[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 20, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6428-6453]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-3645]
[[Page 6427]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Office of Management and Budget
_______________________________________________________________________
Management of Federal Information Resources; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 1996 /
Notices
[[Page 6428]]
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Management of Federal Information Resources
AGENCY: Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the
President.
ACTION: Revision of OMB Circular No. A-130, Transmittal No. 3, Appendix
III, ``Security of Federal Automated Information Resources.''
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is revising Appendix
III, ``Security of Federal Information Systems,'' of Circular No. A-
130, ``Management of Federal Automated Information Resources.'' This is
the third stage of planned revisions to Circular A-130. Enactment of
the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 (Division E of
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996) will
require OMB to issue additional guidance on capital planning,
investment control, and the management of information technology. A
plan for those revisions will be announced in the Spring.
Transmittal 1 to Circular A-130, effective June 25, 1993, and
published on July 2, 1993 (58 FR 36068) addressed the Information
Management Policy section of the Circular (Section 8a), as well as
Appendix I, ``Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records
About Individuals.'' That issuance dealt primarily with how the Federal
government manages its information holdings, particularly information
exchange with the public.
Transmittal 2 to Circular A-130, effective July 15, 1994, and
published on July 25, 1994 (59 FR 37906) addressed agency management
practices for information systems and information technology (Section
8b). That issuance was intended to (1) promote agency investments in
information technology that improve service delivery to the public,
reduce burden on the public, and lower the cost of Federal programs
administration, and (2) encourage agencies to use information
technology as a strategic resource to improve Federal work processes
and organization.
This Transmittal 3 is intended to guide agencies in securing
government information resources as they increasingly rely on an open
and interconnected National Information Infrastructure. It stresses
management controls, such as individual responsibility, awareness and
training, and accountability, and explains how they can be supported by
technical controls. Among other things, it requires agencies to assure
that risk-based rules of behavior are established, that employees are
trained in them, and that the rules are enforced. The revision also
integrates security into program and mission goals, reduces the
centralized reporting of security plans, emphasizes the management of
risk rather than its measurement, and revises government-wide security
responsibilities to be consistent with the Computer Security Act and
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
This transmittal also makes minor technical revisions to Section 9
(``Assignment of Responsibilities'') and Section 10 (``Oversight'') to
reflect the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13). One
substantive change has been made to Appendix I in Section 3.a. changing
the annual requirement to review recordkeeping practices, training,
violations, and notices to a biennial review, in accordance with other
regular agency reviews not required by statute. Several minor changes
have been made, none of which are intended to be substantive. In
Section 2.c., a portion of the definition of ``nonfederal agency''
which has been inadvertently omitted has been added to reflect the
current practice in state-federal matching programs. In Section 3.a.,
extraneous and confusing language referring to source or matching
agencies was removed because the provision applies to any agency that
participates in a matching program. The example's in 4.c.(1) were
updated for clarity. Other editorial and organizational changes were
made throughout the appendix.
Appendix IV has been changed to include material from OMB
Memorandum M-95-22, ``Implementing the Information Dissemination
Provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995'' (September 29,
1995), and to delete some outdated or otherwise already implemented
guidance from the discussion of Sections 9 and 10.
ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY: This document is available on the OMB Home
page of Welcome to the White House World Wide Web site (http://
www.whitehouse.gov) as http://www1.whitehouse.gov/White-House/EOP/OMB/
html/omb-a130.html. This document is also available on the Internet via
anonymous File Transfer Protocol (FTP) from the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) Computer Security Resource
Clearinghouse at csrc.ncsl.nist.gov as /pub/secplcy/a130.txt (do not
use any capital letters in the file name) or via the World Wide Web
from http://csrc.ncsl.nist.gov/secplcy as a130.txt. Appendix III,
``Security of Federal Automated Information Resources'' can be
separately obtained as a130app3.txt. The clearinghouse can also be
reached using dial-in access at 301-948-5717. For those who do not have
file transfer capability, the document can be retrieved via mail query
by sending an electronic mail message to docserver@csrc.ncsl.nist.gov
with no subject and with send a130.txt (or a130app3.txt for only the
security appendix) as the first line of the body of the message. Paper
copies may also be obtained by writing to the Publications Office,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 2200 NEOB, Washington, D.C. 20503
or by telephone at (202) 395-7332.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information Policy and Technology
Branch, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building,
Washington, D.C. 20503. Telephone: (202) 395-3785.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Since December 30, 1985, Appendix III of Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-130, ``Security of Federal Automated
Information Systems,'' has defined a minimum set of controls for the
security of Federal automated information systems (50 FR 52730). That
Appendix, and its predecessor, Transmittal Memorandum No. 1 to OMB
Circular No. A-71, (July 27, 1978), defined controls that were
considered effective in a centralized processing environment which ran
primarily custom-developed application software.
Today's computing environment is significantly different. It is
characterized by open, widely distributed processing systems which
frequently operate with commercial off-the-shelf software. While
effective use of information technology often reduces risks to the
Federal program being administered (e.g., risks from fraud or errors),
the risk to and vulnerability of Federal information resources has
increased. Greater risks result from increasing quantities of valuable
information being committed to Federal systems, and from agencies being
critically dependent on those systems to perform their missions.
Greater vulnerabilities exist because virtually every Federal employee
has access to Federal systems, and because these systems now
interconnect with outside systems.
In part because of these trends, Congress enacted the Computer
Security Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-235). That Act requires agencies to
improve the
[[Page 6429]]
security of Federal computer systems, plan for the security of
sensitive systems, and provide mandatory awareness and training in
security for all individuals with access to computer systems.
To assist agencies in implementing the Computer Security Act, OMB
issued Bulletin No. 88-16, ``Guidance for Preparation and Submission of
Security Plans for Federal Computer Systems Containing Sensitive
Information'' (July 6, 1988), and OMB Bulletin No. 90-08, ``Guidance
for Preparation of Security Plans for Federal Computer Systems that
Contain Sensitive Information'' (July 9, 1990). This revision of
Appendix III to OMB Circular A-130 incorporates and updates the
policies set out in those Bulletins and supersedes them.
The report of the National Performance Review, ``Creating a
Government that Works Better & Costs Less: Reengineering through
Information Technology'' (September 1993), recommended that Circular A-
130 be revised to: (1) Require an information security plan to be part
of each agency's strategic information technology (IT) plan; (2)
require that if computer security does not meet established thresholds,
it be identified as a material weakness in the Federal Managers'
Financial Integrity Act report; (3) require awareness and training of
employees and contractors; (4) require that agencies improve planning
for contingencies; and (5) establish and employ formal emergency
response capabilities. Those recommendations are incorporated in this
revision.
Since its establishment by the Computer Security Act, the Computer
System Security and Privacy Advisory Board has recommended changes in
Circular A-130 to: (1) Require that agencies establish computer
emergency response teams; and (2) link oversight of Federal computer
security activities more closely to the oversight established pursuant
to the Federal Manager's Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA), Public Law
97-255. This revision incorporates both of those recommendations.
Subsequent to issuance of Bulletin 90-08, OMB, the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the National Security
Agency (NSA) met with 28 Federal departments and agencies to review
their computer security programs. In February 1993, OMB, NIST and NSA
issued a report (``Observations of Agency Computer Security Practices
and Implementation of OMB Bulletin No. 90-08'') which summarized those
meetings and proposed several changes in OMB Circular A-130 as next
steps to improving the Federal computer security program. Those
proposed changes are incorporated in this revision.
The revised Appendix clarifies the relationship between
requirements to protect information classified pursuant to an Executive
Order and the requirements in this Appendix. Where an agency processes
information which is controlled for national security reasons pursuant
to an Executive Order or statute, security measures required by
appropriate directives should be included in agency systems. Those
policies, procedures, and practices will be coordinated with the U.S.
Security Policy Board as directed by the President.
On May 22, 1995, the President signed into law the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. That Act, in 44 U.S.C. 3505
and 3506, requires agencies to establish computer security programs,
and it tasks OMB to develop and oversee the implementation of policies,
principles, standards and guidelines on security. It also requires
Federal agencies to identify and provide security protection consistent
with the Computer Security Act of 1987 (40 U.S.C. 759 note). This
revision is intended to implement those OMB responsibilities.
Comments on the Proposed Appendix
On April 3, 1995, the revised Appendix was proposed for public
comment (60 FR 16970). It was also sent directly to Federal agencies
for comment and made available for comment via the Internet. Thirty-two
comments were received. The comments supported the approach proposed in
the revised Appendix. They also made a number of suggestions to improve
it. The principal issues raised in comments and our response to them
are set forth below.
1. Most of the comments stated that the preamble accompanying the
proposed Appendix was useful in their understanding of the Appendix
itself. They suggested that the information in the preamble be
incorporated in the final Appendix for improved future understanding.
We agree with this suggestion, and have incorporated the preamble,
as revised to accommodate changes made to the proposed Appendix, as
part B of the final Appendix.
2. Many comments suggested that the terminology of the Appendix
should be more directive.
We generally agree with this comment, and have changed part A of
the Appendix to be directive, while leaving the descriptive material in
part B as explanatory.
3. A number of comments noted that there is a difference between
making individuals aware of security needs and training them. They
suggested that the Appendix should clarify this distinction and the
requirements associated with each.
We agree, and have made changes in the Appendix and the descriptive
information in part B to clarify that the requirements for training are
consistent with the Computer Security Act (i.e., for increasing
computer security awareness and training in accepted security
practice).
We have also added a clarification that training for members of the
public who are given access to general support systems should normally
be accomplished in the context of the application to which they are
given access. As was pointed out in comments, members of the public
should not be given direct access to general support systems, except
through authorized use of an application. We have also added
descriptive language in part B to address the need to train members of
the public with access to major applications.
4. Several comments raised a concern about the proposed requirement
to limit access to systems until a new employee has been trained in
security responsibilities. They suggested that training be required to
be completed within a certain amount of time after access is granted
(e.g., 60 days).
We disagree. Understanding the security requirements that are
integral to a system is a fundamental responsibility of each individual
who accesses the system. It should not be delayed for administrative
convenience. Furthermore, security training should be included as part
of general training in use of the system for an employee. Initial
awareness and training need not be accomplished through formal
classroom training; in some cases it may be through interactive
sessions of reading well-written and understandable rules. The critical
factor is for the initial and subsequent awareness and training to be
commensurate with the risk and magnitude of harm that could occur.
Therefore, new employees can and should be trained in their security
responsibilities before access is granted. The final Appendix includes
this requirement.
5. Several comments expressed concern about the proposed removal of
the requirement for agencies to prepare formal risk analyses. They
point out that such analyses assist in identifying
[[Page 6430]]
threats, vulnerabilities, and risks to a system. They expressed a
concern that without such analyses it would be difficult to convince
senior management of the need for security. Other comments said that
without risk analysis as the basis of decisions, security measures will
not be effective. On the other hand, several comments supported the
removal of this requirement, which they found not cost-effective.
We agree that security measures must be risk-based. The Computer
Security Act requires that security controls be commensurate with the
risk and magnitude of harm that could occur. Implicit in that approach
is a need to assess the risk to each system. However, given the
complexity and detail such formal analyses often entail, a formal risk
analysis is not appropriate for every system. Therefore, the Appendix
does not require that a formal risk analysis be performed.
At the same time, risk assessment is an essential element in
ensuring adequate security. NIST recently issued a handbook, ``An
Introduction to Computer Security: The NIST Handbook'' (March 16,
1995), which contains guidance on computer security risk management and
provides a flexible framework for performing meaningful risk
assessments. Part B references the NIST handbook.
6. Several comments asked about the relation between the rules of
behavior required in the Appendix and operating policies prescribed in
the NIST Handbook. Other comments made suggestions about the kind and
scope of rules that should be included in the security plan.
We have added language to part B to describe the kinds of rules we
believe are appropriate and to clarify that rules of behavior in the
Appendix should be consistent with the system-specific policies
described in the NIST handbook.
7. Several comments raised a concern about the effectiveness of
reviews of security controls unless they are performed by independent
reviewers.
An independent review can improve the objectivity of the review, as
well as its value to top management in assessing the need for
corrective action. Therefore, we have added language to the discussion
in part B of the Appendix that clarifies that reviews of major
applications, because of their higher risk, should be independent. We
have not, however, required that reviews of all general support systems
be independent. Nevertheless, given the value of an independent review,
agencies may elect to use this approach, particularly where a system
supports a high-risk agency function.
In addition, we understand that the U.S. General Accounting Office
is developing guidance which provides a structured approach for
performing reviews. We have also revised the Appendix to be consistent
with OMB Circular No. A-123, ``Management Accountability and Control''
(June 21, 1995).
8. Several comments requested additional guidance on enforcement of
the rules of behavior, either from the Department of Justice or the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
The presumption in requiring rules of behavior is that they would
be enforced as are other behavioral rules within an agency. Therefore,
we are not proposing to have central guidance developed by either
Justice or OPM. However, we expect that agencies will share their
various approaches through inter-agency forums, such as the Computer
Security Program Managers' Forum. We have added a brief discussion of
this point to part B.
9. Several comments concerned the protection of shared information
and requested that additional guidance be provided. We have clarified
our intent in the discussion in part B.
10. One comment raised a concern about the Appendix's apparent
subordination of technical controls to management controls. While we
are stressing the importance of management controls, we have added
preamble language to clarify that both types of controls must be in
place to be effective.
11. A number of comments raised a concern about whether adequate
funding would be forthcoming to implement the requirements of the
Appendix.
Implicit in issuing the Appendix is our presumption that a system
is created and maintained with adequate security or it should not be
created or maintained. Security costs should therefore be factored into
the normal capital planning and investment controls process for
information technology, consistent with the information systems and
information technology management requirements in Section 8b of this
circular.
12. A number of comments concerned the government-wide role of the
Security Policy Board. Several favored expanding that role, others
proposed that it be more limited. Still others said the Appendix should
be silent on national security directives.
We have revised the language in the Appendix to clarify the role of
the Security Policy Board regrading security of information technology
used to process classified information. We have also added language to
the preamble which clarifies that Circular No. A-130 and the Appendix
exclude certain mission critical systems, the so-called ``Warner
systems'' from coverage, and to describe the Department of Defense's
responsibilities pursuant to existing Presidential directives. The
Appendix does not attempt to interpret the language of the directives.
Rather, it clarifies that requirements issued pursuant to those
directives should be used in place of the requirements of the Appendix
with respect to the protection of classified information. The
discussion of national security directives is included to assist in the
coordination of security activities among various security communities.
Accordingly, Circular A-130 is revised as set forth below.
Sally Katzen,
Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
Executive Office of the President
Office of Management and Budget
February 8, 1996.
Circular No. A-130, Revised (Transmittal Memorandum No. 3)
Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Establishments
Subject: Management of Federal Information Resources.
Circular No. A-130 provides uniform government-wide information
resources management policies as required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1980, as amended by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. Chapter 35. This Transmittal Memorandum contains updated
guidance on the ``Security of Federal Automated Information
Systems,'' Appendix III and makes minor technical revisions to the
Circular to reflect the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-13). The Circular is reprinted in its entirety for convenience.
Alice M. Rivlin,
Director.
Attachment
Circular No. A-130 Revised (Transmittal Memorandum No. 3)
Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Establishments
Subject: Management of Federal Information Resources.
1. Purpose: This Circular establishes policy for the management
of Federal information resources. Procedural and analytic guidelines
for implementing specific aspects of these policies are included as
appendices.
2. Rescissions: This Circular rescinds OMB Circulars No. A-3, A-
71, A-90, A-108, A-114, and A-121, and all Transmittal Memoranda to
those circulars.
3. Authorities: This Circular is issued pursuant to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1980, as amended by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter
[[Page 6431]]
35); the Privacy Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a); the Chief Financial
Officers Act (31 U.S.C. 3512 et seq.); the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 759 and 487); the
Computer Security Act (40 U.S.C. 759 note); the Budget and
Accounting Act, as amended (31 U.S.C. Chapter 11); Executive Order
No. 12046 of March 27, 1978; and Executive Order No. 12472 of April
3, 1984.
4. Applicability and Scope:
a. The policies in this Circular apply to the information
activities of all agencies of the executive branch of the Federal
government.
b. Information classified for national security purposes should
also be handled in accordance with the appropriate national security
directives. National security emergency preparedness activities
should be conducted in accordance with Executive Order No. 12472.
5. Background: The Paperwork Reduction Act establishes a broad
mandate for agencies to perform their information resources
management activities in an efficient, effective, and economical
manner. To assist agencies in an integrated approach to information
resources management, the Act requires that the Director of OMB
develop and implement uniform and consistent information resources
management policies; oversee the development and promote the use of
information management principles, standards, and guidelines;
evaluate agency information resources management practices in order
to determine their adequacy and efficiency; and determine compliance
of such practices with the policies, principles, standards, and
guidelines promulgated by the Director.
6. Definitions:
a. The term ``agency'' means any executive department, military
department, government corporation, government controlled
corporation, or other establishment in the executive branch of the
Federal government, or any independent regulatory agency. Within the
Executive Office of the President, the term includes only OMB and
the Office of Administration.
b. The term ``audiovisual production'' means a unified
presentation, developed according to a plan or script, containing
visual imagery, sound or both, and used to convey information.
c. The term ``dissemination'' means the government initiated
distribution of information to the public. Not considered
dissemination within the meaning of this Circular is distribution
limited to government employees or agency contractors or grantees,
intra- or inter-agency use or sharing of government information, and
responses to requests for agency records under the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) or Privacy Act.
d. The term ``full costs,'' when applied to the expenses
incurred in the operation of an information processing service
organization (IPSO), is comprised of all direct, indirect, general,
and administrative costs incurred in the operation of an IPSO. These
costs include, but are not limited to, personnel, equipment,
software, supplies, contracted services from private sector
providers, space occupancy, intra-agency services from within the
agency, inter-agency services from other Federal agencies, other
services that are provided by State and local governments, and
Judicial and Legislative branch organizations.
e. The term ``government information'' means information
created, collected, processed, disseminated, or disposed of by or
for the Federal Government.
f. The term ``government publication'' means information which
is published as an individual document at government expense, or as
required by law. (44 U.S.C. 1901)
g. The term ``information'' means any communication or
representation of knowledge such as facts, data, or opinions in any
medium or form, including textual, numerical, graphic, cartographic,
narrative, or audiovisual forms.
h. The term ``information dissemination product'' means any
book, paper, map, machine-readable material, audiovisual production,
or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or
characteristic, disseminated by an agency to the public.
i. The term ``information life cycle'' means the stages through
which information passes, typically characterized as creation or
collection, processing, dissemination, use, storage, and
disposition.
j. The term ``information management'' means the planning,
budgeting, manipulating, and controlling of information throughout
its life cycle.
k. The term ``information resources'' includes both government
information and information technology.
l. The term ``information processing services organization''
(IPSO) means a discrete set of personnel, information technology,
and support equipment with the primary function of providing
services to more than one agency on a reimbursable basis.
m. The term ``information resources management'' means the
process of managing information resources to accomplish agency
missions. The term encompasses both information itself and the
related resources, such as personnel, equipment, funds, and
information technology.
n. The term ``information system'' means a discrete set of
information resources organized for the collection, processing,
maintenance, transmission, and dissemination of information, in
accordance with defined procedures, whether automated or manual.
o. The term ``information system life cycle'' means the phases
through which an information system passes, typically characterized
as initiation, development, operation, and termination.
p. The term ``information technology'' means the hardware and
software operated by a Federal agency or by a contractor of a
Federal agency or other organization that processes information on
behalf of the Federal government to accomplish a Federal function,
regardless of the technology involved, whether computers,
telecommunications, or others. It includes automatic data processing
equipment as that term is defined in Section 111(a)(2) of the
Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949. For the
purposes of this Circular, automatic data processing and
telecommunications activities related to certain critical national
security missions, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(2) and 10 U.S.C.
2315, are excluded.
q. The term ``major information system'' means an information
system that requires special management attention because of its
importance to an agency mission; its high development, operating, or
maintenance costs; or its significant role in the administration of
agency programs, finances, property, or other resources.
r. The term ``records'' means all books, papers, maps,
photographs, machine-readable materials, or other documentary
materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or
received by an agency of the United States Government under Federal
law or in connection with the transaction of public business and
preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its
legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions,
policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of
the government or because of the informational value of the data in
them. Library and museum material made or acquired and preserved
solely for reference or exhibition purposes, extra copies of
documents preserved only for convenience of reference, and stocks of
publications and of processed documents are not included. (44 U.S.C.
3301)
s. The term ``records management'' means the planning,
controlling, directing, organizing, training, promoting, and other
managerial activities involved with respect to records creation,
records maintenance and use, and records disposition in order to
achieve adequate and proper documentation of the policies and
transactions of the Federal Government and effective and economical
management of agency operations. (44 U.S.C. 2901(2))
t. The term ``service recipient'' means an agency organizational
unit, programmatic entity, or chargeable account that receives
information processing services from an information processing
service organization (IPSO). A service recipient may be either
internal or external to the organization responsible for providing
information resources services, but normally does not report either
to the manager or director of the IPSO or to the same immediate
supervisor.
7. Basic Considerations and Assumptions:
a. The Federal Government is the largest single producer,
collector, consumer, and disseminator of information in the United
States. Because of the extent of the government's information
activities, and the dependence of those activities upon public
cooperation, the management of Federal information resources is an
issue of continuing importance to all Federal agencies, State and
local governments, and the public.
b. Government information is a valuable national resource. It
provides the public with knowledge of the government, society, and
economy--past, present, and future. It is a means to ensure the
accountability of government, to manage the government's operations,
to maintain the healthy performance of the economy, and is itself a
commodity in the marketplace.
[[Page 6432]]
c. The free flow of information between the government and the
public is essential to a democratic society. It is also essential
that the government minimize the Federal paperwork burden on the
public, minimize the cost of its information activities, and
maximize the usefulness of government information.
d. In order to minimize the cost and maximize the usefulness of
government information, the expected public and private benefits
derived from government information should exceed the public and
private costs of the information, recognizing that the benefits to
be derived from government information may not always be
quantifiable.
e. The nation can benefit from government information
disseminated both by Federal agencies and by diverse nonfederal
parties, including State and local government agencies, educational
and other not-for-profit institutions, and for-profit organizations.
f. Because the public disclosure of government information is
essential to the operation of a democracy, the management of Federal
information resources should protect the public's right of access to
government information.
g. The individual's right to privacy must be protected in
Federal Government information activities involving personal
information.
h. Systematic attention to the management of government records
is an essential component of sound public resources management which
ensures public accountability. Together with records preservation,
it protects the government's historical record and guards the legal
and financial rights of the government and the public.
i. Agency strategic planning can improve the operation of
government programs. The application of information resources should
support an agency's strategic plan to fulfill its mission. The
integration of IRM planning with agency strategic planning promotes
the appropriate application of Federal information resources.
j. Because State and local governments are important producers
of government information for many areas such as health, social
welfare, labor, transportation, and education, the Federal
Government must cooperate with these governments in the management
of information resources.
k. The open and efficient exchange of scientific and technical
government information, subject to applicable national security
controls and the proprietary rights of others, fosters excellence in
scientific research and effective use of Federal research and
development funds.
l. Information technology is not an end in itself. It is one set
of resources that can improve the effectiveness and efficiency of
Federal program delivery.
m. Federal Government information resources management policies
and activities can affect, and be affected by, the information
policies and activities of other nations.
n. Users of Federal information resources must have skills,
knowledge, and training to manage information resources, enabling
the Federal government to effectively serve the public through
automated means.
o. The application of up-to-date information technology presents
opportunities to promote fundamental changes in agency structures,
work processes, and ways of interacting with the public that improve
the effectiveness and efficiency of Federal agencies.
p. The availability of government information in diverse media,
including electronic formats, permits agencies and the public
greater flexibility in using the information.
q. Federal managers with program delivery responsibilities
should recognize the importance of information resources management
to mission performance.
8. Policy
a. Information Management Policy:
(1) Information Management Planning. Agencies shall plan in an
integrated manner for managing information throughout its life
cycle. Agencies shall:
(a) Consider, at each stage of the information life cycle, the
effects of decisions and actions on other stages of the life cycle,
particularly those concerning information dissemination;
(b) Consider the effects of their actions on members of the
public and ensure consultation with the public as appropriate;
(c) Consider the effects of their actions on State and local
governments and ensure consultation with those governments as
appropriate;
(d) Seek to satisfy new information needs through interagency or
intergovernmental sharing of information, or through commercial
sources, where appropriate, before creating or collecting new
information;
(e) Integrate planning for information systems with plans for
resource allocation and use, including budgeting, acquisition, and
use of information technology;
(f) Train personnel in skills appropriate to management of
information;
(g) Protect government information commensurate with the risk
and magnitude of harm that could result from the loss, misuse, or
unauthorized access to or modification of such information;
(h) Use voluntary standards and Federal Information Processing
Standards where appropriate or required;
(i) Consider the effects of their actions on the privacy rights
of individuals, and ensure that appropriate legal and technical
safeguards are implemented;
(j) Record, preserve, and make accessible sufficient information
to ensure the management and accountability of agency programs, and
to protect the legal and financial rights of the Federal Government;
(k) Incorporate records management and archival functions into
the design, development, and implementation of information systems;
(l) Provide for public access to records where required or
appropriate.
(2) Information Collection. Agencies shall collect or create
only that information necessary for the proper performance of agency
functions and which has practical utility.
(3) Electronic Information Collection. Agencies shall use
electronic collection techniques where such techniques reduce burden
on the public, increase efficiency of government programs, reduce
costs to the government and the public, and/or provide better
service to the public. Conditions favorable to electronic collection
include:
(a) The information collection seeks a large volume of data and/
or reaches a large proportion of the public;
(b) The information collection recurs frequently;
(c) The structure, format, and/or definition of the information
sought by the information collection does not change significantly
over several years;
(d) The agency routinely converts the information collected to
electronic format;
(e) A substantial number of the affected public are known to
have ready access to the necessary information technology and to
maintain the information in electronic form;
(f) Conversion to electronic reporting, if mandatory, will not
impose substantial costs or other adverse effects on the public,
especially State and local governments and small business entities.
(4) Records Management. Agencies shall:
(a) Ensure that records management programs provide adequate and
proper documentation of agency activities;
(b) Ensure the ability to access records regardless of form or
medium;
(c) In a timely fashion, establish, and obtain the approval of
the Archivist of the United States for, retention schedules for
Federal records; and
(d) Provide training and guidance as appropriate to all agency
officials and employees and contractors regarding their Federal
records management responsibilities.
(5) Providing Information to the Public. Agencies have a
responsibility to provide information to the public consistent with
their missions. Agencies shall discharge this responsibility by:
(a) Providing information, as required by law, describing agency
organization, activities, programs, meetings, systems of records,
and other information holdings, and how the public may gain access
to agency information resources;
(b) Providing access to agency records under provisions of the
Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act, subject to the
protections and limitations provided for in these Acts;
(c) Providing such other information as is necessary or
appropriate for the proper performance of agency functions; and
(d) In determining whether and how to disseminate information to
the public, agencies shall:
(i) Disseminate information in a manner that achieves the best
balance between the goals of maximizing the usefulness of the
information and minimizing the cost to the government and the
public;
(ii) Disseminate information dissemination products on
equitable and timely terms;
(iii) Take advantage of all dissemination channels, Federal and
nonfederal, including State and local governments, libraries and
private sector entities, in discharging agency information
dissemination responsibilities;
(iv) Help the public locate government information maintained
by or for the agency.
(6) Information Dissemination Management System. Agencies shall
maintain and
[[Page 6433]]
implement a management system for all information dissemination
products which shall, at a minimum:
(a) Assure that information dissemination products are necessary
for proper performance of agency functions (44 U.S.C. 1108);
(b) Consider whether an information dissemination product
available from other Federal or nonfederal sources is equivalent to
an agency information dissemination product and reasonably fulfills
the dissemination responsibilities of the agency;
(c) Establish and maintain inventories of all agency information
dissemination products;
(d) Develop such other aids to locating agency information
dissemination products including catalogs and directories, as may
reasonably achieve agency information dissemination objectives;
(e) Identify in information dissemination products the source of
the information, if from another agency;
(f) Ensure that members of the public with disabilities whom the
agency has a responsibility to inform have a reasonable ability to
access the information dissemination products;
(g) Ensure that government publications are made available to
depository libraries through the facilities of the Government
Printing Office, as required by law (44 U.S.C. Part 19);
(h) Provide electronic information dissemination products to the
Government Printing Office for distribution to depository libraries;
(i) Establish and maintain communications with members of the
public and with State and local governments so that the agency
creates information dissemination products that meet their
respective needs;
(j) Provide adequate notice when initiating, substantially
modifying, or terminating significant information dissemination
products; and
(k) Ensure that, to the extent existing information
dissemination policies or practices are inconsistent with the
requirements of this Circular, a prompt and orderly transition to
compliance with the requirements of this Circular is made.
(7) Avoiding Improperly Restrictive Practices. Agencies shall:
(a) Avoid establishing, or permitting others to establish on
their behalf, exclusive, restricted, or other distribution
arrangements that interfere with the availability of information
dissemination products on a timely and equitable basis;
(b) Avoid establishing restrictions or regulations, including
the charging of fees or royalties, on the reuse, resale, or
redissemination of Federal information dissemination products by the
public; and,
(c) Set user charges for information dissemination products at a
level sufficient to recover the cost of dissemination but no higher.
They shall exclude from calculation of the charges costs associated
with original collection and processing of the information.
Exceptions to this policy are:
(i) Where statutory requirements are at variance with the
policy;
(ii) Where the agency collects, processes, and disseminates the
information for the benefit of a specific identifiable group beyond
the benefit to the general public;
(iii) Where the agency plans to establish user charges at less
than cost of dissemination because of a determination that higher
charges would constitute a significant barrier to properly
performing the agency's functions, including reaching members of the
public whom the agency has a responsibility to inform; or
(iv) Where the Director of OMB determines an exception is
warranted.
(8) Electronic Information Dissemination. Agencies shall use
electronic media and formats, including public networks, as
appropriate and within budgetary constraints, in order to make
government information more easily accessible and useful to the
public. The use of electronic media and formats for information
dissemination is appropriate under the following conditions:
(a) The agency develops and maintains the information
electronically;
(b) Electronic media or formats are practical and cost effective
ways to provide public access to a large, highly detailed volume of
information;
(c) The agency disseminates the product frequently;
(d) The agency knows a substantial portion of users have ready
access to the necessary information technology and training to use
electronic information dissemination products;
(e) A change to electronic dissemination, as the sole means of
disseminating the product, will not impose substantial acquisition
or training costs on users, especially State and local governments
and small business entities.
(9) Safeguards. Agencies shall:
(a) Ensure that information is protected commensurate with the
risk and magnitude of the harm that would result from the loss,
misuse, or unauthorized access to or modification of such
information;
(b) Limit the collection of information which identifies
individuals to that which is legally authorized and necessary for
the proper performance of agency functions;
(c) Limit the sharing of information that identifies individuals
or contains proprietary information to that which is legally
authorized, and impose appropriate conditions on use where a
continuing obligation to ensure the confidentiality of the
information exists;
(d) Provide individuals, upon request, access to records about
them maintained in Privacy Act systems of records, and permit them
to amend such records as are in error consistent with the provisions
of the Privacy Act.
b. Information Systems and Information Technology Management
(1) Evaluation and Performance Measurement. Agencies shall
promote the appropriate application of Federal information resources
as follows:
(a) Seek opportunities to improve the effectiveness and
efficiency of government programs through work process redesign and
the judicious application of information technology;
(b) Prepare, and update as necessary throughout the information
system life cycle, a benefit-cost analysis for each information
system:
(i) At a level of detail appropriate to the size of the
investment;
(ii) Consistent with the methodology described in OMB Circular
No. A-94, ``Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis
of Federal Programs;'' and
(iii) that relies on systematic measures of mission performance,
including the:
(a) Effectiveness of program delivery;
(b) Efficiency of program administration; and
(c) Reduction in burden, including information collection
burden, imposed on the public;
(c) Conduct benefit-cost analyses to support ongoing management
oversight processes that maximize return on investment and minimize
financial and operational risk for investments in major information
systems on an agency-wide basis; and
(d) Conduct post-implementation reviews of information systems
to validate estimated benefits and document effective management
practices for broader use.
(2) Strategic Information Resources Management (IRM) Planning.
Agencies shall establish and maintain strategic information
resources management planning processes which include the following
components:
(a) Strategic IRM planning that addresses how the management of
information resources promotes the fulfillment of an agency's
mission. This planning process should support the development and
maintenance of a strategic IRM plan that reflects and anticipates
changes in the agency's mission, policy direction, technological
capabilities, or resource levels;
(b) Information planning that promotes the use of information
throughout its life cycle to maximize the usefulness of information,
minimize the burden on the public, and preserve the appropriate
integrity, availability, and confidentiality of information. It
shall specifically address the planning and budgeting for the
information collection burden imposed on the public as defined by 5
CFR 1320;
(c) Operational information technology planning that links
information technology to anticipated program and mission needs,
reflects budget constraints, and forms the basis for budget
requests. This planning should result in the preparation and
maintenance of an up-to-date five-year plan, as required by 44
U.S.C. 3506, which includes:
(i) A listing of existing and planned major information systems;
(ii) A listing of planned information technology acquisitions;
(iii) An explanation of how the listed major information systems
and planned information technology acquisitions relate to each other
and support the achievement of the agency's mission; and
(iv) A summary of computer security planning, as required by
Section 6 of the Computer Security Act of 1987 (40 U.S.C. 759 note);
and
(d) Coordination with other agency planning processes including
strategic, human resources, and financial resources.
[[Page 6434]]
(3) Information Systems Management Oversight. Agencies shall
establish information system management oversight mechanisms that:
(a) Ensure that each information system meets agency mission
requirements;
(b) Provide for periodic review of information systems to
determine:
(i) How mission requirements might have changed;
(ii) Whether the information system continues to fulfill ongoing
and anticipated mission requirements; and
(iii) What level of maintenance is needed to ensure the
information system meets mission requirements cost effectively;
(c) Ensure that the official who administers a program supported
by an information system is responsible and accountable for the
management of that information system throughout its life cycle;
(d) Provide for the appropriate training for users of Federal
information resources;
(e) Prescribe Federal information system requirements that do
not unduly restrict the prerogatives of State, local, and tribal
governments;
(f) Ensure that major information systems proceed in a timely
fashion towards agreed-upon milestones in an information system life
cycle, meet user requirements, and deliver intended benefits to the
agency and affected publics through coordinated decision making
about the information, human, financial, and other supporting
resources; and
(g) Ensure that financial management systems conform to the
requirements of OMB Circular No. A-127, ``Financial Management
Systems.''
(4) Use of Information Resources. Agencies shall create and
maintain management and technical frameworks for using information
resources that document linkages between mission needs, information
content, and information technology capabilities. These frameworks
should guide both strategic and operational IRM planning. They
should also address steps necessary to create an open systems
environment. Agencies shall implement the following principles:
(a) Develop information systems in a manner that facilitates
necessary interoperability, application portability, and scalability
of computerized applications across networks of heterogeneous
hardware, software, and communications platforms;
(b) Ensure that improvements to existing information systems and
the development of planned information systems do not unnecessarily
duplicate information systems available within the same agency, from
other agencies, or from the private sector;
(c) Share available information systems with other agencies to
the extent practicable and legally permissible;
(d) Meet information technology needs through intra-agency and
inter-agency sharing, when it is cost effective, before acquiring
new information technology resources;
(e) For Information Processing Service Organizations (IPSOs)
that have costs in excess of $5 million per year, agencies shall:
(i) Account for the full costs of operating all IPSOs; (ii)
Recover the costs incurred for providing IPSO services to all
service recipients on an equitable basis commensurate with the costs
required to provide those services; and
(iii) Document sharing agreements between service recipients and
IPSOs; and
(f) Establish a level of security for all information systems
that is commensurate with the risk and magnitude of the harm
resulting from the loss, misuse, or unauthorized access to or
modification of the information contained in these information
systems.
(5) Acquisition of Information Technology. Agencies shall:
(a) Acquire information technology in a manner that makes use of
full and open competition and that maximizes return on investment;
(b) Acquire off-the-shelf software from commercial sources,
unless the cost effectiveness of developing custom software to meet
mission needs is clear and has been documented;
(c) Acquire information technology in accordance with OMB
Circular No. A-109, ``Acquisition of Major Systems,'' where
appropriate; and
(d) Acquire information technology in a manner that considers
the need for accommodations of accessibility for individuals with
disabilities to the extent that needs for such access exist.
9. Assignment of Responsibilities
a. All Federal Agencies. The head of each agency shall:
(1) Have primary responsibility for managing agency information
resources;
(2) Ensure that the information policies, principles, standards,
guidelines, rules, and regulations prescribed by OMB are implemented
appropriately within the agency;
(3) Develop internal agency information policies and procedures
and oversee, evaluate, and otherwise periodically review agency
information resources management activities for conformity with the
policies set forth in this Circular;
(4) Develop agency policies and procedures that provide for
timely acquisition of required information technology;
(5) Maintain an inventory of the agencies' major information
systems, holdings and information dissemination products, as
required by 44 U.S.C. 3511.
(6) Implement and enforce applicable records management policies
and procedures, including requirements for archiving information
maintained in electronic format, particularly in the planning,
design and operation of information systems.
(7) Identify to the Director, OMB, statutory, regulatory, and
other impediments to efficient management of Federal information
resources and recommend to the Director legislation, policies,
procedures, and other guidance to improve such management;
(8) Assist OMB in the performance of its functions under the PRA
including making services, personnel, and facilities available to
OMB for this purpose to the extent practicable;
(9) Appoint a senior official, as required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(a),
who shall report directly to the agency head to carry out the
responsibilities of the agency under the PRA. The head of the agency
shall keep the Director, OMB, advised as to the name, title,
authority, responsibilities, and organizational resources of the
senior official. For purposes of this paragraph, military
departments and the Office of the Secretary of Defense may each
appoint one official.
(10) Direct the senior official appointed pursuant to 44 U.S.C.
3506(a) to monitor agency compliance with the policies, procedures,
and guidance in this Circular. Acting as an ombudsman, the senior
official shall consider alleged instances of agency failure to
comply with this Circular and recommend or take corrective action as
appropriate. The senior official shall report annually, not later
than February 1st of each year, to the Director those instances of
alleged failure to comply with this Circular and their resolution.
b. Department of State. The Secretary of State shall:
(1) Advise the Director, OMB, on the development of United
States positions and policies on international information policy
issues affecting Federal Government information activities and
ensure that such positions and policies are consistent with Federal
information resources management policy;
(2) Ensure, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, that
the United States is represented in the development of international
information technology standards, and advise the Director, OMB, of
such activities.
c. Department of Commerce. The Secretary of Commerce shall:
(1) Develop and issue Federal Information Processing Standards
and guidelines necessary to ensure the efficient and effective
acquisition, management, security, and use of information
technology;
(2) Advise the Director, OMB, on the development of policies
relating to the procurement and management of Federal
telecommunications resources;
(3) Provide OMB and the agencies with scientific and technical
advisory services relating to the development and use of information
technology;
(4) Conduct studies and evaluations concerning
telecommunications technology, and concerning the improvement,
expansion, testing, operation, and use of Federal telecommunications
systems and advise the Director, OMB, and appropriate agencies of
the recommendations that result from such studies;
(5) Develop, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the
Director of OMB, plans, policies, and programs relating to
international telecommunications issues affecting government
information activities;
(6) Identify needs for standardization of telecommunications and
information processing technology, and develop standards, in
consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of
General Services, to ensure efficient application of such
technology;
(7) Ensure that the Federal Government is represented in the
development of national and, in consultation with the Secretary of
[[Page 6435]]
State, international information technology standards, and advise the
Director, OMB, of such activities.
d. Department of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall
develop, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services,
uniform Federal telecommunications standards and guidelines to
ensure national security, emergency preparedness, and continuity of
government.
e. General Services Administration. The Administrator of General
Services shall:
(1) Advise the Director, OMB, and agency heads on matters
affecting the procurement of information technology;
(2) Coordinate and, when required, provide for the purchase,
lease, and maintenance of information technology required by Federal
agencies;
(3) Develop criteria for timely procurement of information
technology and delegate procurement authority to agencies that
comply with the criteria;
(4) Provide guidelines and regulations for Federal agencies, as
authorized by law, on the acquisition, maintenance, and disposition
of information technology, and for implementation of Federal
Information Processing Standards;
(5) Develop policies and guidelines that facilitate the sharing
of information technology among agencies as required by this
Circular;
(6) Manage the Information Technology Fund in accordance with
the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act as amended;
f. Office of Personnel Management. The Director, Office of
Personnel Management, shall:
(1) Develop and conduct training programs for Federal personnel
on information resources management including end-user computing;
(2) Evaluate periodically future personnel management and
staffing requirements for Federal information resources management;
(3) Establish personnel security policies and develop training
programs for Federal personnel associated with the design,
operation, or maintenance of information systems.
g. National Archives and Records Administration. The Archivist
of the United States shall:
(1) Administer the Federal records management program in
accordance with the National Archives and Records Act;
(2) Assist the Director, OMB, in developing standards and
guidelines relating to the records management program.
h. Office of Management and Budget. The Director of the Office
of Management and Budget shall:
(1) Provide overall leadership and coordination of Federal
information resources management within the executive branch;
(2) Serve as the President's principal adviser on procurement
and management of Federal telecommunications systems, and develop
and establish policies for procurement and management of such
systems;
(3) Issue policies, procedures, and guidelines to assist
agencies in achieving integrated, effective, and efficient
information resources management;
(4) Initiate and review proposals for changes in legislation,
regulations, and agency procedures to improve Federal information
resources management;
(5) Review and approve or disapprove agency proposals for
collection of information from the public, as defined by 5 CFR
1320.3;
(6) Develop and maintain a Governmentwide strategic plan for
information resources management.
(7) Evaluate agencies' information resources management and
identify cross-cutting information policy issues through the review
of agency information programs, information collection budgets,
information technology acquisition plans, fiscal budgets, and by
other means;
(8) Provide policy oversight for the Federal records management
function conducted by the National Archives and Records
Administration, coordinate records management policies and programs
with other information activities, and review compliance by agencies
with records management requirements;
(9) Review agencies' policies, practices, and programs
pertaining to the security, protection, sharing, and disclosure of
information, in order to ensure compliance, with respect to privacy
and security, with the Privacy Act, the Freedom of Information Act,
the Computer Security Act and related statutes;
(10) Resolve information technology procurement disputes between
agencies and the General Services Administration pursuant to Section
111 of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act;
(11) Review proposed U.S. Government Position and Policy
statements on international issues affecting Federal Government
information activities and advise the Secretary of State as to their
consistency with Federal information resources management policy.
(12) Coordinate the development and review by the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of policy associated with Federal
procurement and acquisition of information technology with the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy.
10. Oversight:
a. The Director, OMB, will use information technology planning
reviews, fiscal budget reviews, information collection budget
reviews, management reviews, and such other measures as the Director
deems necessary to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of each
agency's information resources management and compliance with this
Circular.
b. The Director, OMB, may, consistent with statute and upon
written request of an agency, grant a waiver from particular
requirements of this Circular. Requests for waivers must detail the
reasons why a particular waiver is sought, identify the duration of
the waiver sought, and include a plan for the prompt and orderly
transition to full compliance with the requirements of this
Circular. Notice of each waiver request shall be published promptly
by the agency in the Federal Register, with a copy of the waiver
request made available to the public on request.
11. Effectiveness: This Circular is effective upon issuance.
Nothing in this Circular shall be construed to confer a private
right of action on any person.
12. Inquiries: All questions or inquiries should be addressed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. 20503. Telephone: (202) 395-
3785.
13. Sunset Review Date: OMB will review this Circular three
years from the date of issuance to ascertain its effectiveness.
Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130--Federal Agency Responsibilities
for Maintaining Records About Individuals
1. Purpose and Scope
This Appendix describes agency responsibilities for implementing
the reporting and publication requirements of the Privacy Act of
1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, as amended (hereinafter ``the Act''). It
applies to all agencies subject to the Act. Note that this Appendix
does not rescind other guidance OMB has issued to help agencies
interpret the Privacy Act's provisions, e.g., Privacy Act Guidelines
(40 FR 28949-28978, July 9, 1975), or Final Guidance for Conducting
Matching Programs (54 FR at 25819, June 19, 1989).
2. Definitions
a. The terms ``agency,'' ``individual,'' ``maintain,''
``matching program,'' ``record,'' ``system of records,'' and
``routine use,'' as used in this Appendix, are defined in the Act (5
U.S.C. 552a(a)).
b. Matching Agency. Generally, the Recipient Federal agency (or
the Federal source agency in a match conducted by a nonfederal
agency) is the matching agency and is responsible for meeting the
reporting and publication requirements associated with the matching
program. However, in large, multi-agency matching programs, where
the recipient agency is merely performing the matches and the
benefit accrues to the source agencies, the partners should assign
responsibility for compliance with the administrative requirements
in a fair and reasonable way. This may mean having the matching
agency carry out these requirements for all parties, having one
participant designated to do so, or having each source agency do so
for its own matching program(s).
c. Nonfederal Agency. Nonfederal agencies are State or local
governmental agencies receiving or providing records in a matching
program with a Federal agency.
d. Recipient Agency. Recipient agencies are Federal agencies or
their contractors receiving automated records from the Privacy Act
systems of records of other Federal agencies, or from State or local
governments, to be used in a matching program as defined in the Act.
e. Source Agency. A source agency is a Federal agency that
discloses automated records from a system of records to another
Federal agency or to a State or local agency to be used in a
matching program. It is also a State or local agency that discloses
records to a Federal agency for use in a matching program.
[[Page 6436]]
3. Assignment of Responsibilities
a. All Federal Agencies. In addition to meeting the agency
requirements contained in the Act and the specific reporting and
publication requirements detailed in this Appendix, the head of each
agency shall ensure that the following reviews are conducted as
often as specified below, and be prepared to report to the Director,
OMB, the results of such reviews and the corrective action taken to
resolve problems uncovered. The head of each agency shall:
(1) Section (m) Contracts. Review every two years a random
sample of agency contracts that provide for the maintenance of a
system of records on behalf of the agency to accomplish an agency
function, in order to ensure that the wording of each contract makes
the provisions of the Act binding on the contractor and his or her
employees. (See 5 U.S.C. 552a(m)(1)).
(2) Recordkeeping Practices. Review biennially agency
recordkeeping and disposal policies and practices in order to assure
compliance with the Act, paying particular attention to the
maintenance of automated records.
(3) Routine Use Disclosures. Review every four years the routine
use disclosures associated with each system of records in order to
ensure that the recipient's use of such records continues to be
compatible with the purpose for which the disclosing agency
collected the information.
(4) Exemption of Systems of Records. Review every four years
each system of records for which the agency has promulgated
exemption rules pursuant to Section (j) or (k) of the Act in order
to determine whether such exemption is still needed.
(5) Matching Programs. Review annually each ongoing matching
program in which the agency has participated during the year in
order to ensure that the requirements of the Act, the OMB guidance,
and any agency regulations, operating instructions, or guidelines
have been met.
(6) Privacy Act Training. Review biennially agency training
practices in order to ensure that all agency personnel are familiar
with the requirements of the Act, with the agency's implementing
regulation, and with any special requirements of their specific
jobs.
(7) Violations. Review biennially the actions of agency
personnel that have resulted either in the agency being found
civilly liable under Section (g) of the Act, or an employee being
found criminally liable under the provisions of Section (i) of the
Act, in order to determine the extent of the problem, and to find
the most effective way to prevent recurrence of the problem.
(8) Systems of Records Notices. Review biennially each system of
records notice to ensure that it accurately describes the system of
records. Where minor changes are needed, e.g., the name of the
system manager, ensure that an amended notice is published in the
Federal Register. Agencies may choose to make one annual
comprehensive publication consolidating such minor changes. This
requirement is distinguished from and in addition to the requirement
to report to OMB and Congress significant changes to systems of
records and to publish those changes in the Federal Register (See
paragraph 4c of this Appendix).
b. Department of Commerce. The Secretary of Commerce shall,
consistent with guidelines issued by the Director, OMB, develop and
issue standards and guidelines for ensuring the security of
information protected by the Act in automated information systems.
c. The Department of Defense, General Services Administration,
and National Aeronautics and Space Administration. These agencies
shall, consistent with guidelines issued by the Director, OMB,
ensure that instructions are issued on what agencies must do in
order to comply with the requirements of Section (m) of the Act when
contracting for the operation of a system of records to accomplish
an agency purpose.
d. Office of Personnel Management. The Director of the Office of
Personnel Management shall, consistent with guidelines issued by the
Director, OMB:
(1) Develop and maintain government-wide standards and
procedures for civilian personnel information processing and
recordkeeping directives to assure conformance with the Act.
(2) Develop and conduct Privacy Act training programs for agency
personnel, including both the conduct of courses in various
substantive areas (e.g., administrative, information technology) and
the development of materials that agencies can use in their own
courses. The assignment of this responsibility to OPM does not
affect the responsibility of individual agency heads for developing
and conducting training programs tailored to the specific needs of
their own personnel.
e. National Archives and Records Administration. The Archivist
of the United States through the Office of the Federal Register,
shall, consistent with guidelines issued by the Director, OMB:
(1) Issue instructions on the format of the agency notices and
rules required to be published under the Act.
(2) Compile and publish every two years, the rules promulgated
under 5 U.S.C. 552a(f) and agency notices published under 5 U.S.C.
552a(e)(4) in a form available to the public at low cost.
(3) Issue procedures governing the transfer of records to
Federal Records Centers for storage, processing, and servicing
pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3103. For purposes of the Act, such records
are considered to be maintained by the agency that deposited them.
The Archivist may disclose deposited records only according to the
access rules established by the agency that deposited them.
f. Office of Management and Budget. The Director of the Office
of Management and Budget will:
(1) Issue guidelines and directives to the agencies to implement
the Act.
(2) Assist the agencies, at their request, in implementing their
Privacy Act programs.
(3) Review new and altered system of records and matching
program reports submitted pursuant to Section (o) of the Act.
(4) Compile the biennial report of the President to Congress in
accordance with Section (s) of the Act.
(5) Compile and issue a biennial report on the agencies'
implementation of the computer matching provisions of the Privacy
Act, pursuant to Section (u)(6) of the Act.
4. Reporting Requirements. The Privacy Act requires agencies to
make the following kinds of reports:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Report When Due Recipient**
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biennial Privacy Act Report.................. June 30, 1996, Administrator, OIRA.
1998, 2000, 2002.
Biennial Matching Activity Report............ June 30, 1996, Administrator, OIRA.
1998, 2000, 2002.
New System of Records Report................. When establishing a Administrator, OIRA, Congress.
system of records--
at least 40 days
before operating
the system*.
Altered System of Records Report............. When adding a new *Administrator, OIRA, Congress.
routine use,
exemption, or
otherwise
significantly
altering an
existing system of
records--at least
40 days before
change to system
takes place.
New Matching Program Report.................. When establishing a Administrator, OIRA, Congress.
new matching
program--at least
40 days before
operating the
program*.
Renewal of Existing Matching Program......... At least 40 days Administrator, OIRA, Congress.
prior to
expiration of any
one year extension
of the original
program--treat as
a new program.
Altered Matching Program..................... When making a Administrator, OIRA, Congress.
significant change
to an existing
matching program--
at least 40 days
before operating
an altered
program*.
Matching Agreements.......................... At least 40 days Congress.
prior to the start
of a matching
program*.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Review Period: Note that the statutory reporting requirement is 30 days prior; the additional ten days will
ensure that OMB and Congress have sufficient time to review the proposal. Agencies should therefore ensure
that reports are mailed expeditiously after being signed.
**Recipient Addresses: At bottom of envelope print ``Privacy Act Report''.
[[Page 6437]]
House of Representatives: The Chair of the House Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight, 2157 RHOB, Washington, D.C. 20515-
6143.
Senate: The Chair of the Senate Committee on Governmental
Affairs, 340 SDOB, Washington, D.C. 20510-6250.
Office of Management and Budget: The Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, ATTN: Docket Library, NEOB Room 10012, Washington, D.C.
20503.
a. Biennial Privacy Act Report. To provide the necessary
information for the biennial report of the President, agencies shall
submit a biennial report to OMB, covering their Privacy Act
activities for the calendar years covered by the reporting period.
The exact format of the report will be established by OMB. At a
minimum, however, agencies should collect and be prepared to report
the following data on a calendar year basis:
(1) A listing of publication activity during the year showing
the following:
*Total Number of Systems of Records (Exempt/NonExempt)
*Number of New Systems of Records Added (Exempt/NonExempt)
*Number Routine Uses Added
*Number Exemptions Added to Existing Systems
*Number Exemptions Deleted from Existing Systems
*Total Number of Automated Systems of Records (Exempt/NonExempt)
The agency should provide a brief narrative describing those
activities in detail, e.g., ``the Department added a (k)(1)
exemption to an existing system of records entitled ``Investigative
Records of the Office of Investigations;'' or ``the agency added a
new routine use to a system of records entitled `Employee Health
Records' that would permit disclosure of health data to researchers
under contract to the agency to perform workplace risk analysis.''
(2) A brief description of any public comments received on
agency publication and implementation activities, and agency
response.
(3) Number of access and amendment requests from record subjects
citing the Privacy Act that were received during the calendar year
of the report. Also the disposition of requests from any year that
were completed during the calendar year of the report:
*Total Number of Access Requests
Number Granted in Whole
Number Granted in Part
Number Wholly Denied
Number For Which No Record Found
*Total Amendment Requests
Number Granted in Whole
Number Granted in Part
Number Wholly Denied
*Number of Appeals of Denials of Access
Number Granted in Whole
Number Granted in Part
Number Wholly Denied
Number For Which No Record Found
*Number of Appeals of Denials of Amendment
Number Granted in Whole
Number Granted in Part
Number Wholly Denied
(4) Number of instances in which individuals brought suit under
section (g) of the Privacy Act against the agency and the results of
any such litigation that resulted in a change to agency practices or
affected guidance issued by OMB.
(5) Results of the reviews undertaken in response to paragraph
3a of this Appendix.
(6) Description of agency Privacy Act training activities
conducted in accordance with paragraph 3a(6) of this Appendix.
b. Biennial Matching Activity Report (See 5 U.S.C.
552a(u)(3)(D)). At the end of each calendar year, the Data Integrity
Board of each agency that has participated in a matching program
will collect data summarizing that year's matching activity. The Act
requires that such activity be reported every two years. OMB will
establish the exact format of the report, but agencies' Data
Integrity Boards should be prepared to report the data identified
below both to the agency head and to OMB:
(1) A listing of the names and positions of the members of the
Data Integrity Board and showing separately the name of the Board
Secretary, his or her agency mailing address, and telephone number.
Also show and explain any changes in membership or structure
occurring during the reporting year.
(2) A listing of each matching program, by title and purpose, in
which the agency participated during the reporting year. This
listing should show names of participant agencies, give a brief
description of the program, and give a page citation and the date of
the Federal Register notice describing the program.
(3) For each matching program, an indication of whether the
cost/benefit analysis performed resulted in a favorable ratio. The
Data Integrity Board should explain why the agency proceeded with
any matching program for which an unfavorable ratio was reached.
(4) For each program for which the Board waived a cost/benefit
analysis, the reasons for the waiver and the results of the match,
if tabulated.
(5) A description of any matching agreement the Board rejected
and an explanation of the rejection.
(6) A listing of any violations of matching agreements that have
been alleged or identified, and a discussion of any action taken.
(7) A discussion of any litigation involving the agency's
participation in any matching program.
(8) For any litigation based on allegations of inaccurate
records, an explanation of the steps the agency used to ensure the
integrity of its data as well as the verification process it used in
the matching program, including an assessment of the adequacy of
each.
c. New and Altered System of Records Report. The Act requires
agencies to publish notices in the Federal Register describing new
or altered systems of records, and to submit reports to OMB, and to
the Chair of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight of the
House of Representatives, and the Chair of the Committee on
Governmental Affairs of the Senate. The reports must be transmitted
at least 40 days prior to the operation of the new system of records
or the date on which the alteration to an existing system takes
place.
(1) Which Alterations Require a Report. Minor changes to systems
of records need not be reported. For example, a change in the
designation of the system manager due to a reorganization would not
require a report, so long as an individual's ability to gain access
to his or her records is not affected. Other examples include
changing applicable safeguards as a result of a risk analysis or
deleting a routine use when there is no longer a need for the
disclosure. The following changes are those for which a report is
required:
(a) A significant increase in the number, type, or category of
individuals about whom records are maintained. For example, a system
covering physicians that has been expanded to include other types of
health care providers, e.g., nurses, technicians, etc., would
require a report. Increases attributable to normal growth should not
be reported.
(b) A change that expands the types or categories of information
maintained. For example, a benefit system which originally included
only earned income information that has been expanded to include
unearned income information.
(c) A change that alters the purpose for which the information
is used.
(d) A change to equipment configuration (either hardware or
software) that creates substantially greater access to the records
in the system of records. For example, locating interactive
terminals at regional offices for accessing a system formerly
accessible only at the headquarters would require a report.
(e) The addition of an exemption pursuant to Section (j) or (k)
of the Act. Note that, in examining a rulemaking for a Privacy Act
exemption as part of a report of a new or altered system of records,
OMB will also review the rule under applicable regulatory review
procedures and agencies need not make a separate submission for that
purpose.
(f) The addition of a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
552a(b)(3).
(2) Reporting Changes to Multiple Systems of Records. When an
agency makes a change to an information technology installation or a
telecommunication network, or makes any other general changes in
information collection, processing, dissemination, or storage that
affect multiple systems of records, it may submit a single,
consolidated report, with changes to existing notices and supporting
documentation included in the submission.
(3) Contents of the New or Altered System Report. The report for
a new or altered system has three elements: a transmittal letter, a
narrative statement, and supporting documentation.
(a) Transmittal Letter. The transmittal letter should be signed
by the senior agency official responsible for implementation of the
Act within the agency and should contain the name and telephone
number of the individual who can best answer questions about the
system of records. The letter should contain the agency's assurance
that the proposed system does not duplicate any existing agency or
government-wide systems of records. The letter sent to OMB may also
include a request for waiver of the time
[[Page 6438]]
period for the review. The agency should indicate why it cannot meet
the established review period and the consequences of not obtaining
the waiver. (See paragraph 4e below.) There is no prescribed format
for the letter.
(b) Narrative Statement. There is also no prescribed format for
the narrative statement, but it should be brief. It should make
reference, as appropriate, to information in the supporting
documentation rather than restating such information. The statement
should:
1. Describe the purpose for which the agency is establishing the
system of records.
2. Identify the authority under which the system of records is
maintained. The agency should avoid citing housekeeping statutes,
but rather cite the underlying programmatic authority for
collecting, maintaining, and using the information. When the system
is being operated to support an agency housekeeping program, e.g., a
carpool locator, the agency may, however, cite a general
housekeeping statute that authorizes the agency head to keep such
records as necessary.
3. Provide the agency's evaluation of the probable or potential
effect of the proposal on the privacy of individuals.
4. Provide a brief description of the steps taken by the agency
to minimize the risk of unauthorized access to the system of
records. A more detailed assessment of the risks and specific
administrative, technical, procedural, and physical safeguards
established shall be made available to OMB upon request.
5. Explain how each proposed routine use satisfies the
compatibility requirement of subsection (a)(7) of the Act. For
altered systems, this requirement pertains only to any newly
proposed routine use.
6. Provide OMB Control Numbers, expiration dates, and titles of
any information collection requests (e.g., forms, surveys, etc.)
contained in the system of records and approved by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. If the request for OMB clearance of an
information collection is pending, the agency may simply state the
title of the collection and the date it was submitted for OMB
clearance.
(c) Supporting Documentation. Attach the following to all new or
altered system of records reports:
1. A copy of the new or altered system of records notice
consistent with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4). The notice
must appear in the format prescribed by the Office of the Federal
Register's Document Drafting Handbook. For proposed altered systems
the agency should supply a copy of the original system of records
notice to ensure that reviewers can understand the changes proposed.
If the sole change to an existing system of records is to add a
routine use, the agency should either republish the entire system of
records notice, a condensed description of the system of records, or
a citation to the last full text Federal Register publication.
2. A copy in Federal Register format of any new exemption rules
or changes to published rules (consistent with the provisions of 5
U.S.C. 552a(f),(j), or (k)) that the agency proposes to issue for
the new or altered system.
(4) OMB Review. OMB will review reports under 5 U.S.C. 552a(r)
and provide comments if appropriate. Agencies may assume that OMB
concurs in the Privacy Act aspects of their proposal if OMB has not
commented within 40 days from the date the transmittal letter was
signed. Agencies should ensure that letters are transmitted
expeditiously after they are signed.
(5) Timing of Systems of Records Reports. Agencies may publish
system of records and routine use notices as well as proposed
exemption rules in the Federal Register at the same time that they
send the new or altered system report to OMB and Congress. The
period for OMB and congressional review and the notice and comment
period for routine uses and exemptions will then run concurrently.
Note that exemptions must be published as final rules before they
are effective.
d. New or Altered Matching Program Report. The Act requires
agencies to publish notices in the Federal Register describing new
or altered matching programs, and to submit reports to OMB, and to
Congress. The report must be received at least 40 days prior to the
initiation of any matching activity carried out under a new or
substantially altered matching program. For renewals of continuing
programs, the report must be dated at least 40 days prior to the
expiration of any existing matching agreement.
(1) When to Report Altered Matching Programs. Agencies need not
report minor changes to matching programs. The term ``minor change
to a matching program'' means a change that does not significantly
alter the terms of the agreement under which the program is being
carried out. Examples of significant changes include:
(a) Changing the purpose for which the program was established.
(b) Changing the matching population, either by including new
categories of record subjects or by greatly increasing the numbers
of records matched.
(c) Changing the legal authority covering the matching program.
(d) Changing the source or recipient agencies involved in the
matching program.
(2) Contents of New or Altered Matching Program Report. The
report for a new or altered matching program has three elements: a
transmittal letter, a narrative statement, and supporting
documentation that includes a copy of the proposed Federal Register
notice.
(a) Transmittal Letter. The transmittal letter should be signed
by the senior agency official responsible for implementation of the
Privacy Act within the agency and should contain the name and
telephone number of the individual who can best answer questions
about the matching program. The letter should state that a copy of
the matching agreement has been distributed to Congress as the Act
requires. The letter to OMB may also include a request for waiver of
the review time period. (See 4e below.)
(b) Narrative Statement. There is no prescribed format for the
narrative statement, but it should be brief. It should make
reference, as appropriate, to information in the supporting
documentation rather than restating such information. The statement
should provide:
1. A description of the purpose of the matching program and the
authority under which it is being carried out.
2. A description of the security safeguards used to protect
against any unauthorized access or disclosure of records used in the
match.
3. If the cost/benefit analysis required by Section (u)(4)(A)
indicated an unfavorable ratio or was waived pursuant to OMB
guidance, an explanation of the basis on which the agency justifies
conducting the match.
(c) Supporting Documentation. Attach the following:
1. A copy of the Federal Register notice describing the
matching program. The notice must appear in the format prescribed by
the Office of the Federal Register's Document Drafting Handbook.
(See 5b (3).)
2. For the Congressional report only, a copy of the matching
agreement.
(3) OMB Review. OMB will review reports under 5 U.S.C. 552a(r)
and provide comments if appropriate. Agencies may assume that OMB
concurs in the Privacy Act aspects of their proposal if OMB has not
commented within 40 days from the date the transmittal letter was
signed.
(4) Timing of Matching Program Reports. Agencies should ensure
that letters are transmitted expeditiously after they are signed.
Agencies may publish matching program notices in the Federal
Register at the same time that they send the matching program report
to OMB and Congress. The period for OMB and congressional review and
the notice and comment period will then run concurrently.
e. Expedited Review. The Director, OMB, may grant a waiver of
the 40-day review period for either systems of records or matching
program reviews. The agency must ask for the waiver in the
transmittal letter and demonstrate compelling reasons. When a waiver
is granted, the agency is not thereby relieved of any other
requirement of the Act. If no waiver is granted, agencies may
presume concurrence at the expiration of the 40 day review period if
OMB has not commented by that time. Note that OMB cannot waive time
periods specifically established by the Act such as the 30 days
notice and comment period required for the adoption of a routine use
proposal pursuant to Section (b)(3) of the Act.
5. Publication Requirements. The Privacy Act requires agencies
to publish notices or rules in the Federal Register in the following
circumstances: when adopting a new or altered system of records,
when adopting a routine use, when adopting an exemption for a system
of records, or when proposing to carry out a new or altered matching
program. (See paragraph 4c(1) and 4d(1) above on what constitutes an
alteration requiring a report to OMB and the Congress.)
a. Publishing New or Altered Systems of Records Notices and
Exemption Rules.
(1) Who Publishes. The agency responsible for operating the
system of records makes the necessary publication. Publication
should be carried out at the departmental or agency level. Even
where a system of records is to
[[Page 6439]]
be operated exclusively by a component, the department rather than the
component should publish the notice. Thus, for example, the
Department of the Treasury would publish a system of records notice
covering a system operated exclusively by the Internal Revenue
Service. Note that if the agency is proposing to exempt the system
under Section (j) or (k) of the Act, it must publish a rule in
addition to the system of records notice.
(a) Government-wide Systems of Records. Certain agencies publish
systems of records containing records for which they have
government-wide responsibilities. The records may be located in
other agencies, but they are being used under the authority of and
in conformance with the rules mandated by the publishing agency. The
Office of Personnel Management, for example, has published a number
of government-wide systems of records relating to the operation of
the government's personnel program. Agencies should not publish
systems of records that wholly or partly duplicate existing
government-wide systems of records.
(b) Section (m) Contract Provisions. When an agency provides by
contract for the operation of a system of records, it should ensure
that a system of records notice describing the system has been
published. It should also review the notice to ensure that it
contains a routine use under Section (e)(4)(D) of the Act permitting
disclosure to the contractor and his or her personnel.
(2) When to Publish.
(a) System Notice. The system of records notice must appear in
the Federal Register before the agency begins to operate the system,
e.g., collect and use the information.
(b) Routine Use. A routine use must be published in the Federal
Register 30 days before the agency discloses records pursuant to its
terms. (Note that the addition of a routine use to an existing
system of records requires a report to OMB and Congress, and that
the review period for this report is 40 days.)
(c) Exemption Rule. A rule exempting a system of records under
(j) or (k) or the Act must be established through informal
rulemaking pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act. This
process generally requires publication of a proposed rule, a period
during which the public may comment, publication of a final rule,
and the adoption of the final rule. Agencies may not withhold
records under an exemption until these requirements have been met.
(3) Format. Agencies should follow the publication format
contained in the Office of the Federal Register's Document Drafting
Handbook which may be obtained from the Government Printing Office.
b. Publishing Matching Notices.
(1) Who Publishes. Generally, the recipient Federal agency (or
the Federal source agency in a match conducted by a nonfederal
agency) is responsible for publishing in the Federal Register a
notice describing the new or altered matching program. However, in
large, multi-agency matching programs, where the recipient agency is
merely performing the matches, and the benefit accrues to the source
agencies, the partners should assign responsibility for compliance
with the administrative requirements in a fair and reasonable way.
This may mean having the matching agency carry out these
requirements for all parties, having one participant designated to
do so, or having each source agency do so for its own matching
program(s).
(2) Timing. Publication must occur at least 30 days prior to the
initiation of any matching activity carried out under a new or
substantially altered matching program. For renewals of programs
agencies wish to continue past the 30 month period of initial
eligibility (i.e., the initial 18 months plus a one year extension),
publication must occur at least 30 days prior to the expiration of
the existing matching agreement. (But note that a report to OMB and
the Congress is also required with a 40 day review period).
(3) Format. The matching notice shall be in the format
prescribed by the Office of the Federal Register's Document Drafting
Handbook and contain the following information:
(a) The name of the Recipient Agency.
(b) The Name(s) of the Source Agencies.
(c) The beginning and ending dates of the match.
(d) A brief description of the matching program, including its
purpose; the legal authorities authorizing its operation; categories
of individuals involved; and identification of records used,
including name(s) of Privacy Act Systems of records.
(e) The identification, address, and telephone number of a
Recipient Agency official who will answer public inquiries about the
program.
Appendix II to OMB Circular No. A-130--Cost Accounting, Cost Recovery,
and Interagency Sharing of Information Technology Facilities
[The guidance formerly found in Appendix II has been revised and
placed in Section 8b. See, Transmittal No. 2, 59 FR 37906. Appendix
II has been deleted and is reserved for future topics.]
Appendix III to OMB Circular No. A-130--Security of Federal Automated
Information Resources
A. Requirements
1. Purpose
This Appendix establishes a minimum set of controls to be
included in Federal automated information security programs; assigns
Federal agency responsibilities for the security of automated
information; and links agency automated information security
programs and agency management control systems established in
accordance with OMB Circular No. A-123. The Appendix revises
procedures formerly contained in Appendix III to OMB Circular No. A-
130 (50 FR 52730; December 24, 1985), and incorporates requirements
of the Computer Security Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-235) and
responsibilities assigned in applicable national security
directives.
2. Definitions
The term:
a. ``Adequate security'' means security commensurate with the
risk and magnitude of the harm resulting from the loss, misuse, or
unauthorized access to or modification of information. This includes
assuring that systems and applications used by the agency operate
effectively and provide appropriate confidentiality, integrity, and
availability, through the use of cost-effective management,
personnel, operational, and technical controls.
b. ``Application'' means the use of information resources
(information and information technology) to satisfy a specific set
of user requirements.
c. ``General support system'' or ``system'' means an
interconnected set of information resources under the same direct
management control which shares common functionality. A system
normally includes hardware, software, information, data,
applications, communications, and people. A system can be, for
example, a local area network (LAN) including smart terminals that
supports a branch office, an agency-wide backbone, a communications
network, a departmental data processing center including its
operating system and utilities, a tactical radio network, or a
shared information processing service organization (IPSO).
d. ``Major application'' means an application that requires
special attention to security due to the risk and magnitude of the
harm resulting from the loss, misuse, or unauthorized access to or
modification of the information in the application. Note: All
Federal applications require some level of protection. Certain
applications, because of the information in them, however, require
special management oversight and should be treated as major.
Adequate security for other applications should be provided by
security of the systems in which they operate.
3. Automated Information Security Programs. Agencies shall
implement and maintain a program to assure that adequate security is
provided for all agency information collected, processed,
transmitted, stored, or disseminated in general support systems and
major applications.
Each agency's program shall implement policies, standards and
procedures which are consistent with government-wide policies,
standards, and procedures issued by the Office of Management and
Budget, the Department of Commerce, the General Services
Administration and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Different or more stringent requirements for securing national
security information should be incorporated into agency programs as
required by appropriate national security directives. At a minimum,
agency programs shall include the following controls in their
general support systems and major applications:
a. Controls for general support systems.
(1) Assign Responsibility for Security. Assign responsibility
for security in each system to an individual knowledgeable in the
information technology used in the system and in providing security
for such technology.
(2) System Security Plan. Plan for adequate security of each
general support system as part of the organization's information
resources management (IRM) planning process. The security plan shall
be consistent
[[Page 6440]]
with guidance issued by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST). Independent advice and comment on the security
plan shall be solicited prior to the plan's implementation. A
summary of the security plans shall be incorporated into the
strategic IRM plan required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35) and Section 8(b) of this circular. Security plans
shall include:
(a) Rules of the System. Establish a set of rules of behavior
concerning use of, security in, and the acceptable level of risk
for, the system. The rules shall be based on the needs of the
various users of the system. The security required by the rules
shall be only as stringent as necessary to provide adequate security
for information in the system. Such rules shall clearly delineate
responsibilities and expected behavior of all individuals with
access to the system. They shall also include appropriate limits on
interconnections to other systems and shall define service provision
and restoration priorities. Finally, they shall be clear about the
consequences of behavior not consistent with the rules.
(b) Training. Ensure that all individuals are appropriately
trained in how to fulfill their security responsibilities before
allowing them access to the system. Such training shall assure that
employees are versed in the rules of the system, be consistent with
guidance issued by NIST and OPM, and apprise them about available
assistance and technical security products and techniques. Behavior
consistent with the rules of the system and periodic refresher
training shall be required for continued access to the system.
(c) Personnel Controls. Screen individuals who are authorized to
bypass significant technical and operational security controls of
the system commensurate with the risk and magnitude of harm they
could cause. Such screening shall occur prior to an individual being
authorized to bypass controls and periodically thereafter.
(d) Incident Response Capability. Ensure that there is a
capability to provide help to users when a security incident occurs
in the system and to share information concerning common
vulnerabilities and threats. This capability shall share information
with other organizations, consistent with NIST coordination, and
should assist the agency in pursuing appropriate legal action,
consistent with Department of Justice guidance.
(e) Continuity of Support. Establish and periodically test the
capability to continue providing service within a system based upon
the needs and priorities of the participants of the system.
(f) Technical Security. Ensure that cost-effective security
products and techniques are appropriately used within the system.
(g) System Interconnection. Obtain written management
authorization, based upon the acceptance of risk to the system,
prior to connecting with other systems. Where connection is
authorized, controls shall be established which are consistent with
the rules of the system and in accordance with guidance from NIST.
(3) Review of Security Controls. Review the security controls in
each system when significant modifications are made to the system,
but at least every three years. The scope and frequency of the
review should be commensurate with the acceptable level of risk for
the system. Depending on the potential risk and magnitude of harm
that could occur, consider identifying a deficiency pursuant to OMB
Circular No. A-123, ``Management Accountability and Control'' and
the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA), if there is
no assignment of security responsibility, no security plan, or no
authorization to process for a system.
(4) Authorize Processing. Ensure that a management official
authorizes in writing the use of each general support system based
on implementation of its security plan before beginning or
significantly changing processing in the system. Use of the system
shall be re-authorized at least every three years.
b. Controls for Major Applications.
(1) Assign Responsibility for Security. Assign responsibility
for security of each major application to a management official
knowledgeable in the nature of the information and process supported
by the application and in the management, personnel, operational,
and technical controls used to protect it. This official shall
assure that effective security products and techniques are
appropriately used in the application and shall be contacted when a
security incident occurs concerning the application.
(2) Application Security Plan. Plan for the adequate security of
each major application, taking into account the security of all
systems in which the application will operate. The plan shall be
consistent with guidance issued by NIST. Advice and comment on the
plan shall be solicited from the official responsible for security
in the primary system in which the application will operate prior to
the plan's implementation. A summary of the security plans shall be
incorporated into the strategic IRM plan required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act. Application security plans shall include:
(a) Application Rules. Establish a set of rules concerning use
of and behavior within the application. The rules shall be as
stringent as necessary to provide adequate security for the
application and the information in it. Such rules shall clearly
delineate responsibilities and expected behavior of all individuals
with access to the application. In addition, the rules shall be
clear about the consequences of behavior not consistent with the
rules.
(b) Specialized Training. Before allowing individuals access to
the application, ensure that all individuals receive specialized
training focused on their responsibilities and the application
rules. This may be in addition to the training required for access
to a system. Such training may vary from a notification at the time
of access (e.g., for members of the public using an information
retrieval application) to formal training (e.g., for an employee
that works with a high-risk application).
(c) Personnel Security. Incorporate controls such as separation
of duties, least privilege and individual accountability into the
application and application rules as appropriate. In cases where
such controls cannot adequately protect the application or
information in it, screen individuals commensurate with the risk and
magnitude of the harm they could cause. Such screening shall be done
prior to the individuals' being authorized to access the application
and periodically thereafter.
(d) Contingency Planning. Establish and periodically test the
capability to perform the agency function supported by the
application in the event of failure of its automated support.
(e) Technical Controls. Ensure that appropriate security
controls are specified, designed into, tested, and accepted in the
application in accordance with appropriate guidance issued by NIST.
(f) Information Sharing. Ensure that information shared from the
application is protected appropriately, comparable to the protection
provided when information is within the application.
(g) Public Access Controls. Where an agency's application
promotes or permits public access, additional security controls
shall be added to protect the integrity of the application and the
confidence the public has in the application. Such controls shall
include segregating information made directly accessible to the
public from official agency records.
(3) Review of Application Controls. Perform an independent
review or audit of the security controls in each application at
least every three years. Consider identifying a deficiency pursuant
to OMB Circular No. A-123, ``Management Accountability and Control''
and the Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act if there is no
assignment of responsibility for security, no security plan, or no
authorization to process for the application.
(4) Authorize Processing. Ensure that a management official
authorizes in writing use of the application by confirming that its
security plan as implemented adequately secures the application.
Results of the most recent review or audit of controls shall be a
factor in management authorizations. The application must be
authorized prior to operating and re-authorized at least every three
years thereafter. Management authorization implies accepting the
risk of each system used by the application.
4. Assignment of Responsibilities
a. Department of Commerce. The Secretary of Commerce shall:
(1) Develop and issue appropriate standards and guidance for the
security of sensitive information in Federal computer systems.
(2) Review and update guidelines for training in computer
security awareness and accepted computer security practice, with
assistance from OPM.
(3) Provide agencies guidance for security planning to assist in
their development of application and system security plans.
(4) Provide guidance and assistance, as appropriate, to agencies
concerning cost-effective controls when interconnecting with other
systems.
(5) Coordinate agency incident response activities to promote
sharing of incident response information and related
vulnerabilities.
[[Page 6441]]
(6) Evaluate new information technologies to assess their
security vulnerabilities, with technical assistance from the
Department of Defense, and apprise Federal agencies of such
vulnerabilities as soon as they are known.
b. Department of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall:
(1) Provide appropriate technical advice and assistance
(including work products) to the Department of Commerce.
(2) Assist the Department of Commerce in evaluating the
vulnerabilities of emerging information technologies.
c. Department of Justice. The Attorney General shall:
(1) Provide appropriate guidance to agencies on legal remedies
regarding security incidents and ways to report and work with law
enforcement concerning such incidents.
(2) Pursue appropriate legal actions when security incidents
occur.
d. General Services Administration. The Administrator of General
Services shall:
(1) Provide guidance to agencies on addressing security
considerations when acquiring automated data processing equipment
(as defined in section 111(a)(2) of the Federal Property and
Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended).
(2) Facilitate the development of contract vehicles for agencies
to use in the acquisition of cost-effective security products and
services (e.g., back-up services).
(3) Provide appropriate security services to meet the needs of
Federal agencies to the extent that such services are cost-
effective.
e. Office of Personnel Management. The Director of the Office of
Personnel Management shall:
(1) Assure that its regulations concerning computer security
training for Federal civilian employees are effective.
(2) Assist the Department of Commerce in updating and
maintaining guidelines for training in computer security awareness
and accepted computer security practice.
f. Security Policy Board. The Security Policy Board shall
coordinate the activities of the Federal government regarding the
security of information technology that processes classified
information in accordance with applicable national security
directives;
5. Correction of Deficiencies and Reports
a. Correction of Deficiencies. Agencies shall correct
deficiencies which are identified through the reviews of security
for systems and major applications described above.
b. Reports on Deficiencies. In accordance with OMB Circular No.
A-123, ``Management Accountability and Control'', if a deficiency in
controls is judged by the agency head to be material when weighed
against other agency deficiencies, it shall be included in the
annual FMFIA report. Less significant deficiencies shall be reported
and progress on corrective actions tracked at the appropriate agency
level.
c. Summaries of Security Plans. Agencies shall include a summary
of their system security plans and major application plans in the
strategic plan required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3506).
B. Descriptive Information
The following descriptive language is explanatory. It is
included to assist in understanding the requirements of the
Appendix.
The Appendix re-orients the Federal computer security program to
better respond to a rapidly changing technological environment. It
establishes government-wide responsibilities for Federal computer
security and requires Federal agencies to adopt a minimum set of
management controls. These management controls are directed at
individual information technology users in order to reflect the
distributed nature of today's technology.
For security to be most effective, the controls must be part of
day-to-day operations. This is best accomplished by planning for
security not as a separate activity, but as an integral part of
overall planning.
``Adequate security'' is defined as ``security commensurate with
the risk and magnitude of harm resulting from the loss, misuse, or
unauthorized access to or modification of information.'' This
definition explicitly emphasizes the risk-based policy for cost-
effective security established by the Computer Security Act.
The Appendix no longer requires the preparation of formal risk
analyses. In the past, substantial resources have been expended
doing complex analyses of specific risks to systems, with limited
tangible benefit in terms of improved security for the systems.
Rather than continue to try to precisely measure risk, security
efforts are better served by generally assessing risks and taking
actions to manage them. While formal risk analyses need not be
performed, the need to determine adequate security will require that
a risk-based approach be used. This risk assessment approach should
include a consideration of the major factors in risk management: the
value of the system or application, threats, vulnerabilities, and
the effectiveness of current or proposed safeguards. Additional
guidance on effective risk assessment is available in ``An
Introduction to Computer Security: The NIST Handbook'' (March 16,
1995).
Discussion of the Appendix's Major Provisions. The following
discussion is provided to aid reviewers in understanding the changes
in emphasis in the Appendix.
Automated Information Security Programs. Agencies are required
to establish controls to assure adequate security for all
information processed, transmitted, or stored in Federal automated
information systems. This Appendix emphasizes management controls
affecting individual users of information technology. Technical and
operational controls support management controls. To be effective,
all must interrelate. For example, authentication of individual
users is an important management control, for which password
protection is a technical control. However, password protection will
only be effective if both a strong technology is employed, and it is
managed to assure that it is used correctly.
Four controls are set forth: assigning responsibility for
security, security planning, periodic review of security controls,
and management authorization. The Appendix requires that these
management controls be applied in two areas of management
responsibility: one for general support systems and one for major
applications.
The terms ``general support system'' and ``major application''
were used in OMB Bulletins Nos. 88-16 and 90-08. A general support
system is ``an interconnected set of information resources under the
same direct management control which shares common functionality.''
Such a system can be, for example, a local area network (LAN)
including smart terminals that supports a branch office, an agency-
wide backbone, a communications network, a departmental data
processing center including its operating system and utilities, a
tactical radio network, or a shared information processing service
organization. Normally, the purpose of a general support system is
to provide processing or communications support.
A major application is a use of information and information
technology to satisfy a specific set of user requirements that
requires special management attention to security due to the risk
and magnitude of harm resulting from the loss, misuse or
unauthorized access to or modification of the information in the
application. All applications require some level of security, and
adequate security for most of them should be provided by security of
the general support systems in which they operate. However, certain
applications, because of the nature of the information in them,
require special management oversight and should be treated as major.
Agencies are expected to exercise management judgement in
determining which of their applications are major.
The focus of OMB Bulletins Nos. 88-16 and 90-08 was on
identifying and securing both general support systems and
applications which contained sensitive information. The Appendix
requires the establishment of security controls in all general
support systems, under the presumption that all contain some
sensitive information, and focuses extra security controls on a
limited number of particularly high-risk or major applications.
a. General Support Systems. The following controls are required
in all general support systems:
(1) Assign Responsibility for Security. For each system, an
individual should be a focal point for assuring there is adequate
security within the system, including ways to prevent, detect, and
recover from security problems. That responsibility should be
assigned in writing to an individual trained in the technology used
in the system and in providing security for such technology,
including the management of security controls such as user
identification and authentication.
(2) Security Plan. The Computer Security Act requires that
security plans be developed for all Federal computer systems that
contain sensitive information. Given the expansion of distributed
processing since passage of the Act, the presumption in the Appendix
is that all general support systems contain some sensitive
information which requires protection to assure its integrity,
availability, or confidentiality, and therefore all systems require
security plans.
[[Page 6442]]
Previous guidance on security planning was contained in OMB
Bulletin No. 90-08. This Appendix supersedes OMB Bulletin 90-08 and
expands the coverage of security plans from Bulletin 90-08 to
include rules of individual behavior as well as technical security.
Consistent with OMB Bulletin 90-08, the Appendix directs NIST to
update and expand security planning guidance and issue it as a
Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS). In the interim,
agencies should continue to use the Appendix of OMB Bulletin No. 90-
08 as guidance for the technical portion of their security plans.
The Appendix continues the requirement that independent advice
and comment on the security plan for each system be sought. The
intent of this requirement is to improve the plans, foster
communication between managers of different systems, and promote the
sharing of security expertise.
This Appendix also continues the requirement from the Computer
Security Act that summaries of security plans be included in agency
strategic information resources management plans. OMB will provide
additional guidance about the contents of those strategic plans,
pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The following specific security controls should be included in
the security plan for a general support system:
(a) Rules. An important new requirement for security plans is
the establishment of a set of rules of behavior for individual users
of each general support system. These rules should clearly delineate
responsibilities of and expectations for all individuals with access
to the system. They should be consistent with system-specific policy
as described in ``An Introduction to Computer Security: The NIST
Handbook'' (March 16, 1995). In addition, they should state the
consequences of non-compliance. The rules should be in writing and
will form the basis for security awareness and training.
The development of rules for a system must take into
consideration the needs of all parties who use the system. Rules
should be as stringent as necessary to provide adequate security.
Therefore, the acceptable level of risk for the system must be
established and should form the basis for determining the rules.
Rules should cover such matters as work at home, dial-in access,
connection to the Internet, use of copyrighted works, unofficial use
of government equipment, the assignment and limitation of system
privileges, and individual accountability. Often rules should
reflect technical security controls in the system. For example,
rules regarding password use should be consistent with technical
password features in the system. Rules may be enforced through
administrative sanctions specifically related to the system (e.g.
loss of system privileges) or through more general sanctions as are
imposed for violating other rules of conduct. In addition, the rules
should specifically address restoration of service as a concern of
all users of the system.
(b) Training. The Computer Security Act requires Federal
agencies to provide for the mandatory periodic training in computer
security awareness and accepted computer security practice of all
employees who are involved with the management, use or operation of
a Federal computer system within or under the supervision of the
Federal agency. This includes contractors as well as employees of
the agency. Access provided to members of the public should be
constrained by controls in the applications through which access is
allowed, and training should be within the context of those
controls. The Appendix enforces such mandatory training by requiring
its completion prior to granting access to the system. Each new user
of a general support system in some sense introduces a risk to all
other users. Therefore, each user should be versed in acceptable
behavior--the rules of the system--before being allowed to use the
system. Training should also inform the individual how to get help
in the event of difficulty with using or security of the system.
Training should be tailored to what a user needs to know to use
the system securely, given the nature of that use. Training may be
presented in stages, for example as more access is granted. In some
cases, the training should be in the form of classroom instruction.
In other cases, interactive computer sessions or well-written and
understandable brochures may be sufficient, depending on the risk
and magnitude of harm.
Over time, attention to security tends to dissipate. In
addition, changes to a system may necessitate a change in the rules
or user procedures. Therefore, individuals should periodically have
refresher training to assure that they continue to understand and
abide by the applicable rules.
To assist agencies, the Appendix requires NIST, with assistance
from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), to update its
existing guidance. It also proposes that OPM assure that its rules
for computer security training for Federal civilian employees are
effective.
(c) Personnel Controls. It has long been recognized that the
greatest harm has come from authorized individuals engaged in
improper activities, whether intentional or accidental. In every
general support system, a number of technical, operational, and
management controls are used to prevent and detect harm. Such
controls include individual accountability, ``least privilege,'' and
separation of duties.
Individual accountability consists of holding someone
responsible for his or her actions. In a general support system,
accountability is normally accomplished by identifying and
authenticating users of the system and subsequently tracing actions
on the system to the user who initiated them. This may be done, for
example, by looking for patterns of behavior by users.
Least privilege is the practice of restricting a user's access
(to data files, to processing capability, or to peripherals) or type
of access (read, write, execute, delete) to the minimum necessary to
perform his or her job.
Separation of duties is the practice of dividing the steps in a
critical function among different individuals. For example, one
system programmer can create a critical piece of operating system
code, while another authorizes its implementation. Such a control
keeps a single individual from subverting a critical process.
Nevertheless, in some instances, individuals may be given the
ability to bypass some significant technical and operational
controls in order to perform system administration and maintenance
functions (e.g., LAN administrators or systems programmers).
Screening such individuals in positions of trust will supplement
technical, operational, and management controls, particularly where
the risk and magnitude of harm is high.
(d) Incident Response Capability. Security incidents, whether
caused by viruses, hackers, or software bugs, are becoming more
common. When faced with a security incident, an agency should be
able to respond in a manner that both protects its own information
and helps to protect the information of others who might be affected
by the incident. To address this concern, agencies should establish
formal incident response mechanisms. Awareness and training for
individuals with access to the system should include how to use the
system's incident response capability.
To be fully effective, incident handling must also include
sharing information concerning common vulnerabilities and threats
with those in other systems and other agencies. The Appendix directs
agencies to effectuate such sharing, and tasks NIST to coordinate
those agency activities government-wide.
The Appendix also directs the Department of Justice to provide
appropriate guidance on pursuing legal remedies in the case of
serious incidents.
(e) Continuity of Support. Inevitably, there will be service
interruptions. Agency plans should assure that there is an ability
to recover and provide service sufficient to meet the minimal needs
of users of the system. Manual procedures are generally NOT a viable
back-up option. When automated support is not available, many
functions of the organization will effectively cease. Therefore, it
is important to take cost-effective steps to manage any disruption
of service.
Decisions on the level of service needed at any particular time
and on priorities in service restoration should be made in
consultation with the users of the system and incorporated in the
system rules. Experience has shown that recovery plans that are
periodically tested are substantially more viable than those that
are not. Moreover, untested plans may actually create a false sense
of security.
(f) Technical Security. Agencies should assure that each system
appropriately uses effective security products and techniques,
consistent with standards and guidance from NIST. Often such
techniques will correspond with system rules of behavior, such as in
the proper use of password protection.
The Appendix directs NIST to continue to issue computer security
guidance to assist agencies in planning for and using technical
security products and techniques. Until such guidance is issued,
however, the planning guidance included in OMB Bulletin 90-08 can
assist in determining techniques for
[[Page 6443]]
effective security in a system and in addressing technical controls in
the security plan.
(g) System Interconnection. In order for a community to
effectively manage risk, it must control access to and from other
systems. The degree of such control should be established in the
rules of the system and all participants should be made aware of any
limitations on outside access. Technical controls to accomplish this
should be put in place in accordance with guidance issued by NIST.
There are varying degrees of how connected a system is. For
example, some systems will choose to isolate themselves, others will
restrict access such as allowing only e-mail connections or remote
access only with sophisticated authentication, and others will be
fully open. The management decision to interconnect should be based
on the availability and use of technical and non-technical
safeguards and consistent with the acceptable level of risk defined
in the system rules.
(3) Review of Security Controls. The security of a system will
degrade over time, as the technology evolves and as people and
procedures change. Reviews should assure that management,
operational, personnel, and technical controls are functioning
effectively. Security controls may be reviewed by an independent
audit or a self review. The type and rigor of review or audit should
be commensurate with the acceptable level of risk that is
established in the rules for the system and the likelihood of
learning useful information to improve security. Technical tools
such as virus scanners, vulnerability assessment products (which
look for known security problems, configuration errors, and the
installation of the latest patches), and penetration testing can
assist in the on-going review of different facets of systems.
However, these tools are no substitute for a formal management
review at least every three years. Indeed, for some high-risk
systems with rapidly changing technology, three years will be too
long.
Depending upon the risk and magnitude of harm that could result,
weaknesses identified during the review of security controls should
be reported as deficiencies in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-
123, ``Management Accountability and Control'' and the Federal
Managers' Financial Integrity Act. In particular, if a basic
management control such as assignment of responsibility, a workable
security plan, or management authorization are missing, then
consideration should be given to identifying a deficiency.
(4) Authorize Processing. The authorization of a system to
process information, granted by a management official, provides an
important quality control (some agencies refer to this authorization
as accreditation). By authorizing processing in a system, a manager
accepts the risk associated with it. Authorization is not a decision
that should be made by the security staff.
Both the security official and the authorizing management
official have security responsibilities. In general, the security
official is closer to the day-to-day operation of the system and
will direct or perform security tasks. The authorizing official will
normally have general responsibility for the organization supported
by the system.
Management authorization should be based on an assessment of
management, operational, and technical controls. Since the security
plan establishes the security controls, it should form the basis for
the authorization, supplemented by more specific studies as needed.
In addition, the periodic review of controls should also contribute
to future authorizations. Some agencies perform ``certification
reviews'' of their systems periodically. These formal technical
evaluations lead to a management accreditation, or ``authorization
to process.'' Such certifications (such as those using the
methodology in FIPS Pub 102 ``Guideline for Computer Security
Certification and Accreditation'') can provide useful information to
assist management in authorizing a system, particularly when
combined with a review of the broad behavioral controls envisioned
in the security plan required by the Appendix.
Re-authorization should occur prior to a significant change in
processing, but at least every three years. It should be done more
often where there is a high risk and potential magnitude of harm.
b. Controls in Major Applications. Certain applications require
special management attention due to the risk and magnitude of harm
that could occur. For such applications, the controls of the support
system(s) in which they operate are likely to be insufficient.
Therefore, additional controls specific to the application are
required. Since the function of applications is the direct
manipulation and use of information, controls for securing
applications should emphasize protection of information and the way
it is manipulated.
(1) Assign Responsibility for Security. By definition, major
applications are high risk and require special management attention.
Major applications usually support a single agency function and
often are supported by more than one general support system. It is
important, therefore, that an individual be assigned responsibility
in writing to assure that the particular application has adequate
security. To be effective, this individual should be knowledgeable
in the information and process supported by the application and in
the management, personnel, operational, and technical controls used
to protect the application.
(2) Application Security Plans. Security for each major
application should be addressed by a security plan specific to the
application. The plan should include controls specific to protecting
information and should be developed from the application manager's
perspective. To assist in assuring its viability, the plan should be
provided to the manager of the primary support system which the
application uses for advice and comment. This recognizes the
critical dependence of the security of major applications on the
underlying support systems they use. Summaries of application
security plans should be included in strategic information resource
management plans in accordance with this Circular.
(a) Application Rules. Rules of behavior should be established
which delineate the responsibilities and expected behavior of all
individuals with access to the application. The rules should state
the consequences of inconsistent behavior. Often the rules will be
associated with technical controls implemented in the application.
Such rules should include, for example, limitations on changing
data, searching databases, or divulging information.
(b) Specialized Training. Training is required for all
individuals given access to the application, including members of
the public. It should vary depending on the type of access allowed
and the risk that access represents to the security of the
application and information in it. This training will be in addition
to that required for access to a support system.
(c) Personnel Security. For most major applications, management
controls such as individual accountability requirements, separation
of duties enforced by access controls, or limitations on the
processing privileges of individuals, are generally more cost-
effective personnel security controls than background screening.
Such controls should be implemented as both technical controls and
as application rules. For example, technical controls to ensure
individual accountability, such as looking for patterns of user
behavior, are most effective if users are aware that there is such a
technical control. If adequate audit or access controls (through
both technical and non-technical methods) cannot be established,
then it may be cost-effective to screen personnel, commensurate with
the risk and magnitude of harm they could cause. The change in
emphasis on screening in the Appendix should not affect background
screening deemed necessary because of other duties that an
individual may perform.
(d) Contingency Planning. Normally the Federal mission supported
by a major application is critically dependent on the application.
Manual processing is generally NOT a viable back-up option. Managers
should plan for how they will perform their mission and/or recover
from the loss of existing application support, whether the loss is
due to the inability of the application to function or a general
support system failure. Experience has demonstrated that testing a
contingency plan significantly improves its viability. Indeed,
untested plans or plans not tested for a long period of time may
create a false sense of ability to recover in a timely manner.
(e) Technical Controls. Technical security controls, for example
tests to filter invalid entries, should be built into each
application. Often these controls will correspond with the rules of
behavior for the application. Under the previous Appendix,
application security was focused on the process by which sensitive,
custom applications were developed. While that process is not
addressed in detail in this Appendix, it remains an effective method
for assuring that security controls are built into applications.
Additionally, the technical security controls defined in OMB
Bulletin No. 90-08 will continue, until that guidance is replaced by
NIST's security planning guidance.
(f) Information Sharing. Assure that information which is shared
with Federal
[[Page 6444]]
organizations, State and local governments, and the private sector is
appropriately protected comparable to the protection provided when
the information is within the application. Controls on the
information may stay the same or vary when the information is shared
with another entity. For example, the primary user of the
information may require a high level of availability while the
secondary user does not, and can therefore relax some of the
controls designed to maintain the availability of the information.
At the same time, however, the information shared may require a
level of confidentiality that should be extended to the secondary
user. This normally requires notification and agreement to protect
the information prior to its being shared.
(g) Public Access Controls. Permitting public access to a
Federal application is an important method of improving information
exchange with the public. At the same time, it introduces risks to
the Federal application. To mitigate these risks, additional
controls should be in place as appropriate. These controls are in
addition to controls such as ``firewalls'' that are put in place for
security of the general support system.
In general, it is more difficult to apply conventional controls
to public access systems, because many of the users of the system
may not be subject to individual accountability policies. In
addition, public access systems may be a target for mischief because
of their higher visibility and published access methods.
Official records need to be protected against loss or
alteration. Official records in electronic form are particularly
susceptible since they can be relatively easy to change or destroy.
Therefore, official records should be segregated from information
made directly accessible to the public. There are different ways to
segregate records. Some agencies and organizations are creating
dedicated information dissemination systems (such as bulletin boards
or World Wide Web servers) to support this function. These systems
can be on the outside of secure gateways which protect internal
agency records from outside access.
In order to secure applications that allow direct public access,
conventional techniques such as least privilege (limiting the
processing capability as well as access to data) and integrity
assurances (such as checking for viruses, clearly labeling the age
of data, or periodically spot checking data) should also be used.
Additional guidance on securing public access systems is available
from NIST Computer Systems Laboratory Bulletin ``Security Issues in
Public Access Systems'' (May, 1993).
(3) Review of Application Controls. At least every three years,
an independent review or audit of the security controls for each
major application should be performed. Because of the higher risk
involved in major applications, the review or audit should be
independent of the manager responsible for the application. Such
reviews should verify that responsibility for the security of the
application has been assigned, that a viable security plan for the
application is in place, and that a manager has authorized the
processing of the application. A deficiency in any of these controls
should be considered a deficiency pursuant to the Federal Manager's
Financial Integrity Act and OMB Circular No. A-123, ``Management
Accountability and Control.''
The review envisioned here is different from the system test and
certification process required in the current Appendix. That
process, however, remains useful for assuring that technical
security features are built into custom-developed software
applications. While the controls in that process are not
specifically called for in this Appendix, they remain in Bulletin
No. 90-08, and are recommended in appropriate circumstances as
technical controls.
(4) Authorize Processing. A major application should be
authorized by the management official responsible for the function
supported by the application at least every three years, but more
often where the risk and magnitude of harm is high. The intent of
this requirement is to assure that the senior official whose mission
will be adversely affected by security weaknesses in the application
periodically assesses and accepts the risk of operating the
application. The authorization should be based on the application
security plan and any review(s) performed on the application. It
should also take into account the risks from the general support
systems used by the application.
4. Assignment of Responsibilities. The Appendix assigns
government-wide responsibilities to agencies that are consistent
with their missions and the Computer Security Act.
a. Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce, through
NIST, is assigned the following responsibilities consistent with the
Computer Security Act.
(1) Develop and issue security standards and guidance.
(2) Review and update, with assistance from OPM, the guidelines
for security training issued in 1988 pursuant to the Computer
Security Act to assure they are effective.
(3) Replace and update the technical planning guidance in the
appendix to OMB Bulletin 90-08 This should include guidance on
effective risk-based security absent a formal risk analysis.
(4) Provide agencies with guidance and assistance concerning
effective controls for systems when interconnecting with other
systems, including the Internet. Such guidance on, for example, so-
called ``firewalls'' is becoming widely available and is critical to
agencies as they consider how to interconnect their communications
capabilities.
(5) Coordinate agency incident response activities. Coordination
of agency incident response activities should address both threats
and vulnerabilities as well as improve the ability of the Federal
government for rapid and effective cooperation in response to
serious security breaches.
(6) Assess security vulnerabilities in new information
technologies and apprise Federal agencies of such vulnerabilities.
The intent of this new requirement is to help agencies understand
the security implications of technology before they purchase and
field it. In the past, there have been too many instances where
agencies have acquired and implemented technology, then found out
about vulnerabilities in the technology and had to retrofit security
measures. This activity is intended to help avoid such difficulties
in the future.
b. Department of Defense. The Department, through the National
Security Agency, should provide technical advice and assistance to
NIST, including work products such as technical security guidelines,
which NIST can draw upon for developing standards and guidelines for
protecting sensitive information in Federal computers.
Also, the Department, through the National Security Agency,
should assist NIST in evaluating vulnerabilities in emerging
technologies. Such vulnerabilities may present a risk to national
security information as well as to unclassified information.
c. Department of Justice. The Department of Justice should
provide appropriate guidance to Federal agencies on legal remedies
available to them when serious security incidents occur. Such
guidance should include ways to report incidents and cooperate with
law enforcement.
In addition, the Department should pursue appropriate legal
actions on behalf of the Federal government when serious security
incidents occur.
d. General Services Administration. The General Services
Administration should provide agencies guidance for addressing
security considerations when acquiring information technology
products or services. This continues the current requirement.
In addition, where cost-effective to do so, GSA should establish
government-wide contract vehicles for agencies to use to acquire
certain security services. Such vehicles already exist for providing
system back-up support and conducting security analyses.
GSA should also provide appropriate security services to assist
Federal agencies to the extent that provision of such services is
cost-effective. This includes providing, in conjunction with the
Department of Defense and the Department of Commerce, appropriate
services which support Federal use of the National Information
Infrastructure (e.g., use of digital signature technology).
e. Office of Personnel Management. In accordance with the
Computer Security Act, OPM should review its regulations concerning
computer security training and assure that they are effective.
In addition, OPM should assist the Department of Commerce in the
review and update of its computer security awareness and training
guidelines. OPM worked closely with NIST in developing the current
guidelines and should work with NIST in revising those guidelines.
f. Security Policy Board. The Security Policy Board is assigned
responsibility for national security policy coordination in
accordance with the appropriate Presidential directive. This
includes policy for the security of information technology used to
process classified information.
Circular A-130 and this Appendix do not apply to information
technology that supports certain critical national security
[[Page 6445]]
missions, as defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502 (9) and 10 U.S.C. 2315. Policy
and procedural requirements for the security of national security
systems (telecommunications and information systems that contain
classified information or that support those critical national
security missions (44 U.S.C. 3502 (9) and 10 U.S.C. 2315)) is
assigned to the Department of Defense pursuant to Presidential
directive. The Circular clarifies that information classified for
national security purposes should also be handled in accordance with
appropriate national security directives. Where classified
information is required to be protected by more stringent security
requirements, those requirements should be followed rather than the
requirements of this Appendix.
5. Reports. The Appendix requires agencies to provide two
reports to OMB:
The first is a requirement that agencies report security
deficiencies and material weaknesses within their FMFIA reporting
mechanisms as defined by OMB Circular No. A-123, ``Management
Accountability and Control,'' and take corrective actions in
accordance with that directive.
The second, defined by the Computer Security Act, requires that
a summary of agency security plans be included in the information
resources management plan required by the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Appendix IV to OMB Circular No. A-130--Analysis of Key Sections
1. Purpose
The purpose of this Appendix is to provide a general context and
explanation for the contents of the key Sections of the Circular.
2. Background
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1980, Public Law 96-511, as
amended by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13,
codified at Chapter 35 of Title 44 of the United States Code,
establishes a broad mandate for agencies to perform their
information activities in an efficient, effective, and economical
manner. Section 3504 of the Act provides authority to the Director,
OMB, to develop and implement uniform and consistent information
resources management policies; oversee the development and promote
the use of information management principles, standards, and
guidelines; evaluate agency information management practices in
order to determine their adequacy and efficiency, and determine
compliance of such practices with the policies, principles,
standards, and guidelines promulgated by the Director.
The Circular implements OMB authority under the PRA with respect
to Section 3504(b), general information resources management policy,
Section 3504(d), information dissemination, Section 3504(f), records
management, Section 3504(g), privacy and security, and Section
3504(h), information technology. The Circular also implements
certain provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a); the
Chief Financial Officers Act (31 U.S.C. 3512 et seq.); Sections 111
and 206 of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of
1949, as amended (40 U.S.C. 759 and 487, respectively); the Computer
Security Act (40 U.S.C. 759 note); the Budget and Accounting Act of
1921 (31 U.S.C. 1 et seq.); and Executive Order No. 12046 of March
27, 1978, and Executive Order No. 12472 of April 3, 1984, Assignment
of National Security and Emergency Telecommunications Functions. The
Circular complements 5 CFR Part 1320, Controlling Paperwork Burden
on the Public, which implements other Sections of the PRA dealing
with controlling the reporting and recordkeeping burden placed on
the public.
In addition, the Circular revises and consolidates policy and
procedures in seven previous OMB directives and rescinds those
directives, as follows:
A-3--Government Publications.
A-71--Responsibilities for the Administration and Management of
Automatic Data Processing Activities Transmittal Memorandum No. 1 to
Circular No. A-71--Security of Federal Automated Information
Systems.
A-90--Cooperating with State and Local Governments to Coordinate
and Improve Information Systems.
A-108--Responsibilities for the Maintenance of Records about
Individuals by Federal Agencies
A-114--Management of Federal Audiovisual Activities
A-121--Cost Accounting, Cost Recovery, and Interagency Sharing
of Data Processing Facilities
3. Analysis
Section 6, Definitions. Access and Dissemination. The original
Circular No. A-130 distinguished between the terms ``access to
information'' and ``dissemination of information'' in order to
separate statutory requirements from policy considerations. The
first term means giving members of the public, at their request,
information to which they are entitled by a law such as the FOIA.
The latter means actively distributing information to the public at
the initiative of the agency. The distinction appeared useful at the
time Circular No. A-130 was written, because it allowed OMB to focus
discussion on Federal agencies' responsibilities for actively
distributing information. However, popular usage and evolving
technology have blurred differences between the terms ``access'' and
``dissemination'' and readers of the Circular were confused by the
distinction. For example, if an agency ``disseminates'' information
via an on-line computer system, one speaks of permitting users to
``access'' the information, and on-line ``access'' becomes a form of
``dissemination.''
Thus, the revision defines only the term ``dissemination.''
Special considerations based on access statutes such as the Privacy
Act and the FOIA are explained in context.
Government Information. The definition of ``government
information'' includes information created, collected, processed,
disseminated, or disposed of both by and for the Federal Government.
This recognizes the increasingly distributed nature of information
in electronic environments. Many agencies, in addition to collecting
information for government use and for dissemination to the public,
require members of the public to maintain information or to disclose
it to the public. Sound information resources management dictates
that agencies consider the costs and benefits of a full range of
alternatives to meet government objectives. In some cases, there is
no need for the government actually to collect the information
itself, only to assure that it is made publicly available. For
example, banks insured by the FDIC must provide statements of
financial condition to bank customers on request. Particularly when
information is available in electronic form, networks make the
physical location of information increasingly irrelevant.
The inclusion of information created, collected, processed,
disseminated, or disposed of for the Federal Government in the
definition of ``government information'' does not imply that
responsibility for implementing the provisions of the Circular
itself extends beyond the executive agencies to other entities. Such
an interpretation would be inconsistent with Section 4,
Applicability, and with existing law. For example, the courts have
held that requests to Federal agencies for release of information
under the FOIA do not always extend to those performing information
activities under grant or contract to a Federal agency. Similarly,
grantees may copyright information where the government may not.
Thus the information responsibilities of grantees and contractors
are not identical to those of Federal agencies except to the extent
that the agencies make them so in the underlying grants or
contracts. Similarly, agency information resources management
responsibilities do not extend to other entities.
Information Dissemination Product. This notice defines the term
``information dissemination product'' to include all information
that is disseminated by Federal agencies. While the provision of
access to on-line databases and search software included on compact
disk, read-only memory (CD-ROM) are often called information
services rather than products, there is no clear distinction and,
moreover, no real difference for policy purposes between the two.
Thus, the term ``information dissemination product'' applies to both
products and services, and makes no distinction based on how the
information is delivered.
Section 8a(1). Information Management Planning. Parallel to new
Section 7, Basic Considerations and Assumptions, Section 8a begins
with information resources management planning. Planning is the
process of establishing a course of action to achieve desired
results with available resources. Planners translate organizational
missions into specific goals and, in turn, into measurable
objectives.
The PRA introduced the concept of information resources
management and the principle of information as an institutional
resource which has both value and associated costs. Information
resources management is a tool that managers use to achieve agency
objectives. Information resources management is successful if it
enables managers to achieve agency objectives efficiently and
effectively.
Information resources management planning is an integral part of
overall mission
[[Page 6446]]
planning. Agencies need to plan from the outset for the steps in the
information life cycle. When creating or collecting information,
agencies must plan how they will process and transmit the
information, how they will use it, how they will protect its
integrity, what provisions they will make for access to it, whether
and how they will disseminate it, how they will store and retrieve
it, and finally, how the information will ultimately be disposed of.
They must also plan for the effects their actions and programs will
have on the public and State and local governments.
The Role of State and Local Governments. OMB made additions at
Sections 7a, 7e, and 7j, Basic Considerations and Assumptions,
concerning State and local governments, and also in policy
statements at Sections 8a(1)(c), (3)(f), (5)(d)(iii), and (8)(e).
State and local governments, and tribal governments, cooperate
as major partners with the Federal Government in the collection,
processing, and dissemination of information. For example, State
governments are the principal collectors and/or producers of
information in the areas of health, welfare, education, labor
markets, transportation, the environment, and criminal justice.
The States supply the Federal Government with data on aid to
families with dependent children; medicare; school enrollments,
staffing, and financing; statistics on births, deaths, and
infectious diseases; population related data that form the basis for
national estimates; employment and labor market data; and data used
for census geography. National information resources are greatly
enhanced through these major cooperating efforts.
Federal agencies need to be sensitive to the role of State and
local governments, and tribal governments, in managing information
and in managing information technology. When planning, designing,
and carrying out information collections, agencies should
systematically consider what effect their activities will have on
cities, counties, and States, and take steps to involve these
governments as appropriate. Agencies should ensure that their
information collections impose the minimum burden and do not
duplicate or conflict with local efforts or other Federal agency
requirements or mandates. The goal is that Federal agencies
routinely integrate State and local government concerns into Federal
information resources management practices. This goal is consistent
with standards for State and local government review of Federal
policies and programs.
Training. Training is particularly important in view of the
changing nature of information resources management.
Decentralization of information technology has placed the management
of automated information and information technology directly in the
hands of nearly all agency personnel rather than in the hands of a
few employees at centralized facilities. Agencies must plan for
incorporating policies and procedures regarding computer security,
records management, protection of privacy, and other safeguards into
the training of every employee and contractor.
Section 8a(2). Information Collection. The PRA requires that the
creation or collection of information be carried out in an
efficient, effective, and economical manner. When Federal agencies
create or collect information--just as when they perform any other
program functions--they consume scarce resources. Such activities
must be continually evaluated for their relevance to agency
missions.
Agencies must justify the creation or collection of information
based on their statutory functions. Policy statement 8a(2) uses the
justification standard--``necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency''--established by the PRA (44 U.S.C.
3508). Furthermore, the policy statement includes the requirement
that the information have practical utility, as defined in the PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3502(11)) and elaborated in 5 CFR Part 1320. Practical
utility includes such qualities of information as accuracy,
adequacy, and reliability. In the case of general purpose statistics
or recordkeeping, practical utility means that actual uses can be
demonstrated (5 CFR 1320.3(l)). It should be noted that OMB's intent
in placing emphasis on reducing unjustified burden in collecting
information, an emphasis consistent with the Act, is not to diminish
the importance of collecting information whenever agencies have
legitimate program reasons for doing so. Rather, the concern is that
the burdens imposed should not exceed the benefits to be derived
from the information. Moreover, if the same benefit can be obtained
by alternative means that impose a lesser burden, that alternative
should be adopted.
Section 8a(3). Electronic Information Collection. Section 7l
articulates a basic assumption of the Circular that modern
information technology can help the government provide better
service to the public through improved management of government
programs. One potentially useful application of information
technology is in the government's collection of information. While
some information collections may not be good candidates for
electronic techniques, many are. Agencies with major electronic
information collection programs have found that automated
information collections allow them to meet program objectives more
efficiently and effectively. Electronic data interchange (EDI) and
related standards for the electronic exchange of information will
ease transmission and processing of routine business transaction
information such as invoices, purchase orders, price information,
bills of lading, health insurance claims, and other common
commercial documents. EDI holds similar promise for the routine
filing of regulatory information such as tariffs, customs
declarations, license applications, tax information, and
environmental reports.
Benefits to the public and agencies from electronic information
collection appear substantial. Electronic methods of collection
reduce paperwork burden, reduce errors, facilitate validation, and
provide increased convenience and more timely receipt of benefits.
The policy in Section 8a(3) encourages agencies to explore the
use of automated techniques for collection of information, and sets
forth conditions conducive to the use of those techniques.
Section 8a(4). Records Management. Section 8a(4) begins with the
fundamental requirement for Federal records management, namely, that
agencies create and keep adequate and proper documentation of their
activities. Federal agencies cannot carry out their missions in a
responsible and responsive manner without adequate recordkeeping.
Section 7h articulates the basic considerations concerning records
management. Policy statements concerning records management are also
interwoven throughout Section 8a, particularly in subsections on
planning (8a(1)(j)), information dissemination (8a(6)), and
safeguards (8a(9)).
Records support the immediate needs of government--
administrative, legal, fiscal--and ensure its continuity. Records
are essential for protecting the rights and interests of the public,
and for monitoring the work of public servants. The government needs
records to ensure accountability to the public which includes making
the information available to the public.
Each stage of the information life cycle carries with it records
management responsibilities. Agencies need to record their plans,
carefully document the content and procedures of information
collection, ensure proper documentation as a feature of every
information system, keep records of dissemination programs, and,
finally, ensure that records of permanent value are preserved.
Preserving records for future generations is the archival
mission. Advances in technology affect the amount of information
that can be created and saved, and the ways this information can be
made available. Technological advances can ease the task of records
management; however, the rapid pace of change in modern technology
makes decisions about the appropriate application of technology
critical to records management. Increasingly the records manager
must be concerned with preserving valuable electronic records in the
context of a constantly changing technological environment.
Records schedules are essential for the appropriate maintenance
and disposition of records. Records schedules must be prepared in a
timely fashion, implement the General Records Schedules issued by
the National Archives and Records Administration, be approved by the
Archivist of the United States, and be kept accurate and current.
(See 44 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.) The National Archives and Records
Administration and the General Services Administration provide
guidance and assistance to agencies in implementing records
management responsibilities. They also evaluate agencies' records
management programs to determine the extent to which they are
appropriately implementing their records management
responsibilities.
Sections 8a(5) and 8a(6). Information Dissemination Policy.
Section 8a(5). Every agency has a responsibility to inform the
public within the context of its mission. This responsibility
requires that agencies distribute information at the agency's
initiative, rather than merely responding when the public requests
information.
The FOIA requires each agency to publish in the Federal Register
current descriptions
[[Page 6447]]
of agency organization, where and how the public may obtain
information, the general methods and procedural requirements by
which agency functions are determined, rules of procedure,
descriptions of forms and how to obtain them, substantive
regulations, statements of general policy, and revisions to all the
foregoing (5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1)). The Privacy Act also requires
publication of information concerning ``systems of records'' which
are records retrieved by individual identifier such as name, Social
Security Number, or fingerprint. The Government in the Sunshine Act
requires agencies to publish meeting announcements (5 U.S.C. 552b
(e)(1)). The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(2)) and its implementing
regulations (5 CFR Part 1320) require agencies to publish notices
when they submit information collection requests for OMB approval.
The public's right of access to government information under these
statutes is balanced against other concerns, such as an individual's
right to privacy and protection of the government's deliberative
process.
As agencies satisfy these requirements, they provide the public
basic information about government activities. Other statutes direct
specific agencies to issue specific information dissemination
products or to conduct information dissemination programs. Beyond
generic and specific statutory requirements, agencies have
responsibilities to disseminate information as a necessary part of
performing their functions. For some agencies the responsibility is
made explicit and sweeping; for example, the Agriculture Department
is directed to ``. . . diffuse among people of the United States,
useful information on subjects connected with agriculture. . . .''
(7 U.S.C. 2201) For other agencies, the responsibility may be much
more narrowly drawn.
Information dissemination is also a consequence of other agency
activities. Agency programs normally include an organized effort to
inform the public about the program. Most agencies carry out
programs that create or collect information with the explicit or
implicit intent that the information will be made public.
Disseminating information is in many cases the logical extension of
information creation or collection.
In other cases, agencies may have information that is not meant
for public dissemination but which may be the subject of requests
from the public. When the agency establishes that there is public
demand for the information and that it is in the public interest to
disseminate the information, the agency may decide to disseminate it
automatically.
The policy in Section 8a(5)(d) sets forth several factors for
agencies to take into account in conducting their information
dissemination programs. First, agencies must balance two goals:
maximizing the usefulness of the information to the government and
the public, and minimizing the cost to both. Deriving from the basic
purposes of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501), the two goals are frequently
in tension because increasing usefulness usually costs more. Second,
Section 8a(5)(d)(ii) requires agencies to conduct information
dissemination programs equitably and in a timely manner. The word
``equal'' was removed from this Section since there may be instances
where, for example, an agency determines that its mission includes
disseminating information to certain specific groups or members of
the public, and the agency determines that user charges will
constitute a significant barrier to carrying out this
responsibility.
Section 8a(5)(d)(iii), requiring agencies to take advantage of
all dissemination channels, recognizes that information reaches the
public in many ways. Few persons may read a Federal Register notice
describing an agency action, but those few may be major secondary
disseminators of the information. They may be affiliated with
publishers of newspapers, newsletters, periodicals, or books;
affiliated with on-line database providers; or specialists in
certain information fields. While millions of information users in
the public may be affected by the agency's action, only a handful
may have direct contact with the agency's own information
dissemination products. As a deliberate strategy, therefore,
agencies should cooperate with the information's original creators,
as well as with secondary disseminators, in order to further
information dissemination goals and foster a diversity of
information sources. An adjunct responsibility to this strategy is
reflected in Section 8a(5)(d)(iv), which directs agencies to assist
the public in finding government information. Agencies may
accomplish this, for example, by specifying and disseminating
``locator'' information, including information about content,
format, uses and limitations, location, and means of access.
Section 8a(6). Information Dissemination Management System. This
Section requires agencies to maintain an information dissemination
management system which can ensure the routine performance of
certain functions, including the essential functions previously
required by Circular No. A-3. Smaller agencies need not establish
elaborate formal systems, so long as the heads of the agencies can
ensure that the functions are being performed.
Subsection (6)(a) carries over a requirement from OMB Circular
No. A-3 that agencies' information dissemination products are to be,
in the words of 44 U.S.C. 1108, ``necessary in the transaction of
the public business required by law of the agency.'' (Circular No.
A-130 uses the expression ``necessary for the proper performance of
agency functions,'' which OMB considers to be equivalent to the
expression in 44 U.S.C. 1108.) The point is that agencies should
determine systematically the need for each information dissemination
product.
Section 8a(6)(b) recognizes that to carry out effective
information dissemination programs, agencies need knowledge of the
marketplace in which their information dissemination products are
placed. They need to know what other information dissemination
products users have available in order to design the best agency
product. As agencies are constrained by finite budgets, when there
are several alternatives from which to choose, they should not
expend public resources filling needs which have already been met by
others in the public or private sector. Agencies have a
responsibility not to undermine the existing diversity of
information sources.
At the same time, an agency's responsibility to inform the
public may be independent of the availability or potential
availability of a similar information dissemination product. That
is, even when another governmental or private entity has offered an
information dissemination product identical or similar to what the
agency would produce, the agency may conclude that it nonetheless
has a responsibility to disseminate its own product. Agencies should
minimize such instances of duplication but could reach such a
conclusion because legal considerations require an official
government information dissemination product.
Section 8a(6)(c) makes the Circular consistent with current
practice (See OMB Bulletins 88-15, 89-15, 90-09, and 91-16), by
requiring agencies to establish and maintain inventories of
information dissemination products. (These bulletins eliminated
annual reporting to OMB of title-by-title listings of publications
and the requirement for agencies to obtain OMB approval for each new
periodical. Publications are now reviewed as necessary during the
normal budget review process.) Inventories help other agencies and
the public identify information which is available. This serves both
to increase the efficiency of the dissemination function and to
avoid unnecessary burdens of duplicative information collections. A
corollary, enunciated in Section 8a(6)(d), is that agencies can
better serve public information needs by developing finding aids for
locating information produced by the agencies. Finally, Section
8a(6)(f) recognizes that there will be situations where agencies may
have to take appropriate steps to ensure that members of the public
with disabilities whom the agency has a responsibility to inform
have a reasonable ability to access the information dissemination
products.
Depository Library Program. Sections 8a(6)(g) and (h) pertain to
the Federal Depository Library Program. Agencies are to establish
procedures to ensure compliance with 44 U.S.C. 1902, which requires
that government publications (defined in 44 U.S.C. 1901 and repeated
in Section 6 of the Circular) be made available to depository
libraries through the Government Printing Office (GPO).
Depository libraries are major partners with the Federal
Government in the dissemination of information and contribute
significantly to the diversity of information sources available to
the public. They provide a mechanism for wide distribution of
government information that guarantees basic availability to the
public. Executive branch agencies support the depository library
program both as a matter of law and on its merits as a means of
informing the public about the government. On the other hand, the
law places the administration of depository libraries with GPO.
Agency responsibility for the depository libraries is limited to
supplying government publications through GPO.
[[Page 6448]]
Agencies can improve their performance in providing government
publications as well as electronic information dissemination
products to the depository library program. For example, the
proliferation of ``desktop publishing'' technology in recent years
has afforded the opportunity for many agencies to produce their own
printed documents. Many such documents may properly belong in the
depository libraries but are not sent because they are not printed
at GPO. The policy requires agencies to establish management
controls to ensure that the appropriate documents reach the GPO for
inclusion in the depository library program.
At present, few agencies provide electronic information
dissemination products to the depository libraries. At the same
time, a small but growing number of information dissemination
products are disseminated only in electronic format.
OMB believes that, as a matter of policy, electronic information
dissemination products generally should be provided to the
depository libraries. Given that production and supply of
information dissemination products to the depository libraries is
primarily the responsibility of GPO, agencies should provide
appropriate electronic information dissemination products to GPO for
inclusion in the depository library program.
While cost may be a consideration, agencies should not conclude
without investigation that it would be prohibitively expensive to
place their electronic information dissemination products in the
depository libraries. For electronic information dissemination
products other than on-line services, agencies may have the option
of having GPO produce the information dissemination product for
them, in which case GPO would pay for depository library costs.
Agencies should consider this option if it would be a cost effective
alternative to the agency making its own arrangements for production
of the information dissemination product. Using GPO's services in
this manner is voluntary and at the agency's discretion. Agencies
could also consider negotiating other terms, such as inviting GPO to
participate in agency procurement orders in order to distribute the
necessary copies for the depository libraries. With adequate advance
planning, agencies should be able to provide electronic information
dissemination products to the depository libraries at nominal cost.
In a particular case, substantial cost may be a legitimate
reason for not providing an electronic information dissemination
product to the depository library program. For example, for an
agency with a substantial number of existing titles of electronic
information dissemination products, furnishing copies of each to the
depository libraries could be prohibitively expensive. In that
situation, the agency should endeavor to make available those titles
with the greatest general interest, value, and utility to the
public. Substantial cost could also be an impediment in the case of
some on-line information services where the costs associated with
operating centralized databases would make provision of unlimited
direct access to numerous users prohibitively expensive. In both
cases, agencies should consult with the GPO, in order to identify
those information dissemination products with the greatest public
interest and utility for dissemination. In all cases, however, where
an agency discontinues publication of an information dissemination
product in paper format in favor of electronic formats, the agency
should work with the GPO to ensure availability of the information
dissemination product to depository libraries.
Notice to the Public. Sections 8a(6)(i) and (j) present new
practices for agencies to observe in communicating with the public
about information dissemination. Among agencies' responsibilities
for dissemination is an active knowledge of, and regular
consultation with, the users of their information dissemination
products. A primary reason for communication with users is to gain
their contribution to improving the quality and relevance of
government information--how it is created, collected, and
disseminated. Consultations with users might include participation
at conferences and workshops, careful attention to correspondence
and telephone communications (e.g., logging and analyzing
inquiries), or formalized user surveys.
A key part of communicating with the public is providing
adequate notice of agency information dissemination plans. Because
agencies' information dissemination actions affect other agencies as
well as the public, agencies must forewarn other agencies of
significant actions. The decision to initiate, terminate, or
substantially modify the content, form, frequency, or availability
of significant products should also trigger appropriate advance
public notice. Where appropriate, the Government Printing Office
should be notified directly. Information dissemination products
deemed not to be significant require no advance notice.
Examples of significant products (or changes to them) might be
those that:
(a) Are required by law; e.g., a statutorily mandated report to
Congress;
(b) Involve expenditure of substantial funds;
(c) By reason of the nature of the information, are matters of
continuing public interest; e.g., a key economic indicator;
(d) By reason of the time value of the information, command
public interest; e.g., monthly crop reports on the day of their
release;
(e) Will be disseminated in a new format or medium; e.g.,
disseminating a printed product in electronic medium, or
disseminating a machine-readable data file via on-line access.
Where members of the public might consider a proposed new agency
product unnecessary or duplicative, the agency should solicit and
evaluate public comments. Where users of an agency information
dissemination product may be seriously affected by the introduction
of a change in medium or format, the agency should notify users and
consider their views before instituting the change. Where members of
the public consider an existing agency product important and
necessary, the agency should consider these views before deciding to
terminate the product. In all cases, however, determination of what
is a significant information dissemination product and what
constitutes adequate notice are matters of agency judgment.
Achieving Compliance with the Circular's Requirements. Section
8a(6)(k) requires that the agency information dissemination
management system ensure that, to the extent existing information
dissemination policies or practices are inconsistent with the
requirements of this Circular, an orderly transition to compliance
with the requirements of this Circular is made. For example, some
agency information dissemination products may be priced at a level
which exceeds the cost of dissemination, or the agency may be
engaged in practices which are otherwise unduly restrictive. In
these instances, agencies must plan for an orderly transition to the
substantive policy requirements of the Circular. The information
dissemination management system must be capable of identifying these
situations and planning for a reasonably prompt transition.
Instances of existing agency practices which cannot immediately be
brought into conformance with the requirements of the Circular are
to be addressed through the waiver procedures of Section 10(b).
Section 8a(7). Avoiding Improperly Restrictive Practices.
Federal agencies are often the sole suppliers of the information
they hold. The agencies have either created or collected the
information using public funds, usually in furtherance of unique
governmental functions, and no one else has it. Hence agencies need
to take care that their behavior does not inappropriately constrain
public access to government information.
When agencies use private contractors to accomplish
dissemination, they must take care that they do not permit
contractors to impose restrictions that undercut the agencies'
discharge of their information dissemination responsibilities. The
contractual terms should assure that, with respect to dissemination,
the contractor behaves as though the contractor were the agency. For
example, an agency practice of selling, through a contractor, on-
line access to a database but refusing to sell copies of the
database itself may be improperly restrictive because it precludes
the possibility of another firm making the same service available to
the public at a lower price. If an agency is willing to provide
public access to a database, the agency should be willing to sell
copies of the database itself.
By the same reasoning, agencies should behave in an even-handed
manner in handling information dissemination products. If an agency
is willing to sell a database or database services to some members
of the public, the agency should sell the same products under
similar terms to other members of the public, unless prohibited by
statute. When an agency decides it has public policy reasons for
offering different terms of sale to different groups in the public,
the agency should provide a clear statement of the policy and its
basis.
Agencies should not attempt to exert control over the secondary
uses of their
[[Page 6449]]
information dissemination products. In particular, agencies should not
establish exclusive, restricted, or other distribution arrangements
which interfere with timely and equitable availability of
information dissemination products, and should not charge fees or
royalties for the resale or redissemination of government
information. These principles follow from the fact that the law
prohibits the Federal Government from exercising copyright.
Agencies should inform the public as to the limitations inherent
in the information dissemination product (e.g., possibility of
errors, degree of reliability, and validity) so that users are fully
aware of the quality and integrity of the information. If
circumstances warrant, an agency may wish to establish a procedure
by which disseminators of the agency's information may at their
option have the data and/or value-added processing checked for
accuracy and certified by the agency. Using this method,
redisseminators of the data would be able to respond to the demand
for integrity from purchasers and users. This approach could be
enhanced by the agency using its authority to trademark its
information dissemination product, and requiring that
redisseminators who wish to use the trademark agree to appropriate
integrity procedures. These methods have the possibility of
promoting diversity, user responsiveness, and efficiency as well as
integrity. However, an agency's responsibility to protect against
misuse of a government information dissemination product does not
extend to restricting or regulating how the public actually uses the
information.
The Lanham Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. 1055, 1125, 1127,
provides an efficient method to address legitimate agency concerns
regarding public safety. Specifically, the Act permits a trademark
owner to license the mark, and to demand that the user maintain
appropriate quality controls over products reaching consumers under
the mark. See generally, McCarthy on Trademarks, Sec. 18.13. When a
trademark owner licenses the trademark to another, it may retain the
right to control the quality of goods sold under the trademark by
the licensee. Furthermore, if a licensee sells goods under the
licensed trademark in breach of the licensor's quality
specifications, the licensee may be liable for breach of contract as
well as for trademark infringement. This technique is increasingly
being used to assure the integrity of digital information
dissemination products. For example, the Census Bureau has
trademarked its topologically integrated geographic encoding and
referencing data product (``TIGER/Line''), which is used as official
source data for legislative districting and other sensitive
applications.
Whenever a need for special quality control procedures is
identified, agencies should adopt the least burdensome methods and
ensure that the methods chosen do not establish an exclusive,
restricted, or other distribution arrangement that interferes with
timely and equitable availability of public information to the
public. Agencies should not attempt to condition the resale or
redissemination of its information dissemination products by members
of the public.
User charges. Title 5 of the Independent Offices Appropriations
Act of 1952 (31 U.S.C. 9701) establishes Federal policy regarding
fees assessed for government services, and for sale or use of
government property or resources. OMB Circular No. A-25, User
Charges, implements the statute. It provides for charges for
government goods and services that convey special benefits to
recipients beyond those accruing to the general public. It also
establishes that user charges should be set at a level sufficient to
recover the full cost of providing the service, resource, or
property. Since Circular No. A-25 is silent as to the extent of its
application to government information dissemination products, full
cost recovery for information dissemination products might be
interpreted to include the cost of collecting and processing
information rather than just the cost of dissemination. The policy
in Section 8a(7)(c) clarifies the policy of Circular No. A-25 as it
applies to information dissemination products. This policy was
codified by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 at 35 U.S.C. Section
3506(d)(4)(D).
Statutes such as FOIA and the Government in the Sunshine Act
establish a broad and general obligation on the part of Federal
agencies to make government information available to the public and
to avoid erecting barriers that impede public access. User charges
higher than the cost of dissemination may be a barrier to public
access. The economic benefit to society is maximized when government
information is publicly disseminated at the cost of dissemination.
Absent statutory requirements to the contrary, the general standard
for user charges for government information dissemination products
should be to recover no more than the cost of dissemination. It
should be noted in this connection that the government has already
incurred the costs of creating and processing the information for
governmental purposes in order to carry out its mission.
Underpinning this standard is the FOIA fee structure which
establishes limits on what agencies can charge for access to Federal
records. That Act permits agencies to charge only the direct
reasonable cost of search, reproduction and, in certain cases,
review of requested records. In the case of FOIA requests for
information dissemination products, charges would be limited to
reasonable direct reproduction costs alone. No search would be
needed to find the product, thus no search fees would be charged.
Neither would the record need to be reviewed to determine if it
could be withheld under one of the Act's exemptions since the agency
has already decided to release it. Thus, FOIA provides an
information ``safety net'' for the public.
While OMB does not intend to prescribe procedures for pricing
government information dissemination products, the cost of
dissemination may generally be thought of as the sum of all costs
specifically associated with preparing a product for dissemination
and actually disseminating it to the public. When an agency prepares
an information product for its own internal use, costs associated
with such production would not generally be recoverable as user
charges on subsequent dissemination. When the agency prepares the
product for public dissemination, and disseminates it, costs
associated with preparation and actual dissemination would be
recoverable as user charges.
In the case of government databases which are made available to
the public on-line, the costs associated with initial database
development, including the costs of the necessary hardware and
software, would not be included in the cost of dissemination. Once a
decision is made to disseminate the data, additional costs logically
associated with dissemination can be included in the user fee. These
may include costs associated with modification of the database to
make it suitable for dissemination, any hardware or software
enhancements necessary for dissemination, and costs associated with
providing customer service or telecommunications capacity.
In the case of information disseminated via cd-rom, the costs
associated with initial database development would likewise not be
included in the cost of dissemination. However, a portion of the
costs associated with formatting the data for cd-rom dissemination
and the costs of mastering the cd-rom, could logically be included
as part of the dissemination cost, as would the cost associated with
licensing appropriate search software.
Determining the appropriate user fee is the responsibility of
each agency, and involves the exercise of judgment and reliance on
reasonable estimates. Agencies should be able to explain how they
arrive at user fees which represent average prices and which, given
the likely demand for the product, can be expected to recover the
costs associated with dissemination.
When agencies provide custom tailored information services to
specific individuals or groups, full cost recovery, including the
cost of collection and processing, is appropriate. For example, if
an agency prepares special tabulations or similar services from its
databases in answer to a specific request from the public, all costs
associated with fulfilling the request would be charged, and the
requester should be so informed before work is begun.
In a few cases, agencies engaging in information collection
activities augment the information collection at the request of, and
with funds provided by, private sector groups. Since the 1920's, the
Bureau of the Census has carried out, on request, surveys of certain
industries at greater frequency or at a greater level of detail than
Federal funding would permit, because gathering the additional
information is consistent with Federal purposes and industry groups
have paid the additional information collection and processing
costs. While the results of these surveys are disseminated to the
public at the cost of dissemination, the existence and availability
of the additional government data are special benefits to certain
recipients beyond those accruing to the public. It is appropriate
that those recipients should bear the full costs of information
collection and processing, in addition to the normal costs of
dissemination.
Agencies must balance the requirement to establish user charges
and the level of fees
[[Page 6450]]
charged against other policies, specifically, the proper performance of
agency functions and the need to ensure that information
dissemination products reach the public for whom they are intended.
If an agency mission includes disseminating information to certain
specific groups or members of the public and the agency determines
that user charges will constitute a significant barrier to carrying
out this responsibility, the agency may have grounds for reducing or
eliminating its user charges for the information dissemination
product, or for exempting some recipients from the charge. Such
reductions or eliminations should be the subject of agency
determinations on a case by case basis and justified in terms of
agency policies.
Section 8a(8). Electronic Information Dissemination. Advances in
information technology have changed government information
dissemination. Agencies now have available new media and formats for
dissemination, including CD-ROM, electronic bulletin boards, and
public networks. The growing public acceptance of electronic data
interchange (EDI) and similar standards enhances their
attractiveness as methods for government information dissemination.
For example, experiments with the use of electronic bulletin boards
to advertise Federal contracting opportunities and to receive vendor
quotes have achieved wider dissemination of information about
business opportunities with the Federal Government than has been the
case with traditional notices and advertisements. Improved
information dissemination has increased the number of firms
expressing interest in participating in the government market and
decreased prices to the government due to expanded competition. In
addition, the development of public electronic information networks,
such as the Internet, provides an additional way for agencies to
increase the diversity of information sources available to the
public. Emerging applications such as Wide Area Information Servers
and the World-wide Web (using the NISO Z39.50 standard) will be used
increasingly to facilitate dissemination of government information
such as environmental data, international trade information, and
economic statistics in a networked environment.
A basic purpose of the PRA is to ``provide for the dissemination
of public information on a timely basis, on equitable terms, and in
a manner that promotes the utility of the information to the public
and makes effective use of information technology.'' (44 U.S.C.
3501(7)) Agencies can frequently enhance the value, practical
utility, and timeliness of government information as a national
resource by disseminating information in electronic media.
Electronic collection and dissemination may substantially increase
the usefulness of government information dissemination products for
three reasons. First, information disseminated electronically is
likely to be more timely and accurate because it does not require
data re-entry. Second, electronic records often contain more
complete and current information because, unlike paper, it is
relatively easy to make frequent changes. Finally, because
electronic information is more easily manipulated by the user and
can be tailored to a wide variety of needs, electronic information
dissemination products are more useful to the recipients.
As stated at Section 8a(1)(h), agencies should use voluntary
standards and Federal Information Processing Standards to the extent
appropriate in order to ensure the most cost effective and
widespread dissemination of information in electronic formats.
Agencies can frequently make government information more
accessible to the public and enhance the utility of government
information as a national resource by disseminating information in
electronic media. Agencies generally do not utilize data in raw
form, but edit, refine, and organize the data in order to make it
more accessible and useful for their own purposes. Information is
made more accessible to users by aggregating data into logical
groupings, tagging data with descriptive and other identifiers, and
developing indexing and retrieval systems to facilitate access to
particular data within a larger file. As a general matter, and
subject to budgetary, security or legal constraints, agencies should
make available such features developed for internal agency use as
part of their information dissemination products.
There will also be situations where the agency determines that
its mission will be furthered by providing enhancements beyond those
needed for its own use, particularly those that will improve the
public availability of government information over the long term. In
these instances, the agency should evaluate the expected usefulness
of the enhanced information in light of its mission, and where
appropriate construct partnerships with the private sector to add
these elements of value. This approach may be particularly
appropriate as part of a strategy to utilize new technology
enhancements, such as graphic images, as part of a particular
dissemination program.
Section 8a(9). Information Safeguards. The basic premise of this
Section is that agencies should provide an appropriate level of
protection to government information, given an assessment of the
risks associated with its maintenance and use. Among the factors to
be considered include meeting the specific requirements of the
Privacy Act of 1974 and the Computer Security Act of 1987.
In particular, agencies are to ensure that they meet the
requirements of the Privacy Act regarding information retrievable by
individual identifier. Such information is to be collected,
maintained, and protected so as to preclude intrusion into the
privacy of individuals and the unwarranted disclosure of personal
information. Individuals must be accorded access and amendment
rights to records, as provided in the Privacy Act. To the extent
that agencies share information which they have a continuing
obligation to protect, agencies should see that appropriate
safeguards are instituted. Appendix I prescribes agency procedures
for the maintenance of records about individuals, reporting
requirements to OMB and Congress, and other special requirements of
specific agencies, in accordance with the Privacy Act.
This Section also incorporates the requirement of the Computer
Security Act of 1987 that agencies plan to secure their systems
commensurate with the risk and magnitude of loss or harm that could
result from the loss, misuse, or unauthorized access to information
contained in those systems. It includes assuring the integrity,
availability, and appropriate confidentiality of information. It
also involves protection against the harm that could occur to
individuals or entities outside of the Federal Government as well as
the harm to the Federal Government. Appendix III prescribes a
minimum set of controls to be included in Federal automated
information resources security programs and assigns Federal agency
responsibilities for the security of automated information
resources. The Section also includes limits on collection and
sharing of information and procedures to assure the integrity of
information as well as requirements to adequately secure the
information.
Incorporation of Circular No. A-114. OMB Circular No. A-114,
Management of Federal Audiovisual Activities, last revised on March
20, 1985, prescribed policies and procedures to improve Federal
audiovisual management. Although OMB has rescinded Circular No. A-
114, its essential policies and procedures continue. This revision
provides information resources management policies and principles
independent of medium, including paper, electronic, or audiovisual.
By including the term ``audiovisual'' in the definition of
``information,'' audiovisual materials are incorporated into all
policies of this Circular.
The requirement in Circular No. A-114 that the head of each
agency designate an office with responsibility for the management
oversight of an agency's audiovisual productions and that an
appropriate program for the management of audiovisual productions in
conformance with 36 CFR 1232.4 is incorporated into this Circular at
Section 9a(10). The requirement that audiovisual activities be
obtained consistent with OMB Circular No. A-76 is covered by
Sections 8a(1)(d), 8a(5)(d)(i) and 8a(6)(b).
The National Archives and Records Administration will continue
to prescribe the records management and archiving practices of
agencies with respect to audiovisual productions at 36 CFR 1232.4,
``Audiovisual Records Management.''
Section 8b. Information Systems and Information Technology
Management.
Section 8b(1). Evaluation and Performance Measurement. OMB
encourages agencies to stress several types of evaluation in their
oversight of information systems. As a first step, agencies must
assess the continuing need for the mission function. If the agency
determines there is a continuing need for a function, agencies
should reevaluate existing work processes prior to creating new or
updating existing information systems. Without this analysis,
agencies tend to develop information systems that improve the
efficiency of traditional paper-based processes which may be no
longer needed. The application of information technology presents an
opportunity to reevaluate existing organizational structures, work
[[Page 6451]]
processes, and ways of interacting with the public to see whether they
still efficiently and effectively support the agency's mission.
Benefit-cost analyses provide vital management information on
the most efficient allocation of human, financial, and information
resources to support agency missions. Agencies should conduct a
benefit-cost analysis for each information system to support
management decision making to ensure: (a) alignment of the planned
information system with the agency's mission needs; (b)
acceptability of information system implementation to users inside
the Government; (c) accessibility to clientele outside the
Government; and (d) realization of projected benefits. When
preparing benefit-cost analyses to support investments in
information technology, agencies should seek to quantify the
improvements in agency performance results through the measurement
of program outputs.
The requirement to conduct a benefit-cost analysis need not
become a burdensome activity for agencies. The level of detail
necessary for such analyses varies greatly and depends on the nature
of the proposed investment. Proposed investments in ``major
information systems'' as defined in this Circular require detailed
and rigorous analysis. This analysis should not merely serve as
budget justification material, but should be part of the ongoing
management oversight process to ensure prudent allocation of scarce
resources. Proposed investments for information systems that are not
considered ``major information systems'' should be analyzed and
documented more informally.
While it is not necessary to create a new benefit-cost analysis
at each stage of the information system life cycle, it is useful to
refresh these analyses with up-to-date information to ensure the
continued viability of an information system prior to and during
implementation. Reasons for updating a benefit-cost analysis may
include such factors as significant changes in projected costs and
benefits, significant changes in information technology
capabilities, major changes in requirements (including legislative
or regulatory changes), or empirical data based on performance
measurement gained through prototype results or pilot experience.
Agencies should also weigh the relative benefits of proposed
investments in information technology across the agency. Given the
fiscal constraints facing the Federal government in the upcoming
years, agencies should fund a portfolio of investments across the
agency that maximizes return on investment for the agency as a
whole. Agencies should also emphasize those proposed investments
that show the greatest probability (i.e., display the lowest
financial and operational risk) of achieving anticipated benefits
for the organization. OMB and GAO are creating a publication that
will provide agencies with reference materials for setting up such
evaluation processes.
Agencies should complete a retrospective evaluation of
information systems once operational to validate projected savings,
changes in practices, and effectiveness in serving affected publics.
These post-implementation reviews may also serve as the basis for
agency-wide learning about effective management practices.
Section 8b(2). Strategic Information Resources Management (IRM)
Planning. Agencies should link to, and to the extent possible,
integrate IRM planning with the agency strategic planning required
by the Government Performance and Results Act (P.L. 103-62). Such a
linkage ensures that agencies apply information resources to
programs that support the achievement of agreed-upon mission goals.
Additionally, strategic IRM planning by agencies may help avoid
automating out-of-date, ineffective, or inefficient procedures and
work processes.
Agencies should also devote management attention to operational
information resources management planning. This operational IRM
planning should provide a one to five year focus to agency IRM
activities and projects. Agency operational IRM plans should also
provide a listing of the major information systems covered by the
management oversight processes described in Section 8b(3). Agency
operational planning for IRM should also communicate to the public
how the agency's application of information resources might affect
them. For the contractor community, this includes articulating the
agency's intent to acquire information technology from the private
sector. These data should not be considered acquisition sensitive,
so that they can be distributed as widely as possible to the vendor
community in order to promote competition. Agencies should make
these acquisition plans available to the public through government-
wide information dissemination mechanisms, including electronic
means.
Operational planning should also include initiatives to reduce
the burden, including information collection burden, an agency
imposes on the public. Too often, for example, agencies require
personal visits to government offices during office hours
inconvenient to the public. Instead, agencies should plan to use
information technology in ways that make the public's dealing with
the Federal government as ``user-friendly'' as possible.
Each year, OMB issues a bulletin requesting copies of agencies'
latest strategic IRM plans and annual updates to operational plans
for information and information technology.
Section 8b(3). Information Systems Management Oversight.
Agencies should consider what constitutes a ``major information
system'' for purposes of this Circular when determining the
appropriate level of management attention for an information system.
The anticipated dollar size of an information system or a supporting
acquisition is only one determinant of the level of management
attention an information system requires. Additional criteria to
assess include the maturity and stability of the technology under
consideration, how well defined user requirements are, the level of
stability of program and user requirements, and security concerns.
For instance, certain risky or ``cutting-edge'' information
systems require closer scrutiny and more points of review and
evaluation. This is particularly true when an agency uses an
evolutionary life cycle strategy that requires a technical and
financial evaluation of the project's viability at prototype and
pilot testing phases. Projects relying on commercial off-the-shelf
technology and applications will generally require less oversight
than those using custom-designed software.
While each phase of an information system life cycle may have
unique characteristics, the dividing line between the phases may not
always be distinct. For instance, both planning and evaluation
should continue throughout the information system life cycle. In
fact, during any phase, it may be necessary to revisit the previous
stages based on new information or changes in the environment in
which the system is being developed.
The policy statements in this Circular describe an information
system life cycle. It does not, however, make a definitive statement
that there must be four versus five phases of a life cycle because
the life cycle varies by the nature of the information system. Only
two phases are common to all information systems--a beginning and an
end. As a result, life cycle management techniques that agencies can
use may vary depending on the complexity and risk inherent in the
project.
One element of this management oversight policy is the
recognition of imbedded and/or parallel life cycles. Within an
information system's life cycle there may be other subsidiary life
cycles. For instance, most Federal information systems projects
include an acquisition of goods and services that have life cycle
characteristics. Some projects include software development
components, which also have life cycles. Effective management
oversight of major information systems requires a recognition of all
these various life cycles and an integrated information systems
management oversight with the budget and human resource management
cycles that exist in the agency.
Section 8b(2) of the Circular underscores the need for agencies
to bring an agency-wide perspective to a number of information
resources management issues. These issues include policy
formulation, planning, management and technical frameworks for using
information resources, and management oversight of major information
systems. Agencies should also provide for coordinated decision
making (Section 8b(3)(f)) in order to bring together the
perspectives from across an agency, and outside if appropriate. Such
coordination may take place in an agency-wide management or IRM
committee. Interested groups typically include functional users,
managers of financial and human resources, information resources
management specialists, and, as appropriate, the affected public.
Section 8b(4). Use of Information Resources. Agency management
of information resources should be guided by management and
technical frameworks for agency-wide information and information
technology needs. The technical framework should serve as a
reference for updates to existing and new information systems. The
[[Page 6452]]
management framework should assure the integration of proposed
information systems projects into the technical framework in a
manner that will ensure progress toward achieving an open systems
environment. Agency strategic IRM planning should describe the
parameters (e.g., technical standards) of such a technical
framework. The management framework should drive operational
planning and should describe how the agency intends to use
information and information technology consistent with the technical
framework.
Agency management and technical frameworks for information
resources should address agency strategies to move toward an open
systems environment. These strategies should consist of one or
multiple profiles (an internally consistent set of standards), based
on the current version of the NIST's Application Portability
Profile. These profiles should satisfy user requirements,
accommodate officially recognized or de facto standards, and promote
interoperability, application portability, and scalability by
defining interfaces, services, protocols, and data formats favoring
the use of nonproprietary specifications.
Agencies should focus on how to better utilize the data they
currently collect from the public. Because agencies generally do not
share information, the public often must respond to duplicative
information collections from various agencies or their components.
Sharing of information about individuals should be consistent with
the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, and Appendix I of this
Circular.
Services provided by IPSOs to components of their own agency are
often perceived to be ``free'' by the service recipients because
their costs are budgeted as an ``overhead'' charge. Service
recipients typically do not pay for IPSO services based on actual
usage. Since the services are perceived to be free, there is very
little incentive for either the service recipients or the IPSO
managers to be watchful for opportunities to improve productivity or
to reduce costs. Agencies are encouraged to institute chargeback
mechanisms for IPSOs that provide common information processing
services across a number of agency components when the resulting
economies are expected to exceed the cost of administration.
Section 8b(5). Acquisition of Information Technology. Consistent
with the requirements of the Brooks Act and the Paperwork Reduction
Act, agencies should acquire information technology to improve
service delivery, reduce the cost of Federal program administration,
and minimize burden of dealing with the Federal government. Agencies
may wish to ask potential offerors to propose different technical
solutions and approaches to fulfilling agency mission requirements.
Evaluating acquisitions of information technology must assess both
the benefits and costs of applying technology to meet such
requirements.
The distinction between information system life cycles and
acquisition life cycles is important when considering the
implications of OMB Circular A-109, Acquisition of Major Systems, to
the acquisition of information resources. Circular A-109 presents
one strategy for acquiring information technology when:
(i) The agency intends to fund operational tests and
demonstrations of system design;
(ii) The risk is high due to the unproven integration of custom
designed software and/or hardware components;
(iii) The estimated cost savings or operational improvements
from such a demonstration will further improve the return on
investment; or
(iv) The agency wants to acquire a solution based on state-of-
the-art, unproven technology.
Agencies should comply with OMB Circular A-76, Performance of
Commercial Activities, when considering conversion to or from in-
house or contract performance.
Agencies should ensure that acquisitions for new information
technology comply with GSA regulations concerning information
technology accessibility for individuals with disabilities [41
C.F.R. 201-20.103-7].
Section 9a(11). Ombudsman. The senior agency official designated
by the head of each agency under 44 U.S.C. 3506(a) is charged with
carrying out the responsibilities of the agency under the PRA.
Agency senior information resources management officials are
responsible for ensuring that their agency practices are in
compliance with OMB policies. It is envisioned that the agency
senior information resources management official will work as an
ombudsman to investigate alleged instances of agency failure to
adhere to the policies set forth in the Circular and to recommend or
take corrective action as appropriate. Agency heads should continue
to use existing mechanisms to ensure compliance with laws and
policies.
Section 9b. International Relationships. The information
policies contained in the PRA and Circular A-130 are based on the
premise that government information is a valuable national resource,
and that the economic benefits to society are maximized when
government information is available in a timely and equitable manner
to all. Maximizing the benefits of government information to society
depends, in turn, on fostering diversity among the entities involved
in disseminating it. These include for-profit and not-for-profit
entities, such as information vendors and libraries, as well as
State, local and tribal governments. The policies on charging the
cost of dissemination and against restrictive practices contained in
the PRA and Circular A-130 are aimed at achieving this goal.
Other nations do not necessarily share these values. Although an
increasing number are embracing the concept of equitable and
unrestricted access to public information--particularly scientific,
environmental, and geographic information of great public benefit--
other nations are treating their information as a commodity to be
``commercialized''. Whereas the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 105, has
long provided that ``[c]opyright protection under this title is not
available for any work of the United States Government,'' some other
nations take advantage of their domestic copyright laws that do
permit government copyright and assert a monopoly on certain
categories of information in order to maximize revenues. Such
arrangements tend to preclude other entities from developing markets
for the information or otherwise disseminating the information in
the public interest.
Thus, Federal agencies involved in international data exchanges
are sometimes faced with problems in disseminating data stemming
from differing national treatment of government copyright. For
example, one country may attempt to condition the sharing of data
with a Federal agency on an agreement that the agency will withhold
release of the information or otherwise restrict its availability to
the public. Since the Freedom of Information Act does not provide a
categorical exemption for copyrighted information, and Federal
agencies have neither the authority nor capability to enforce
restrictions on behalf of other nations, agencies faced with such
restrictive conditions lack clear guidance as to how to respond.
The results of the July 1995 Congress of the World
Meteorological Organization, which sought to strike a balance of
interests in this area, are instructive. Faced with a resolution
which would have essentially required member nations to enforce
restrictions on certain categories of information for the commercial
benefit of other nations, the United States proposed a compromise
which was ultimately accepted. The compromise explicitly affirmed
the general principle that government meteorological information--
like all other scientific, technical and environmental information--
should be shared globally without restriction; but recognized that
individual nations may in particular cases apply their own domestic
copyright and similar laws to prevent what they deem to be unfair or
inappropriate competition within their own territories. This
compromise leaves open the door for further consultation as to
whether the future of government information policy in a global
information infrastructure should follow the ``open and unrestricted
access'' model embraced by the United States and a number of other
nations, or if it should follow the ``government commercialization''
model of others.
Accordingly, since the PRA and Circular A-130 are silent as to
how agencies should respond to similar situations, we are providing
the following suggestions. They are intended to foster globally the
open and unrestricted information policy embraced by the United
States and like minded nations, while permitting agencies to have
access to data provided by foreign governments with restrictive
conditions.
Release by a Federal agency of copyrighted information, whether
under a FOIA request or otherwise, does not affect any rights the
copyright holder might otherwise possess. Accordingly, agencies
should inform any concerned foreign governments that their copyright
claims may be enforceable under United States law, but that the
agency is not authorized to prosecute any such claim on behalf of
the foreign government.
Whenever an agency seeks to negotiate an international agreement
in which a foreign party seeks to impose restrictive practices on
information to be exchanged, the agency
[[Page 6453]]
should first coordinate with the State Department. The State Department
will work with the agency to develop the least restrictive terms
consistent with United States policy, and ensure that those terms
receive full interagency clearance through the established process
for granting agencies authority to negotiate and conclude
international agreements.
Finally, whenever an agency is attending meetings of
international or multilateral organizations where restrictive
practices are being proposed as binding on member states, the agency
should coordinate with the State Department, the Office of
Management and Budget, the Office of Science and Technology Policy,
or the U.S. Trade Representative, as appropriate, before expressing
a position on behalf of the United States.
[FR Doc. 96-3645 Filed 2-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
