Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic
    Diseases*, prior to basing the 2005 Dietary Guidelines upon that
    report.  Complainant contends that the U.S. Government had
    previously expressed concerns to the World Health Organization (WHO)
    about the "quality of facts and analyses supporting the scientific
    recommendations in the WHO report."

-   **Description of Requested Correction:** Conduct a predissemination
    review; retract the joint USDA-HHS press release regarding the 2005
    Dietary Guidelines; and inform WHO of non-compliance with scientific
    standards.

-   **Influential:** \_\_\_\_Yes \_\_\_\_ No \_[X]{.underline}\_
    Undetermined

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **First Agency Response** \_\_X\_\_ in progress [\_ \_]{.underline}
    completed

> USDA is working with HHS in the development of the response.

-   **Resolution:**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Request:** \_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_
    none \_\_ \_\_ in progress [\_ \_]{.underline} completed

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Summary of Request for Reconsideration**

> Not applicable.

-   **Type of Request for Reconsideration Process Used**: Not
    applicable.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Request for Reconsideration Resolution:** Not applicable.