Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; The American Community Survey, 58378-58381 [2017-26726]
Download as PDF
58378
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 82, No. 237
Tuesday, December 12, 2017
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
December 7, 2017.
The Department of Agriculture has
submitted the following information
collection requirement(s) to OMB for
review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. Comments are
requested regarding (1) whether the
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of burden including
the validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments regarding this information
collection received by January 11, 2018
will be considered. Written comments
should be addressed to: Desk Officer for
Agriculture, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), New
Executive Office Building, 725 17th
Street NW, Washington, DC 20502.
Commenters are encouraged to submit
their comments to OMB via email to:
OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV or
fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental
Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail
Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250–
7602. Copies of the submission(s) may
be obtained by calling (202) 720–8958.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor a collection of information
unless the collection of information
displays a currently valid OMB control
number and the agency informs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:03 Dec 11, 2017
Jkt 244001
potential persons who are to respond to
the collection of information that such
persons are not required to respond to
the collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Title: Salmonella Initiative Program.
OMB Control Number: 0583–0154.
Summary of Collection: The Food
Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) has
been delegated the authority to exercise
the functions of the Secretary as
provided in the Federal Meat Inspection
Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the
Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA)
(21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.). These statutes
mandate that FSIS protect the public by
ensuring that meat and poultry products
are safe, wholesome, unadulterated, and
properly labeled and packaged. The
Salmonella initiative Program (SIP)
offers incentives to meat and poultry
slaughter establishments to control
Salmonella in their operations. SIP
benefits public health because it
encourages establishments to test for
microbial pathogens, which is a key
feature of effective process control.
Need and Use of the Information:
Under SIP, establishments will share
their data with the Food Safety and
Inspection Service (FSIS); this will help
the Agency in formulating its policy.
Establishments that want to enter SIP
must send a protocol to FSIS informing
the Agency about their plans for
implementing SIP in their
establishment, including data
collection, objectives and methods of
evaluating the new technology for
which they are receiving the regulator
waiver.
Description of Respondents: Business
or other for-profit.
Number of Respondents: 50.
Frequency of Responses:
Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion.
Total Burden Hours: 8,256.
Ruth Brown,
Departmental Information Collection
Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017–26706 Filed 12–11–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Census Bureau
Proposed Information Collection;
Comment Request; The American
Community Survey
U.S. Census Bureau,
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Commerce, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork and
respondent burden, invites the general
public and other Federal agencies to
take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: To ensure consideration, written
comments must be submitted on or
before February 12, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Please direct all written
comments to Jennifer Jessup,
Departmental Paperwork Clearance
Officer, Department of Commerce, Room
6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the
internet at PRAcomments@doc.gov).
You may also submit comments,
identified by Docket number USBC–
2017–0005, to the Federal e-Rulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. All
comments received are part of the
public record. No comments will be
posted to https://www.regulations.gov for
public viewing until after the comment
period has closed. Comments will
generally be posted without change. All
Personally Identifiable Information (for
example, name and address) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be
publicly accessible. Do not submit
Confidential Business Information or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information. You may submit
attachments to electronic comments in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or
Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument(s) and instructions should
be directed to Robin A. Pennington, Rm.
2H465, U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial
Census Management Division,
Washington, DC 20233 or via email to
Robin.A.Pennington@census.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2017 / Notices
I. Abstract
Since the founding of the nation, the
U.S. Census has mediated between the
demands of a growing country for
information about its economy and
people, and the people’s privacy and
respondent burden. Beginning with the
1810 Census, Congress added questions
to support a range of public concerns
and uses, and over the course of a
century questions were added about
agriculture, industry, and commerce, as
well as occupation, ancestry, marital
status, disabilities, and other topics. In
1940, the U.S. Census Bureau
introduced the long form and, since
then, the more detailed questions were
only asked of a sample of the public.
The American Community Survey
(ACS), launched in 2005, is the current
embodiment of the long form of the
census and is asked each year of a
sample of the U.S. population in order
to provide current data needed more
often than once every ten years.
The content of the proposed 2019
ACS questionnaire and data collection
instruments for both Housing Unit and
Group Quarters operations reflects
changes to content and instructions that
were proposed as a result of the 2016
ACS Content Test. The Census Bureau
periodically conducts tests of new and
improved survey content to ensure the
ACS is meeting the data needs of its
stakeholders. The primary objective of
content tests is to test whether changes
to question wording, response
categories, and definitions of underlying
constructs improve the quality of data
collected.
The ACS is one of the Department of
Commerce’s most valuable data
products, used extensively by
businesses, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), local
governments, and many federal
agencies. In conducting this survey, the
Census Bureau’s top priority is
respecting the time and privacy of the
people providing information while
preserving the survey’s value to the
public. The 2019 survey content
changes cover several topics:
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Telephone Service
The rise of cellphone and smartphone
usage, and other complex and varied
telephone services and equipment, has
changed how people view and use
telephones in a household. Research
also suggests that some respondents, or
in some cases interviewers, may not
fully understand the current wording of
the survey question on Telephone
Service, the additional instructions that
accompany the question, or what the
question is intending to capture. To
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:03 Dec 11, 2017
Jkt 244001
make the intent of the Telephone
Service question easier to understand by
respondents and interviewers, the
question was made a stand-alone
question and additional instructions are
provided on the types of telephones and
equipment respondents should include
when answering the question.
Currently, telephone service is asked as
part of a broader question on housing
characteristics.
Health Insurance
A question on health insurance
premiums and subsidies will be
introduced to the ACS immediately
following the current question on health
insurance coverage. The question on
premiums and subsidies asks if a person
pays a health insurance premium, and
if so, if he or she received a subsidy to
help pay the premium. This question
will provide more accurate information
about coverage categories than available
from the existing ACS question on
current coverage alone. These data will
enhance the ability of HHS and the
states to administer Medicaid, CHIP,
and the exchanges, and monitor private
insurance coverage.
Journey to Work
Changes to the Commute Mode
question were motivated by changes in
public transportation infrastructure
across the United States, particularly the
increased prevalence of light rail
systems and the need to update and
clarify the terminology used to refer to
commute modes that appear as
categories on the ACS. To improve the
Commute Mode question, some of the
public transportation modes were
modified. The category ‘‘Streetcar or
trolley car’’ was changed to ‘‘Light rail,
street car, or trolley,’’ ‘‘Subway or
elevated’’ was changed to ‘‘Subway or
Elevated Rail,’’ and ‘‘Railroad’’ was
changed to ‘‘Long-distance train or
commuter rail.’’ These three rail-related
categories were also slightly reordered
so that ‘‘Subway or elevated rail,’’ the
most prevalent rail mode, is listed first.
The phrase ‘‘trolley bus’’ was dropped
and the phrase ‘‘work at home’’ was
changed to ‘‘work from home.’’ The
subheading of instructions was
simplified to read ‘‘Mark ONE box for
the method of transportation used for
most of the distance.’’ The Time of
Departure question has historically
raised concerns about privacy because
of the reference to the time a person
leaves home. To phrase the question in
a less intrusive way, the question was
changed to ask what time the person’s
trip to work began and to remove the
word ‘‘home.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58379
Weeks Worked
The changes to the question on the
number of weeks worked were made to
allow the Census Bureau to provide
high-quality, continuous measures for
the number of weeks worked, such as
means, medians, and aggregates. In
addition, the changes enable additional
specificity for weeks worked,
particularly with hours worked, income,
and occupation. Part A of the question
regarding the time period of interest was
rephrased from working ‘‘50 or more
weeks’’ to ‘‘EVERY week’’ and
additional information is provided in
the second sentence. The original
instruction of ‘‘Count paid time off as
work’’ was changed to ‘‘Count paid
vacation, paid sick leave, and military
service as work.’’ For part B of the
question, the response option was
changed to a write-in response, the
reference period (‘‘the PAST 12
MONTHS’’) is repeated, and new
guidance clarifies what to count as
work.
Class of Worker
Changes to the Class of Worker
question improve overall question
clarity, refine the definition of unpaid
family workers, explicitly define a
category for Active Duty military,
improve question wording and
categories, and improve the layout of
the question. Response categories were
grouped under three general headings.
‘‘Active Duty’’ was added as one of the
response categories in the government
section, and the ‘‘Active Duty’’
checkbox was dropped from the
Employer Name question. Question and
response category wording were revised
for clarity. To signal that all six
employment characteristics questions
refer to the same job (including industry
and occupation), the series was
renumbered from separate questions to
a single series with sub-questions.
Lastly, the instructional text and
heading for the series immediately
preceding the Class of Worker question
was simplified.
Industry and Occupation
Ongoing research of the Industry and
Occupation question write-in responses
has demonstrated that the questions
were unclear and confusing to
respondents, who were unable to
answer at all or answer with sufficient
clarity to provide useful data. To
increase clarity and improve
occupational specificity, these questions
were revised to include new and
consistent examples, in terms of content
and length, and include modified
question wording. The number of
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
58380
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2017 / Notices
characters for write-in responses about
‘‘Job Duties’’ was expanded from 60 to
100 characters.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Retirement Income
Over the last 40 years, defined
contribution retirement plans have
become increasingly common while
defined benefit plans (such as pensions)
have become less so. Federal surveys
have lagged in addressing these newer
forms of retirement income and
subsequently underreport retirement
income. The Retirement, Survivor, and
Disability Income question was changed
to improve income reporting, increase
item response rates, reduce reporting
errors, and update questions on
retirement income and the income
generated from retirement accounts and
all other assets in order to better
measure retirement income data. The
question was expanded to ask about
‘‘retirement income, pensions, survivor
or disability income.’’ In addition, the
instructions that accompany the
question were expanded to note that
income from ‘‘a previous employer or
union, or any regular withdrawals or
distributions from IRA, Roth IRA,
401(k), 403(b) or other accounts
specifically designed for retirement’’
should be included.
Relationship
For several years, the Census Bureau
has been testing revised Relationship
questions to improve the estimates of
coupled households. The 1990 Census
first introduced ‘‘Unmarried Partner’’ as
a response category to the Relationship
to Householder question. The 2000 and
2010 Censuses built upon this work,
changing the processing of responses to
the Relationship question to more
accurately represent same-sex couples.
The Census Bureau discovered a
statistical error in the 2010 Census data
that resulted from opposite-sex couples
mismarking their sex. This error has the
potential to inflate the estimates of
same-sex, married-couple households
from the 2010 Census. The Census
Bureau released a set of modified statelevel, same-sex household estimates
from the 2010 Census because of this
error, and also began new research
efforts to improve the Relationship
question.
The Relationship question has been
revised to improve measurement of
same-sex couples. The existing
‘‘Husband or wife’’ and ‘‘Unmarried
partner’’ response categories were each
split into two versions: ‘‘Opposite-sex
husband/wife/spouse,’’ ‘‘Opposite-sex
unmarried partner,’’ ‘‘Same-sex
husband/wife/spouse,’’ and ‘‘Same-sex
unmarried partner.’’ Additionally, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:03 Dec 11, 2017
Jkt 244001
two unmarried partner categories were
moved from near the end of the list of
response options to near the beginning,
immediately after the ‘‘Husband/wife/
spouse’’ options. An automated
relationship/sex consistency check will
be included in electronic instruments to
provide respondents an opportunity to
change their sex or relationship
responses when there is an
inconsistency in the reported sex of an
individual and whether their
relationship was reported as ‘‘Oppositesex’’ or ‘‘Same-sex’’ husband/wife/
spouse or unmarried partner. This check
reduces the inconsistency in responses
for a given household and improves the
quality of the relationship data. The
category ‘‘Roomer or boarder’’ has been
dropped from the Relationship question.
Race and Hispanic Origin
The 2016 ACS Content Test served as
an operational test of the race and
ethnicity questions that were previously
tested on the 2015 National Content
Test (NCT). While recommendations
about the race and ethnicity questions
adopted for the 2020 Census and
production ACS will be based on the
results of the census tests and decisions
made in consultation with the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), the
2016 ACS Content Test provided an
opportunity to test data collection
modes and examine other data not
available in the 2015 NCT. The 2016
ACS Content Test evaluated
interviewer-administered collection
modes, assessed the race and ethnicity
questions against demographic and
socioeconomic data, and separately
compared the race and ethnicity results
to data from the ancestry question. In
2020 or later, the ACS will adopt the
final version of the race and Hispanic
origin questions that are implemented
for the 2020 Census.
II. Method of Collection
In August 2012, the OMB in
conjunction with the Census Bureau
established a Subcommittee of the
Interagency Council on Statistical Policy
(ICSP) to address ACS matters. The ICSP
Subcommittee on the ACS exists to
advise the Chief Statistician at OMB and
the Director of the Census Bureau on
how the ACS can best fulfill its role in
the portfolio of Federal household
surveys and provide the most useful
information with the least amount of
burden. It may also advise Census
Bureau technical staff on issues they
request the subcommittee to examine or
that otherwise arise in discussions. The
ICSP Subcommittee on the ACS
reviewed the proposed 2019 ACS
content changes and recommended their
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
approval to the OMB and the Census
Bureau. For the 2016 ACS Content Test,
initial versions of the new and revised
questions were proposed by federal
agencies participating in the OMB
Interagency Committee for the ACS. The
initial proposals contained a
justification for each change and
described any previous testing of the
question wording, the expected impact
of revisions to the time series and the
single-year as well as five-year
estimates, and the estimated net impact
on respondent burden for the proposed
revision. For proposed new questions,
the justification also described the need
for the new data, whether federal law or
regulation required the data for small
areas or small population groups, if
other data sources were currently
available to provide the information
(and why any alternate sources were
insufficient), how policy needs or
emerging data needs would be
addressed through the new question, an
explanation of why the data were
needed with the geographic precision
and frequency provided by the ACS,
and whether other testing or production
surveys had evaluated the use of the
proposed questions.
The Census Bureau and the OMB, as
well as the ICSP Subcommittee,
reviewed these proposals for the ACS.
The OMB determined which proposals
moved forward into cognitive testing.
After OMB approval of the proposals,
topical subcommittees were formed
from the OMB Interagency Committee
on the ACS, which included all
interested federal agencies that use the
data from the proposed questions. These
subcommittees further refined the
specific proposed wording in
preparation for cognitive testing.
The Census Bureau contracted with
Westat, an internationally recognized
organization with expertise in statistical
research and survey methods, to
conduct three rounds of cognitive
testing. The results of the first two
rounds of cognitive testing informed
decisions on specific revisions to the
proposed content for the stateside 2016
ACS Content Test. The proposed
changes, identified through cognitive
testing for each question topic, were
reviewed by the Census Bureau, the
corresponding topical subcommittee,
and the ICSP Subcommittee for the
ACS. The OMB then provided final
overall approval of the proposed
wording for field testing.
The public is invited to comment on
all questions on the ACS; however, the
Census Bureau is particularly interested
in comments on the wording changes to
the nine ACS questions listed above,
which are proposed to be changed based
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 12, 2017 / Notices
on the results of the 2016 ACS Content
Test. Concurrently, Federal agencies
that are the principal sponsors of these
nine questions are invited to respond
either directly to the Census Bureau or
through this notice.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
III. Data
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
OMB Control Number: 0607–0810.
Form Number(s): ACS–1(2019).
Type of Review: Regular submission.
Affected Public: Federal and
legislative agencies, individuals,
households, and businesses.
Estimated Time per Response: 40
minutes for the average household
questionnaire.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: The Census Bureau plans to
contact the following number of
respondents each year: 3,540,000
households; 200,000 persons in group
quarters; 20,000 contacts in group
quarters; 43,000 households for
reinterview; and 1,500 group quarters
contacts for reinterview. The estimate is
an annual average of 2,337,900 burden
hours.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $0.
Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory.
Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. Sections
141 and 193.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Sheleen Dumas,
Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017–26726 Filed 12–11–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–07–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:03 Dec 11, 2017
Jkt 244001
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
[Docket Number DARS–2016–0024; OMB
Control Number 0704–0332]
ACTION:
Notice.
The Department of Defense
has submitted to OMB, for clearance,
the following proposal for collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
DATES: Consideration will be given to all
comments received by January 11, 2018.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title, Associated Form, and OMB
Number: Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement (DFARS)
Appendix I, DoD Pilot Mentor-Protege
Program; OMB Control Number 0704–
0332.
Type of Request: Reinstatement with
change.
Number of Respondents: 122.
Responses per Respondent:
Approximately 2.
Annual Responses: 240.
Average Burden per Response: 1 hour.
Annual Response Burden Hours: 240.
Reporting Frequency: Two times per
year for mentor firms; one time per year
for protege firms.
Needs and Uses: DoD needs this
information to ensure that participants
in the Mentor-Protege Program (‘‘the
Program’’) are fulfilling their obligations
under the mentor-protege agreements
and that the Government is receiving
value for the benefits it provides
through the Program. DoD uses the
information as source data for reports to
Congress required by section 811(d) of
the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2000 (Pub. L. 106–65).
Participation in the Program is
voluntary.
Affected Public: Businesses and other
for-profit entities and not-for-profit
institutions.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain benefits.
OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet
Seehra.
Written comments and
recommendations on the proposed
information collection should be sent to
Ms. Seehra at the Office of Management
and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room
10236, New Executive Office Building,
Washington, DC 20503.
You may also submit comments,
identified by docket number and title,
by the following method: Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58381
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name, docket
number, and title for the Federal
Register document. The general policy
for comments and other public
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information provided. To confirm
receipt of your comment(s), please
check https://www.regulations.gov
approximately two to three days after
submission to verify posting (except
allow 30 days for posting of comments
submitted by mail).
DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick
C. Licari. Written requests for copies of
the information collection proposal
should be sent to Mr. Licari at:
Information Collections Program, WHS/
ESD Office of Information Management,
4800 Mark Center Drive, 3rd Floor, East
Tower, Suite 03F09, Alexandria, VA
22350–3100.
Jennifer L. Hawes,
Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
[FR Doc. 2017–26715 Filed 12–11–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Availability of Elizabeth River and
Southern Branch Navigation
Improvements Draft General
Reevaluation Report/Environmental
Assessment
Department of the Army, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) in association with
the nonfederal sponsor, the Virginia
Port Authority, an agent of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, announces
the availability of the Elizabeth River
and Southern Branch Navigation
Improvements Draft General
Reevaluation Report/Environmental
Assessment (GRR/EA) for public review
and comment. The purpose of this Draft
GRR/EA is to evaluate alternatives that
have the potential to improve the
current and future operational efficiency
of commercial vessels currently using
the Norfolk Harbor federal channel in
the Elizabeth River. Channel deepening
alternatives were evaluated as well as
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12DEN1.SGM
12DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58378-58381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26726]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Census Bureau
Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; The American
Community Survey
AGENCY: U.S. Census Bureau, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public
and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: To ensure consideration, written comments must be submitted on
or before February 12, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Please direct all written comments to Jennifer Jessup,
Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room
6616, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the
internet at [email protected]). You may also submit comments,
identified by Docket number USBC-2017-0005, to the Federal e-Rulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. All comments received are part of
the public record. No comments will be posted to https://www.regulations.gov for public viewing until after the comment period
has closed. Comments will generally be posted without change. All
Personally Identifiable Information (for example, name and address)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do
not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information. You may submit attachments to electronic
comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file
formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection instrument(s) and instructions
should be directed to Robin A. Pennington, Rm. 2H465, U.S. Census
Bureau, Decennial Census Management Division, Washington, DC 20233 or
via email to [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 58379]]
I. Abstract
Since the founding of the nation, the U.S. Census has mediated
between the demands of a growing country for information about its
economy and people, and the people's privacy and respondent burden.
Beginning with the 1810 Census, Congress added questions to support a
range of public concerns and uses, and over the course of a century
questions were added about agriculture, industry, and commerce, as well
as occupation, ancestry, marital status, disabilities, and other
topics. In 1940, the U.S. Census Bureau introduced the long form and,
since then, the more detailed questions were only asked of a sample of
the public.
The American Community Survey (ACS), launched in 2005, is the
current embodiment of the long form of the census and is asked each
year of a sample of the U.S. population in order to provide current
data needed more often than once every ten years.
The content of the proposed 2019 ACS questionnaire and data
collection instruments for both Housing Unit and Group Quarters
operations reflects changes to content and instructions that were
proposed as a result of the 2016 ACS Content Test. The Census Bureau
periodically conducts tests of new and improved survey content to
ensure the ACS is meeting the data needs of its stakeholders. The
primary objective of content tests is to test whether changes to
question wording, response categories, and definitions of underlying
constructs improve the quality of data collected.
The ACS is one of the Department of Commerce's most valuable data
products, used extensively by businesses, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), local governments, and many federal agencies. In
conducting this survey, the Census Bureau's top priority is respecting
the time and privacy of the people providing information while
preserving the survey's value to the public. The 2019 survey content
changes cover several topics:
Telephone Service
The rise of cellphone and smartphone usage, and other complex and
varied telephone services and equipment, has changed how people view
and use telephones in a household. Research also suggests that some
respondents, or in some cases interviewers, may not fully understand
the current wording of the survey question on Telephone Service, the
additional instructions that accompany the question, or what the
question is intending to capture. To make the intent of the Telephone
Service question easier to understand by respondents and interviewers,
the question was made a stand-alone question and additional
instructions are provided on the types of telephones and equipment
respondents should include when answering the question. Currently,
telephone service is asked as part of a broader question on housing
characteristics.
Health Insurance
A question on health insurance premiums and subsidies will be
introduced to the ACS immediately following the current question on
health insurance coverage. The question on premiums and subsidies asks
if a person pays a health insurance premium, and if so, if he or she
received a subsidy to help pay the premium. This question will provide
more accurate information about coverage categories than available from
the existing ACS question on current coverage alone. These data will
enhance the ability of HHS and the states to administer Medicaid, CHIP,
and the exchanges, and monitor private insurance coverage.
Journey to Work
Changes to the Commute Mode question were motivated by changes in
public transportation infrastructure across the United States,
particularly the increased prevalence of light rail systems and the
need to update and clarify the terminology used to refer to commute
modes that appear as categories on the ACS. To improve the Commute Mode
question, some of the public transportation modes were modified. The
category ``Streetcar or trolley car'' was changed to ``Light rail,
street car, or trolley,'' ``Subway or elevated'' was changed to
``Subway or Elevated Rail,'' and ``Railroad'' was changed to ``Long-
distance train or commuter rail.'' These three rail-related categories
were also slightly reordered so that ``Subway or elevated rail,'' the
most prevalent rail mode, is listed first. The phrase ``trolley bus''
was dropped and the phrase ``work at home'' was changed to ``work from
home.'' The subheading of instructions was simplified to read ``Mark
ONE box for the method of transportation used for most of the
distance.'' The Time of Departure question has historically raised
concerns about privacy because of the reference to the time a person
leaves home. To phrase the question in a less intrusive way, the
question was changed to ask what time the person's trip to work began
and to remove the word ``home.''
Weeks Worked
The changes to the question on the number of weeks worked were made
to allow the Census Bureau to provide high-quality, continuous measures
for the number of weeks worked, such as means, medians, and aggregates.
In addition, the changes enable additional specificity for weeks
worked, particularly with hours worked, income, and occupation. Part A
of the question regarding the time period of interest was rephrased
from working ``50 or more weeks'' to ``EVERY week'' and additional
information is provided in the second sentence. The original
instruction of ``Count paid time off as work'' was changed to ``Count
paid vacation, paid sick leave, and military service as work.'' For
part B of the question, the response option was changed to a write-in
response, the reference period (``the PAST 12 MONTHS'') is repeated,
and new guidance clarifies what to count as work.
Class of Worker
Changes to the Class of Worker question improve overall question
clarity, refine the definition of unpaid family workers, explicitly
define a category for Active Duty military, improve question wording
and categories, and improve the layout of the question. Response
categories were grouped under three general headings. ``Active Duty''
was added as one of the response categories in the government section,
and the ``Active Duty'' checkbox was dropped from the Employer Name
question. Question and response category wording were revised for
clarity. To signal that all six employment characteristics questions
refer to the same job (including industry and occupation), the series
was renumbered from separate questions to a single series with sub-
questions. Lastly, the instructional text and heading for the series
immediately preceding the Class of Worker question was simplified.
Industry and Occupation
Ongoing research of the Industry and Occupation question write-in
responses has demonstrated that the questions were unclear and
confusing to respondents, who were unable to answer at all or answer
with sufficient clarity to provide useful data. To increase clarity and
improve occupational specificity, these questions were revised to
include new and consistent examples, in terms of content and length,
and include modified question wording. The number of
[[Page 58380]]
characters for write-in responses about ``Job Duties'' was expanded
from 60 to 100 characters.
Retirement Income
Over the last 40 years, defined contribution retirement plans have
become increasingly common while defined benefit plans (such as
pensions) have become less so. Federal surveys have lagged in
addressing these newer forms of retirement income and subsequently
underreport retirement income. The Retirement, Survivor, and Disability
Income question was changed to improve income reporting, increase item
response rates, reduce reporting errors, and update questions on
retirement income and the income generated from retirement accounts and
all other assets in order to better measure retirement income data. The
question was expanded to ask about ``retirement income, pensions,
survivor or disability income.'' In addition, the instructions that
accompany the question were expanded to note that income from ``a
previous employer or union, or any regular withdrawals or distributions
from IRA, Roth IRA, 401(k), 403(b) or other accounts specifically
designed for retirement'' should be included.
Relationship
For several years, the Census Bureau has been testing revised
Relationship questions to improve the estimates of coupled households.
The 1990 Census first introduced ``Unmarried Partner'' as a response
category to the Relationship to Householder question. The 2000 and 2010
Censuses built upon this work, changing the processing of responses to
the Relationship question to more accurately represent same-sex
couples. The Census Bureau discovered a statistical error in the 2010
Census data that resulted from opposite-sex couples mismarking their
sex. This error has the potential to inflate the estimates of same-sex,
married-couple households from the 2010 Census. The Census Bureau
released a set of modified state-level, same-sex household estimates
from the 2010 Census because of this error, and also began new research
efforts to improve the Relationship question.
The Relationship question has been revised to improve measurement
of same-sex couples. The existing ``Husband or wife'' and ``Unmarried
partner'' response categories were each split into two versions:
``Opposite-sex husband/wife/spouse,'' ``Opposite-sex unmarried
partner,'' ``Same-sex husband/wife/spouse,'' and ``Same-sex unmarried
partner.'' Additionally, the two unmarried partner categories were
moved from near the end of the list of response options to near the
beginning, immediately after the ``Husband/wife/spouse'' options. An
automated relationship/sex consistency check will be included in
electronic instruments to provide respondents an opportunity to change
their sex or relationship responses when there is an inconsistency in
the reported sex of an individual and whether their relationship was
reported as ``Opposite-sex'' or ``Same-sex'' husband/wife/spouse or
unmarried partner. This check reduces the inconsistency in responses
for a given household and improves the quality of the relationship
data. The category ``Roomer or boarder'' has been dropped from the
Relationship question.
Race and Hispanic Origin
The 2016 ACS Content Test served as an operational test of the race
and ethnicity questions that were previously tested on the 2015
National Content Test (NCT). While recommendations about the race and
ethnicity questions adopted for the 2020 Census and production ACS will
be based on the results of the census tests and decisions made in
consultation with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the 2016
ACS Content Test provided an opportunity to test data collection modes
and examine other data not available in the 2015 NCT. The 2016 ACS
Content Test evaluated interviewer-administered collection modes,
assessed the race and ethnicity questions against demographic and
socioeconomic data, and separately compared the race and ethnicity
results to data from the ancestry question. In 2020 or later, the ACS
will adopt the final version of the race and Hispanic origin questions
that are implemented for the 2020 Census.
II. Method of Collection
In August 2012, the OMB in conjunction with the Census Bureau
established a Subcommittee of the Interagency Council on Statistical
Policy (ICSP) to address ACS matters. The ICSP Subcommittee on the ACS
exists to advise the Chief Statistician at OMB and the Director of the
Census Bureau on how the ACS can best fulfill its role in the portfolio
of Federal household surveys and provide the most useful information
with the least amount of burden. It may also advise Census Bureau
technical staff on issues they request the subcommittee to examine or
that otherwise arise in discussions. The ICSP Subcommittee on the ACS
reviewed the proposed 2019 ACS content changes and recommended their
approval to the OMB and the Census Bureau. For the 2016 ACS Content
Test, initial versions of the new and revised questions were proposed
by federal agencies participating in the OMB Interagency Committee for
the ACS. The initial proposals contained a justification for each
change and described any previous testing of the question wording, the
expected impact of revisions to the time series and the single-year as
well as five-year estimates, and the estimated net impact on respondent
burden for the proposed revision. For proposed new questions, the
justification also described the need for the new data, whether federal
law or regulation required the data for small areas or small population
groups, if other data sources were currently available to provide the
information (and why any alternate sources were insufficient), how
policy needs or emerging data needs would be addressed through the new
question, an explanation of why the data were needed with the
geographic precision and frequency provided by the ACS, and whether
other testing or production surveys had evaluated the use of the
proposed questions.
The Census Bureau and the OMB, as well as the ICSP Subcommittee,
reviewed these proposals for the ACS. The OMB determined which
proposals moved forward into cognitive testing. After OMB approval of
the proposals, topical subcommittees were formed from the OMB
Interagency Committee on the ACS, which included all interested federal
agencies that use the data from the proposed questions. These
subcommittees further refined the specific proposed wording in
preparation for cognitive testing.
The Census Bureau contracted with Westat, an internationally
recognized organization with expertise in statistical research and
survey methods, to conduct three rounds of cognitive testing. The
results of the first two rounds of cognitive testing informed decisions
on specific revisions to the proposed content for the stateside 2016
ACS Content Test. The proposed changes, identified through cognitive
testing for each question topic, were reviewed by the Census Bureau,
the corresponding topical subcommittee, and the ICSP Subcommittee for
the ACS. The OMB then provided final overall approval of the proposed
wording for field testing.
The public is invited to comment on all questions on the ACS;
however, the Census Bureau is particularly interested in comments on
the wording changes to the nine ACS questions listed above, which are
proposed to be changed based
[[Page 58381]]
on the results of the 2016 ACS Content Test. Concurrently, Federal
agencies that are the principal sponsors of these nine questions are
invited to respond either directly to the Census Bureau or through this
notice.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0607-0810.
Form Number(s): ACS-1(2019).
Type of Review: Regular submission.
Affected Public: Federal and legislative agencies, individuals,
households, and businesses.
Estimated Time per Response: 40 minutes for the average household
questionnaire.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: The Census Bureau plans to
contact the following number of respondents each year: 3,540,000
households; 200,000 persons in group quarters; 20,000 contacts in group
quarters; 43,000 households for reinterview; and 1,500 group quarters
contacts for reinterview. The estimate is an annual average of
2,337,900 burden hours.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.
Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. Sections 141 and 193.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information;
(c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information
collection; they also will become a matter of public record.
Sheleen Dumas,
Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-26726 Filed 12-11-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P