2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas, 37770-37778 [2021-15159]
Download as PDF
37770
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
7. Update on Disaster Task Force
Implementation
a. Lynn Jennings, Vice President for
Grants Management
8. Update on the Eviction Study and
Housing Task Force
Implementation
a. Lynn Jennings, Vice President for
Grants Management
9. Consider and act on Expenditure of
Private Funds to Support LSC’s
Housing Task Force, Resolution
2021–XXX
10. Update on Rural Justice Task Force
a. Marissa Jeffery, Graduate Law
Fellow
11. Public comment
12. Consider and act on other business
13. Consider and act on motion to
adjourn the Open Session meeting
and proceed to a Closed Session
Closed Session
1. Approval of minutes of the
Institutional Advancement
Committee’s Closed Session
meeting on April 19, 2021
2. Development activities report
a. Nadia Elguindy, Director of
Institutional Advancement
3. Consider and act on motion to
approve Leaders Council and
Emerging Leaders Council invitees
4. Consider and act on other business
5. Consider and act on motion to
adjourn the meeting
Communications Subcommittee of the
Institutional Advancement Committee
Open Session
1. Approval of agenda
2. Approval of minutes of the
Subcommittee’s Open Session
meeting on April 19, 2021
3. Communications and social media
update
a. Carl Rauscher, Director of
Communications and Media
Relations
b. Carol Bergman, Vice President for
Government Relations and Public
Affairs
c. Jada Breegle, Chief Information
Officer
d. Shanikka Richardson, Web Content
Manager
4. Public comment
5. Consider and act on other business
6. Consider and act on motion to
adjourn the meeting
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Board of Directors Meeting
Open Session
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approval of agenda
3. Approval of minutes of the Board’s
Telephonic Meeting on May 25,
2021
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
4. Chairman’s Report
5. Members’ Reports
6. President’s Report
7. Inspector General’s Report
8. Consider and act on the Report of the
Governance and Performance
Review Committee
9. Consider and act on the Report of the
Operations and Regulations
Committee
10. Consider and act on the Report of
the Finance Committee
11. Consider and act on the Report of
the Audit Committee
12. Consider and act on the Report of
the Institutional Advancement
Committee
13. Consider and act on the report of the
Delivery of Legal Services
Committee
14. Consider and act on Resolution
2021–XXX, In Recognition and
Appreciation of Distinguished
Service by Members of the LSC
Veterans Task Force
15. Consider and act on Resolution
2021–XXX, In Recognition and
Appreciation of Distinguished
Service by DLA Piper
16. Public comment
17. Consider and act on other business
18. Consider and act on whether to
authorize a Closed Session of the
Board to address items listed below
Closed Session
1. Approval of minutes of the Board’s
Closed Session meeting on April 20,
2021
2. Management briefing
3. Inspector General briefing
4. Consider and act on General
Counsel’s report on potential and
pending litigation involving LSC
5. Consider and act on prospective
Leaders Council and Emerging
Leaders Council invitees
6. Consider and act on motion to
adjourn the meeting
CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION:
Jessica Wechter, Board Relations
Coordinator, at (202) 295–1626.
Questions may also be sent by electronic
mail to FR_NOTICE_QUESTIONS@
lsc.gov.
NON-CONFIDENTIAL MEETING MATERIALS:
Non-confidential meeting materials will
be made available in electronic format at
least 24 hours in advance of the meeting
on the LSC website, at https://
www.lsc.gov/about-lsc/board-meetingmaterials.
Dated: July 13, 2021.
Mark Freedman,
Senior Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2021–15205 Filed 7–14–21; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7050–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
2020 Standards for Delineating Core
Based Statistical Areas
Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Executive
Office of the President.
ACTION: Notice of decision.
AGENCY:
This Notice announces the
adoption of 2020 Standards for
Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). The 2020 standards,
which reflect modest revisions to the
2010 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas, supersede the 2010
standards. The SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION in this Notice provides
background information on the
standards (Section A), a brief synopsis
of the public comments OMB received
in response to the January 19, 2021
Federal Register notice describing the
recommendations of the Metropolitan
and Micropolitan Statistical Area
Standards Review Committee (Section
B), the statement of the Standards
Review Committee in response to public
comment (Section C), and OMB’s
decisions on the recommendations of
the Standards Review Committee
(Section D). The 2020 standards appear
at the end of this Notice (Section E).
DATES: This Notice is effective
immediately. OMB plans to publish
delineations of areas based on the 2020
standards and 2020 Census data in
2023. Federal agencies should begin to
use the new area delineations to
tabulate and publish statistics when the
delineations are published.
ADDRESSES: Please send correspondence
about OMB’s decision to Dominic
Mancini, Acting Chief Statistician and
Deputy Administrator, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Room 9264, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or
email US_Chief_Statistician@
omb.eop.gov with the subject ‘‘2020
Metro Areas.’’
Electronic Availability: This notice is
available on the internet from the OMB
website at https://www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/information-regulatory-affairs/
statistical-programs-standards/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob
Sivinski, Senior Statistician, Office of
Management and Budget, telephone
(202) 395–1205; or email: Statistical_
Directives@omb.eop.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
Outline of Notice
A. Background and Review Process
B. Summary of Comments Received in
Response to the Recommendations of the
Standards Review Committee
C. Standards Review Committee Response to
Comments
D. OMB’s Decisions Regarding Changes to the
2010 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas
E. 2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based
Statistical Areas, and Key Terms
A. Background and Review Process
1. Background
In its role as coordinator of the
Federal statistical system under the
Budget and Accounting Procedures Act
of 1950 (31 U.S.C. 1104(d)) and the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3504(e)), OMB is required to
ensure the system’s efficiency and
effectiveness. A key method used by
OMB to achieve this responsibility is
the promulgation, maintenance, and
oversight of Government-wide
principles, policies, standards, and
guidance concerning the development,
presentation, and dissemination of
Federal statistical products. OMB’s
Office of Statistical and Science Policy,
within the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, relies on public
comment and subject matter expertise
across the Federal government to help
OMB identify policies or guidance that
may be out of date, lacking clarity, or
inefficient.
One of the long-standing statistical
standards maintained by OMB is the
core based statistical areas program.
This program, under various names, has
provided standard statistical area
delineations for approximately 70 years.
In the 1940s, it became clear that the
value of statistics produced by Federal
agencies would be greatly enhanced if
statistical agencies used a single set of
geographic delineations for the Nation’s
largest centers of population and
activity. OMB’s predecessor, the Bureau
of the Budget, led the effort to develop
what were then called ‘‘standard
metropolitan areas’’ in time for their use
in 1950 census publications. Since then,
comparable data products for
metropolitan areas have been available.
37771
The general concept of a core based
statistical area (CBSA) is that of an area
containing a large population nucleus,
or urban area, and adjacent
communities that have a high degree of
integration with that nucleus. There are
two types of CBSAs: Metropolitan
statistical areas (MSAs) and
micropolitan statistical areas (mSAs).
Metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas are conceptually similar
to each other, but a micropolitan area
features a smaller nucleus.
Both metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas are composed of entire
counties. ‘‘Central counties’’ are those
that contain the population nucleus
mentioned above. These nuclei are
identified by a separate geographic
statistical program, the urban areas
program at the Census Bureau.
‘‘Outlying counties’’ qualify to join a
central county based on demonstrating
sufficient commuting with the central
county or counties of the area. Counties
that do not fall within metropolitan or
micropolitan statistical areas are
‘‘outside of a CBSA. ’’
ml Urban area of at least 50,000 population
■ Urban area of betWeen 10;000 and 49,999 population
The purpose of these statistical areas
is unchanged from when standard
metropolitan areas were first delineated:
The classification provides a nationally
consistent set of delineations for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
D County or equivalent
■Metropolltan statistical area
IIMicropolftlln statistical area
Jkt 253001
collecting, tabulating, and publishing
Federal statistics for geographic areas.
OMB establishes and maintains these
areas solely for statistical purposes. In
reviewing and revising these areas,
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
OMB does not take into account, or
attempt to anticipate, any public or
private sector nonstatistical uses of the
delineations. While the use of these
areas in nonstatistical programs is
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
EN16JY21.001
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Figure 1. Representative Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas with Urban Areas
37772
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
relatively common, and will be
discussed in more detail below as those
potential impacts were the subject of the
vast majority of public comments OMB
received on the proposed standards,
these areas are not designed for the
purpose of serving as a general-purpose
geographic framework applicable for use
in program administration or funding
formulas. If these areas are used for
program administration, OMB
recommends structuring the use in a
way that prevents any unintended
disruption that may be caused by OMB’s
regular review and revision of the
standards.
Furthermore, the MSA and mSA
delineations do not produce an urbanrural classification, and confusion of
these concepts has the potential to affect
the ability of a program to effectively
target either urban or rural areas, if that
is the program goal. Counties included
in metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas may contain both urban
and rural territory and population. For
instance, programs that seek to
strengthen rural economies by focusing
solely on counties located outside MSAs
could ignore a predominantly rural
county that is included in an MSA
because a high percentage of the
county’s residents commute to urban
centers for work. OMB urges agencies,
organizations, and policy makers to
review carefully the goals of
nonstatistical programs and policies to
ensure that appropriate geographic
entities are used to determine the
allocation of Federal funds.
2. Review Process
Periodic review of the standards is
necessary to ensure their continued
usefulness and relevance. Every decade
OMB reviews the statistical area
standards and, if warranted, revises
them prior to their application to new
decennial census data. The current
review of the CBSA standards is the
seventh such review. In 2018, OMB
charged the Metropolitan and
Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards
Review Committee (Standards Review
Committee) with examining the 2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan
and Micropolitan Statistical Areas
(available at: https://
www.federalregister.gov/documents/
2010/06/28/2010-15605/2010standards-for-delineating-metropolitanand-micropolitan-statistical-areas) and
providing recommendations for how to
improve the standards. The Standards
Review Committee is a standing
committee composed of subject matter
experts at the agencies that rely on the
statistical areas to produce official
statistics. Agencies represented on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
review committee include the U.S.
Census Bureau (Chair), Bureau of
Economic Analysis, Bureau of Justice
Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
Economic Research Service, National
Center for Health Statistics, Statistics of
Income, and ex officio, OMB. The
Census Bureau provided research
support to the committee.
OMB published the Review
Committee’s recommendations for
revisions to the 2010 standards in a
Federal Register Notice (FRN) on
January 19, 2021: ‘‘Recommendations
From the Metropolitan and
Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards
Review Committee to the Office of
Management and Budget Concerning
Changes to the 2010 Standards for
Delineating Metropolitan and
Micropolitan Statistical Areas’’ (86 FR
5263). The notice described six
recommendations from the Standards
Review Committee. The Standards
Review Committee recommended that:
(1) The minimum urban area
population to qualify an MSA be
increased from 50,000 to 100,000;
(2) The delineation of New England
city and town areas (NECTAs), NECTA
divisions, and combined NECTAs be
discontinued;
(3) Research be undertaken on an
additional, territorially exhaustive
classification that covers all of the
United States and Puerto Rico;
(4) The first annual delineation
update of the coming decade be
combined with the decennial-based
delineations;
(5) OMB should make publicly
available a schedule for updates to the
core based statistical areas (see
proposed update schedule below); and
(6) OMB continue use of American
Community Survey commuting data in
measurement of intercounty
connectivity, though changing societal
and economic trends may warrant
considering changes in the 2030
standards.
After the public comment period
closed, OMB reconvened the Standards
Review Committee to analyze and
respond to the resulting comments.
After taking into consideration public
comment and the position of the
Standards Review Committee, OMB is
publishing this FRN to announce final
decisions and the content of the 2020
Standards for Delineating Core Based
Statistical Areas. The 2020 standards
replace and supersede OMB’s 2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan
and Micropolitan Statistical Areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
B. Summary of Public Comments
Received in Response to the Review
Committee’s Recommendations
After removing duplicate submissions
from the same senders, OMB received
848 comments in response to the
Standards Review Committee’s
recommendations.
Recommendation 1: Raise the
minimum MSA core population
threshold from 50,000 to 100,000.
Seven hundred thirty-four comments
remarked on Recommendation 1,
increasing the minimum population
threshold of an urban area to qualify an
MSA from 50,000 to 100,000, with 21 in
favor (5 of which conditionally agreed
with additional suggestions regarding
population thresholds) and 712
opposed. In addition, there was one
comment that was neutral toward
Recommendation 1.
Many of the comments opposing
Recommendation 1 did not provide a
rationale for their opposition. Of the
commenters who did cite a rationale for
their opposition, almost all cited a
nonstatistical rationale, such as
concerns about loss of federal or other
funding; concerns about other
programmatic consequences; and
concerns about economic development
for individual areas that would be
reclassified from metropolitan to
micropolitan. Some comments cited
both nonstatistical and statistical
rationales, such as concerns about
potential loss of data for individual
areas that would be reclassified from a
metropolitan to a micropolitan
statistical area; concerns about long
term data analysis and longitudinal
analysis if such a change led to a break
in data series or the type of statistics
collected and produced at this level of
geographic area; concern that the
recommended change was too modest to
justify making any change; failure to
consider another approach (such as
adding a top size class using some
definition of the ‘‘largest’’ areas); and
perceived failure on behalf of the
Standards Review Committee to show a
sufficient rationale for doubling the
current threshold. A few of the
comments presented a purely statistical
rationale.
Twenty-one comments were in favor
of raising the minimum population
threshold of an urban area to qualify an
MSA from 50,000 to 100,000. Five of
these comments offered additional
suggestions, such as modifying the
minimum population to qualify a mSA.
Recommendation 2: Discontinue
Updates to the New England City and
Town Areas, New England City and
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
Town Area Divisions, and Combined
New England City and Town Areas.
Ten comments remarked on
Recommendation 2, the discontinuation
of New England City and Town Area
delineations, with three in favor, two
neutral, and five opposed to the
recommendation.
Among points cited by those opposed
to Recommendation 2 were the relative
prominence of cities and towns (as
opposed to counties) in the six New
England states, and concerns about
impact of the recommendation on data
availability and longitudinal data
analysis.
An argument in favor of the
recommendation advocated against
providing special treatment to one
region of the country.
Recommendation 3: Launch a
research effort into delineating
territorially exhaustive areas.
Seven comments remarked on
Recommendation 3 concerning research
into developing a set of territorially
exhaustive areas. All seven comments
were in favor of the recommendation,
with one of the comments also in favor
of delineation of areas in United States
Island Areas, in addition to the United
States and Puerto Rico. Comments
offered technical suggestions on
different means of delineating the
territory of the United States and Puerto
Rico, such as the use of Bureau of
Economic Analysis (BEA) Economic
Areas, United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) commuting zones,
USDA data, regional intergovernmental
organizations, and substate districts.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate the
results of the decade’s first annual
update review into the results of the
decade’s decennial census-based
update.
Eight comments remarked on
Recommendation 4 concerning
combining the publication of the first
annual delineation update with the
decennial-based redelineation, with
three in favor (with one comment not
wanting any updates during the decade
except this one). An argument in favor
was to minimize statistical area churn in
the inventory.
Five comments expressed general
concerns about OMB conducting
updates during the decade, but did not
provide a specific opinion on this
particular recommendation to combine
the annual and decennial updates.
Recommendation 5: Establish a
Publicly Available Update Schedule.
Two comments remarked on
Recommendation 5, which involved
establishing and publishing a public
schedule for the release of delineations
and updates. The two comments were
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
both in favor of publishing an update
schedule. An argument in favor was
increased transparency and
predictability.
Recommendation 6: Continue use of
American Community Survey
commuting data to measure intercounty
connectivity.
There was a total of 45 comments on
Recommendation 6, concerning the
continued use of American Community
Survey (ACS) commuting data for the
2023 delineations.
Forty-one comments discussed
Recommendation 6, while
simultaneously arguing for an outcome
for a specific area or set of areas.
Suggestions for additional or alternative
datasets included the commodity flow
survey (Bureau of Transportation
Statistics), shopping and transaction
data, the Longitudinal EmployerHousehold Dynamics (Census Bureau),
new modes of transportation, and
geographic proximity between cities.
Two of the four remaining comments
offered support for the recommendation
(with one suggesting that other data may
be needed to determine if areas should
change during the mid-decade update),
and two provided suggestions for other
datasets, such as primary care service
areas and other measures of economic
activity.
A few comments not included in this
count suggested specific changes to how
the ACS commuting data are used in the
standards, such as modifying
commuting thresholds, without
discussing whether the ACS data should
continue to be used or what other
sources of data might replace or
supplement it.
Other Comments
The remaining comments mostly
raised issues outside of the scope of the
request, in that they were directed at
specific applications of the standards,
and did not offer recommendations that
were relevant to the potential
modification of the standards
themselves. Several comments
expressed concern about the current
configuration of one or more
metropolitan areas and requested
changes. For example, forty-two
comments requested modification to the
components of the Evansville, IN-KY
metropolitan area; two comments
requested modification to the
components of the Idaho Falls, ID
metropolitan area, and one comment
requested modification to the
components of the Sioux City, IA-NE-SD
metropolitan area. Five comments
requested using subcounty units to
possibly identify a separate area within
the current Riverside-San Bernardino-
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37773
Ontario, CA metropolitan area. Other
comments requested different
arrangements of multiple metropolitan
areas, including three comments
concerning merging the Raleigh-Cary,
NC and Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
metropolitan areas, and one comment
concerning merging the GreenvilleAnderson, SC and Spartanburg, SC
metropolitan areas.
C. Standards Review Committee
Response to Comments
After the close of the public comment
period, OMB reconvened the Standards
Review Committee and asked them to
provide a statement on their earlier
recommendations, taking into account
the public comments received and
potential impacts of the coronavirus
pandemic. The Standards Review
Committee statement reads, in its
entirety:
‘‘The Committee subscribes without
reservation to the view that federal
statistical standards require regular
review and sometimes revision to stay
abreast of the phenomena they describe.
Over the course of nearly ten months,
the Committee reviewed the ‘‘2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan
and Micropolitan Statistical Areas,’’
and, in the end, it recommended six
revisions to OMB. Now, the Committee
also has examined public comment
received on those recommendations.’’
‘‘Each of the recommendations
followed from thoughtful consideration
and discussion, both within the
Committee and with a panel of external
experts. In addition, nearly all of the
topics addressed in the
recommendations were familiar from
Committee discussions in previous
reviews of the standards.’’
‘‘Having reviewed the public
comment, the Committee stands by five
of its six recommendations but now
recommends that action on the first of
those recommendations—regarding the
minimum population core size for
metropolitan statistical areas—be
delayed pending completion of
additional research on the topic.’’
‘‘Reviewing the public comment.
Public comment received on
Recommendations 2 through 6 generally
was supportive or offered no counterarguments that the Committee found
sufficiently compelling to change its
earlier views. In general, these
recommendations generated modest
amounts of comment. Implementing
these recommendations will improve
the performance of the program in the
near term, lay the foundation for
improved data availability in the future,
and increase transparency and
usability.’’
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
37774
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
‘‘Recommendation 1, on the other
hand, received substantial comment,
and that comment raised a number of
concerns of potential importance to the
federal statistical system. One such
concern focused on a possible reduction
in federal statistical data available for
areas that would change status from
metropolitan statistical areas to
micropolitan statistical areas as a result
of an increased core population
requirement. Another concern was with
discontinuities in longitudinal federal
statistical data series that could come
with a changed population
requirement.’’
‘‘A third identified statistical issue
relative to Recommendation 1 focused
on the size of the recommended core
population requirement increase (from
50,000 to 100,000). For some, that
increase—if needed at all—was viewed
as too large; on the other side, there
were indications of dissatisfaction that
the Committee did not consider
alternative or larger changes to address
the wide range of core populations
currently covered within the category of
‘‘metropolitan.’’ Finally, public
comment challenged the Committee to
justify more clearly its Recommendation
1 with documented research results.’’
‘‘Next steps. The Committee now
recommends OMB’s delaying action on
Recommendation 1 in order to complete
further analysis and research. A side
benefit of this work is that it might help
to reassure data users that appropriate
consideration has been invested in a key
change to the standards.’’
‘‘With assistance from the statistical
agencies, OMB could, with medium
level of effort, address two of the
concerns raised about Recommendation
1:
• Provide a thorough assessment of
the anticipated effects of a changed
minimum core population size on
federal statistical data availability,
reviewing possible effects in individual
data programs across the full set of
statistical agencies.
• Conduct an analysis of changes in
thresholds in other statistical programs
over the years to provide guidance on
mitigating discontinuities in time series
data. Programs change requirements
with different frequencies and using
different approaches. The fact that this
program has held the minimum
metropolitan statistical area core
population size constant in the name of
stability for an extended period should
not permanently preclude adjustments
to fit changed circumstances.’’
‘‘Robust examination of the
appropriate size for an increase in
required core population for
metropolitan statistical areas as well as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
associated, derived area classification
issues will require a more extensive
effort. Experience suggests these tasks
would be addressed most effectively by
a combination of statistical agency
research and two to three external
research projects. Those projects would
analyze evolving U.S. central place
hierarchies and economic agglomeration
thresholds during the period 1940–
2020. Also, consideration should be
given to including within the scope of
these research projects an examination
of changed commuting patterns
(pertinent to Recommendation 6, in
light of changes in commuting behavior
associated with the COVID–19
pandemic that occurred after the
Committee had submitted its
recommendations). This work would
best take place between late 2023 (once
new statistical areas are delineated
based on 2020 data) and the end of 2025
so results would be available to OMB
and the Committee in early 2026. By
2023, the lasting effects of the pandemic
on journey to work should have started
becoming clearer.’’
‘‘(In the interest of smoothing
resource demands for research over the
decade, conducting the groundwork on
approaches to preparing territorially
exhaustive statistical areas
(Recommendation 3) can follow and
benefit from the work on core size and
commuting data and should be
scheduled to start in 2026 and conclude
in 2028.)’’
‘‘Final thought. In view of the
considerable volume of public comment
addressing issues extraneous to the
purpose of the metropolitan and
micropolitan statistical areas program,
the Committee urges OMB to assume a
more assertive posture in reiterating
through various available channels the
value and role of this federal statistical
standard. Part of that effort will require
continued efforts to educate
nonstatistical program users of the
limitations of these statistical areas to
meet their programs’ needs; the other
side of the effort will be to ensure that
federal statistical agencies and programs
are taking full advantage of the areas to
disseminate data for the benefit of data
users. The success of the program
depends in part on the continued
demonstration of its usefulness across
the federal statistical system.’’
—Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Area Standards Review
Committee
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
D. OMB’s Decisions Regarding Changes
to the 2010 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas
This section of the Notice presents the
decisions OMB made on the Standards
Review Committee’s recommendations.
In arriving at these decisions, we
considered the Standards Review
Committee’s recommendations, the
public comments we received on those
the Standards Review Committee’s
recommendations, and the Standards
Review Committee’s subsequent
statement in Section C.
OMB also benefited from the
continued and thorough deliberations of
the statistical experts that constitute the
Standards Review Committee, as well as
the research and analytic support
provided by the Census Bureau. As in
past reviews of the standards, we relied
upon the technical and subject-matter
expertise, insight, and dedication of the
Standards Review Committee members.
We sincerely appreciate these
contributions to the rigor, objectivity,
and usefulness of the CBSA program,
and offer special thanks to the
invaluable support of the Population
Division at the Census Bureau.
OMB’s decisions on each of the
Review Committee’s recommendations
are discussed below. OMB did not make
any substantive changes to the 2010
standards beyond the revisions
discussed in this section.
Recommendation 1: Raise the
minimum MSA core population
threshold from 50,000 to 100,000.
OMB Decision: OMB does not accept
the initial recommendation to raise the
MSA core population threshold in the
2020 standards, and has decided to
leave the current threshold of 50,000 in
place. A change to the fundamental
criteria that determine whether an area
is considered metropolitan would cause
disruption to statistical programs and
products, and would be difficult for the
statistical agencies to implement. OMB
decided that there is insufficient
justification at this time to raise the
threshold to 100,000 and that further
research is necessary before deciding
whether to change the criteria that
determine whether an area is considered
metropolitan. Finally, we also note the
Standard Review Committee’s
subsequent modification of their initial
recommendation recognizing the value
of additional research before modifying
the threshold.
We acknowledge the Standards
Review Committee’s concern that the
MSA thresholds have not kept pace
with population growth, which affects
the ability of the CBSA program to meet
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
its intended purpose of identifying the
primary centers of population and
economic activity in the United States
for use in official statistics. OMB
commits to working with the Standards
Review Committee to conduct research
and stakeholder outreach over the next
four years to closely examine the utility
of the current requirements for an area
to qualify as an MSA, and for outlying
counties to join an MSA (See
Recommendation 6). This research will
be guided by the MSA program’s
primary goal of identifying the major
centers of population and economic
activity of the United States, and will
include exploring different frameworks
and data sources for classifying
metropolitan areas, including alternate
core population thresholds, features and
amenities of areas, evolving U.S. central
place hierarchies, potential economic
thresholds, and other topics identified
by the Standards Review Committee or
outside experts. The Standards Review
Committee will advise OMB on the
impact of any potential revisions on the
statistical products released by their
agencies.
Recommendation 2: Discontinue
Updates to the NECTAs, NECTA
Divisions, and Combined NECTAs.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this
recommendation, and the conclusion of
the Committee that the significant
complexity generated by maintaining
these areas is not justified by their use
in Federal statistical products and
programs.
We recognize that NECTAs are more
granular than county-based CBSAs, and
more closely reflect the functional local
government structure in New England.
However, Federal statistical programs
often do not release two sets of data for
both NECTAs and MSAs in the New
England states, because doing so would
create unacceptable risk of disclosure or
reidentification. As a result, several
statistical programs currently release
data by NECTAs in New England and by
county-based CBSAs for the rest of the
country. This practice is contrary to the
intent of the standards to provide a
nationally consistent geographic
framework. After consulting with the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is the
primary user of these areas, OMB is
confident that BLS programs can
continue to release high quality and
useful statistics across the country. This
decision will not affect the release of
BLS products at finer geographic scales,
such as the release of Local Area
Unemployment Statistics data by minor
civil division.
Recommendation 3: Launch a
research effort into delineating
territorially exhaustive areas.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this
recommendation. The CBSA program
currently does not delineate a large
portion of U.S. territory. A territorially
exhaustive delineation would increase
the utility of the CBSA program and
improve coordination of Federal
statistics. OMB commits to working
with the Review Committee on the
plans for the research necessary to
provide a robust, exhaustive delineation
of the United States and Puerto Rico.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate the
results of the decade’s first annual
update review into the results of the
decade’s decennial census-based
update.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this
recommendation. As background, on an
annual basis and according to the
standards, OMB makes small changes,
generally to just a few MSAs, based on
annual updates to the Census
population data used to determine a
county’s CBSA status. In the past a
small number of counties experienced
change in delineation status between
the comprehensive, decennial
delineations issued in the third year
after the Decennial Census and in the
subsequent annual update that follows,
due in part to the different geographic
units used in the decennial update and
annual updates. The Committee believes
this has led to unnecessary uncertainty
and instability in the program.
Implementing this recommendation will
improve the consistency of the areas
with negligible impact on timing or
resources.
Recommendation 5: Establish a
Publicly Available Update Schedule.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this
recommendation. To increase
transparency and consistency, we have
provide a high level, preliminary
schedule below, and will publish and
maintain a schedule of upcoming CBSA
delineations and updates on our
Statistical Policies and Programs web
page (https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
information-regulatory-affairs/
statistical-programs-standards/).
Because the timing of OMB updates
depends in part on the timing of
delivery of the inputs by the Census
Bureau, we also intend to include the
input dates into this schedule. If OMB
is unable to meet the public update
schedule, we will notify the public as
soon as feasible through the web page.
As described in the final 2020
standards in Section E, OMB will
release three different types of updates.
(1) Annual Updates—These updates
would address qualification of new
metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas and typically would
affect a small number of counties. (In
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37775
some years, there may be no updates
warranted by the data.) (2) Five-Year
(‘‘mid-decade’’) Update—This broader
update would include: Qualification of
metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas, qualification of outlying
counties, merging of adjacent
metropolitan or micropolitan statistical
areas, qualification of principal cities,
categorization of metropolitan and
micropolitan statistical areas,
qualification of metropolitan divisions,
qualification of combined statistical
areas, and titling of metropolitan and
micropolitan statistical areas,
metropolitan divisions, and combined
statistical areas. (3) Decennial
Delineation—The initial re-delineation
following adoption of revised standards
would include all of the changes listed
for the five-year update, plus the
qualification of central counties.
Update type
Decennial Delineation
Annual Update ..........
Annual Update ..........
Annual Update ..........
Annual Update ..........
Five-Year Update ......
Annual Update ..........
Release date
June 2023.
December 2024.
December 2025.
December 2026.
December 2027.
December 2028.
December 2029.
Recommendation 6: Continue use of
American Community Survey
commuting data to measure intercounty
connectivity.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this
recommendation for the 2020 standards.
We note that changes in commuting
behavior as a result of the pandemic
could result in a reduction in the fiveyear average ACS estimates of
commuting which will contribute to the
planned CBSA update in 2028. This
anticipated reduction could result, if no
other adjustments are made, in a large
number of outlying counties getting
dropped from their CBSAs, at least until
the next time commuting data is
updated in 2033.
OMB recognizes that the pandemic’s
impact on commuting patterns may
create an acute challenge for the 2028
mid-decade update, as well as a longerterm challenge for the continued use of
ACS commuting data as the sole
measure of intercounty connectivity and
economic integration. We especially
recognize the importance of additional
research in this area in light of the
changing nature of work patterns, which
the pandemic may have accelerated, and
other ways in which geography and
economic activity interact.
To that end, OMB will reconvene the
Standards Review Committee to
conduct a full review of intercounty
connectivity measures before 2028, and
to advise OMB on whether pandemic-
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
37776
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
related changes in commuting patterns
warrant any adjustments to the
standards prior to the mid-decade
update in 2028 to minimize the risk of
unintended and potentially temporary
pandemic-related changes to the CBSAs
in 2028. In addition, we expect that the
scope of this research will also
encompass whether other measures of
economic activity may be useful in the
identification of CBSAs, and position
OMB to ensure that the standards for
including outlying counties in CBSAs
are robust and meaningful.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
E. 2020 Standards for Delineating Core
Based Statistical Areas, and Key Terms
A Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA)
is a geographic entity associated with at
least one core of 10,000 or more
population, plus adjacent territory that
has a high degree of social and
economic integration with the core as
measured by commuting ties. The
standards delineate two categories of
CBSAs: Metropolitan statistical areas
(MSAs) and micropolitan statistical
areas (mSAs). CBSAs consist of counties
and equivalent entities throughout the
United States and Puerto Rico.
Throughout these standards, the term
‘‘county’’ is used to refer to counties and
county-equivalents.
The purpose of the CBSA standards is
to provide nationally consistent
delineations for collecting, tabulating,
and publishing Federal statistics for a
set of geographic areas. The Office of
Management and Budget establishes and
maintains these areas solely for
statistical purposes as part of their
statutory responsibilities to coordinate
and ensure the efficiency and
effectiveness of the Federal statistical
system.
CBSAs are not designed as a
geographic framework for nonstatistical
activities or for use in program funding
formulas. The CBSA classification is not
an urban-rural classification; MSAs,
mSAs, and many counties outside
CBSAs contain both urban and rural
populations.
The following criteria apply to all
CBSAs nationwide. Commuting and
employment estimates are derived from
the Census Bureau’s American
Community Survey. Whenever
American Community Survey
commuting and employment data are
referred to below, the criteria use point
estimates and do not incorporate a
measure of sampling variability of the
estimates.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
Section 1. Population Size Requirements
for Qualification of Core Based
Statistical Areas
Each CBSA must have a Census
Bureau-delineated Urban Area of at least
10,000 population.
Section 2. Central Counties
The central county or counties of a
CBSA are those counties that:
(a) Have at least 50 percent of their
population in Urban Areas of at least
10,000 population; or
(b) Have within their boundaries a
population of at least 5,000 located in a
single Urban Area of at least 10,000
population.
A central county is associated with
the Urban Area that accounts for the
largest portion of the county’s
population. The central counties
associated with a particular Urban Area
are grouped to form a single cluster of
central counties for purposes of
measuring commuting to and from
potentially qualifying outlying counties.
Section 3. Outlying Counties
A county qualifies as an outlying
county of a CBSA if it meets the
following commuting requirements:
(a) At least 25 percent of the workers
living in the county work in the central
county or counties of the CBSA; or
(b) At least 25 percent of the
employment in the county is accounted
for by workers who reside in the central
county or counties of the CBSA.
A county may be included in only one
CBSA. If a county qualifies as a central
county of one CBSA and as outlying in
another, it falls within the CBSA in
which it is a central county. A county
that qualifies as outlying to multiple
CBSAs falls within the CBSA with
which it has the strongest commuting
tie, as measured by either 3(a) or 3(b)
above. The counties included in a CBSA
must be contiguous; if a county is not
contiguous with other counties in the
CBSA, it will not fall within the CBSA.
Section 4. Merging of Adjacent Core
Based Statistical Areas
Two adjacent CBSAs will merge to
form one CBSA if the central county or
counties (as a group) of one CBSA
qualify as outlying to the central county
or counties (as a group) of the other
CBSA using the measures and
thresholds stated in 3(a) and 3(b) above.
Section 5. Identification of Principal
Cities
The principal city (or cities) of a
CBSA will include:
(a) The largest incorporated place
with a 2020 Census population of at
least 10,000 in the CBSA or, if no
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
incorporated place of at least 10,000
population is present in the CBSA, the
largest incorporated place or census
designated place in the CBSA; and
(b) Any additional incorporated place
or census designated place with a 2020
Census population of at least 250,000 or
in which 100,000 or more persons work;
and
(c) Any additional incorporated place
or census designated place with a 2020
Census population of at least 50,000, but
less than 250,000, and in which the
number of workers working in the place
meets or exceeds the number of workers
living in the place; and
(d) Any additional incorporated place
or census designated place with a 2020
Census population of at least 10,000, but
less than 50,000, and at least one-third
the population size of the largest place,
and in which the number of workers
working in the place meets or exceeds
the number of workers living in the
place.
Section 6. Categories and Terminology
A CBSA is categorized based on the
population of the largest Urban Area
within the CBSA. Categories of CBSAs
are: Metropolitan statistical areas, based
on Urban Areas of 50,000 or more
population, and micropolitan statistical
areas, based on Urban Areas of at least
10,000 population but less than 50,000
population. Counties that do not fall
within CBSAs will represent ‘‘outside
core based statistical areas.’’
Section 7. Divisions of Metropolitan
Statistical Areas
An MSA containing a single Urban
Area with a population of at least 2.5
million may be subdivided to form
smaller groupings of counties referred to
as metropolitan divisions. A county
qualifies as a ‘‘main county’’ of a
metropolitan division if 65 percent or
more of workers living in the county
also work within the county and the
ratio of the number of workers working
in the county to the number of workers
living in the county is at least 0.75. A
county qualifies as a ‘‘secondary
county’’ if 50 percent or more, but less
than 65 percent, of workers living in the
county also work within the county and
the ratio of the number of workers
working in the county to the number of
workers living in the county is at least
0.75.
A main county automatically serves
as the basis for a metropolitan division.
For a secondary county to qualify as the
basis for forming a metropolitan
division, it must join with either a
contiguous secondary county or a
contiguous main county with which it
has the highest employment interchange
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
measure of 15 or more (where the
employment interchange measure is the
sum of the percentage of workers living
in the smaller entity who work in the
larger entity and the percentage of
employment in the smaller entity that is
accounted for by workers who reside in
the larger entity). After all main
counties and secondary counties are
identified and grouped (if appropriate),
each additional county that already has
qualified for inclusion in the MSA falls
within the metropolitan division
associated with the main/secondary
county or counties with which the
county at issue has the highest
employment interchange measure.
Counties in a metropolitan division
must be contiguous.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Section 8. Combining Adjacent Core
Based Statistical Areas
(a) Any two adjacent CBSAs will form
a combined statistical area if the
employment interchange measure
between the two areas is at least 15.
(b) The CBSAs thus combined will
also continue to be recognized as
individual CBSAs within the combined
statistical area.
Section 9. Titles of Core Based
Statistical Areas, Metropolitan
Divisions, and Combined Statistical
Areas
(a) The title of a CBSA will include
the name of its principal city with the
largest 2020 Census population. If there
are multiple principle cities, the names
of the second-largest and (if present)
third-largest principle cities will appear
in the title in order of descending
population size. If the principal city
with the largest 2020 Census population
is a census designated place, the name
of the largest incorporated place of at
least 10,000 population that also is a
principal city will appear first in the
title followed by the name of the census
designated place. If the principal city
with the largest 2020 Census population
is a census designated place, and there
is no incorporated place of at least
10,000 population that also is a
principal city, the name of that census
designated place principal city will
appear first in the title.
(b) The title of a metropolitan division
will include the name of the principal
city with the largest 2020 Census
population located in the metropolitan
division. If there are multiple principle
cities, the names of the second-largest
and (if present) third-largest principle
cities will appear in the title in order of
descending population size. If there are
no principle cities located in the
metropolitan division, the title of the
metropolitan division will use the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
names of up to three counties in order
of descending 2020 Census population
size.
(c) The title of a combined statistical
area will include the names of the two
largest principle cities in the
combination and the name of the thirdlargest principal city, if present. If the
combined statistical area title duplicates
that of one of its component CBSAs, the
name of the third-most-populous
principal city will be dropped from the
title of the Combined Statistical Area.
(d) Titles also will include the names
of any State in which the area is located.
Section 10. Updating Schedule
(a) The Office of Management and
Budget will delineate CBSAs in 2023
based on 2020 Census data and 2016–
2020 American Community Survey fiveyear estimates. Release of these
delineations will take place during June
2023.
(b) In the 2023 delineations and in
subsequent years, the Office of
Management and Budget will designate
a new mSA if:
(1) A city that is outside any existing
CBSA has a Census Bureau special
census count of 10,000 to 49,999
population, or a population estimate of
10,000 to 49,999 for two consecutive
years from the Census Bureau’s
Population Estimates Program, or
(2) A Census Bureau special census
results in the delineation of an Urban
Area of 10,000 to 49,999 population that
is outside of any existing CBSA.
(c) Also in the 2023 delineations and
in subsequent years, the Office of
Management and Budget will designate
a new MSA if:
(1) A city that is outside any existing
MSA has a Census Bureau special
census count of 50,000 or more
population, or a population estimate of
50,000 or more for two consecutive
years from the Census Bureau’s
Population Estimates Program, or
(2) A Census Bureau special census
results in the delineation of an Urban
Area of 50,000 or more population that
is outside of any existing MSA.
(d) Outlying counties of CBSAs that
qualify in this section will qualify
according to the criteria in Section 3
above, on the basis of American
Community Survey five-year
commuting estimates.
(e) OMB will review the delineations
of all existing CBSAs and related
statistical areas in 2028 using 2021–
2025 five-year commuting and
employment estimates from the Census
Bureau’s American Community Survey.
The Urban Areas used in these
delineations will be those based on 2020
Census data or subsequent special
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37777
censuses for which Urban Areas are
created. The central counties of CBSAs
identified on the basis of a 2020 Census
population count, or on the basis of
population estimates from the Census
Bureau’s Population Estimates Program
or a special census count in the case of
postcensally delineated areas, will
constitute the central counties for
purposes of these area delineations.
New CBSAs will be designated in 2028
on the basis of Census Bureau special
census counts or population estimates
as described above in Sections 10(b) and
10(c); outlying county qualification will
be based on five-year commuting
estimates from the American
Community Survey.
(f) Other aspects of the CBSA
delineations are not subject to change
between decennial censuses.
(g) OMB will issue delineation
updates (one per year in those years
when there is an update) in years other
than 2023 during December.
(h) OMB will maintain a publicly
available release schedule for these
updates on its statistical programs and
standards web page (https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/informationregulatory-affairs/statistical-programsstandards/). Any delays will be
announced on the website as soon as
possible, along with an updated release
date.
Section 11. Definitions of Key Terms
Census designated place—A
statistical geographic entity that is
analogous to an incorporated place,
delineated for the decennial census and
consisting of a locally recognized,
unincorporated concentration of
population that is identified by name.
Central county—The county or
counties of a Core Based Statistical Area
containing a substantial portion of an
Urban Area, and to and from which
commuting is measured to determine
qualification of outlying counties.
Combined Statistical Area—A
geographic entity consisting of two or
more adjacent Core Based Statistical
Areas with employment interchange
measures of at least 15.
Core—A densely settled concentration
of population, comprising an Urban
Area (of 10,000 or more population)
delineated by the Census Bureau,
around which a Core Based Statistical
Area is delineated.
Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA)—
A statistical geographic entity consisting
of the county or counties associated
with at least one core (Urban Area) of
at least 10,000 population, plus adjacent
counties having a high degree of social
and economic integration with the core
as measured through commuting ties
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
37778
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 134 / Friday, July 16, 2021 / Notices
with the counties containing the core.
Metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas are the two categories of
core based statistical areas.
Delineation—The establishment of the
boundary of a statistical area, or the
boundary that results.
Employment interchange measure—A
measure of ties between two adjacent
entities. The employment interchange
measure is the sum of the percentage of
workers living in the smaller entity who
work in the larger entity and the
percentage of employment in the
smaller entity that is accounted for by
workers who reside in the larger entity.
Geographic building block—The
geographic unit, such as a county, that
constitutes the basic geographic
component of a statistical area.
Main county—A county that acts as
an employment center within a CBSA
that has a core with a population of at
least 2.5 million. A main county serves
as the basis for delineating a
metropolitan division.
Metropolitan Division—A county or
group of counties within a CBSA that
contains an Urban Area with a
population of at least 2.5 million. A
metropolitan division consists of one or
more main/secondary counties that
represent an employment center or
centers, plus adjacent counties
associated with the main/secondary
county or counties through commuting
ties.
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)—
A Core Based Statistical Area associated
with at least one Urban Area that has a
population of at least 50,000. The MSA
comprises the central county or counties
containing the core, plus adjacent
outlying counties having a high degree
of social and economic integration with
the central county or counties as
measured through commuting.
Micropolitan Statistical Area (mSA)—
A Core Based Statistical Area associated
with at least one Urban Area that has a
population of at least 10,000, but less
than 50,000. The mSA comprises the
central county or counties containing
the core, plus adjacent outlying counties
having a high degree of social and
economic integration with the central
county or counties as measured through
commuting.
Outlying county—A county that
qualifies for inclusion in CBSA on the
basis of commuting ties with the CBSA’s
central county or counties.
Outside Core Based Statistical
Areas—Counties that do not qualify for
inclusion in a CBSA.
Principal City—The largest city of a
CBSA, plus additional cities that meet
specified statistical criteria.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
Secondary county—A county that acts
as an employment center in
combination with a main county or
another secondary county within a
CBSA that has a core with a population
of at least 2.5 million. A secondary
county may serve as the basis for
delineating a metropolitan division, but
only when combined with a main
county or another secondary county.
Urban Area— A statistical geographic
entity delineated by the Census Bureau,
which represents densely developed
territory, and encompasses residential,
commercial, and other non-residential
urban land uses. For purposes of
delineating MSAs, at least one Urban
Area of 50,000 or more population is
required; for purposes of delineating
mSAs, at least one Urban Area of 10,000
to 49,999 population is required.
Sharon Block,
Acting Administrator, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2021–15159 Filed 7–13–21; 5:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. MC2021–111 and CP2021–113;
MC2021–112 and CP2021–114]
New Postal Products
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Commission is noticing a
recent Postal Service filing for the
Commission’s consideration concerning
a negotiated service agreement. This
notice informs the public of the filing,
invites public comment, and takes other
administrative steps.
DATES: Comments are due: July 20,
2021.
SUMMARY:
Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit
comments electronically should contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section by
telephone for advice on filing
alternatives.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at
202–789–6820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Docketed Proceeding(s)
I. Introduction
The Commission gives notice that the
Postal Service filed request(s) for the
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Commission to consider matters related
to negotiated service agreement(s). The
request(s) may propose the addition or
removal of a negotiated service
agreement from the market dominant or
the competitive product list, or the
modification of an existing product
currently appearing on the market
dominant or the competitive product
list.
Section II identifies the docket
number(s) associated with each Postal
Service request, the title of each Postal
Service request, the request’s acceptance
date, and the authority cited by the
Postal Service for each request. For each
request, the Commission appoints an
officer of the Commission to represent
the interests of the general public in the
proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505
(Public Representative). Section II also
establishes comment deadline(s)
pertaining to each request.
The public portions of the Postal
Service’s request(s) can be accessed via
the Commission’s website (https://
www.prc.gov). Non-public portions of
the Postal Service’s request(s), if any,
can be accessed through compliance
with the requirements of 39 CFR
3011.301.1
The Commission invites comments on
whether the Postal Service’s request(s)
in the captioned docket(s) are consistent
with the policies of title 39. For
request(s) that the Postal Service states
concern market dominant product(s),
applicable statutory and regulatory
requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39
U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3030, and 39
CFR part 3040, subpart B. For request(s)
that the Postal Service states concern
competitive product(s), applicable
statutory and regulatory requirements
include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633,
39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3035, and
39 CFR part 3040, subpart B. Comment
deadline(s) for each request appear in
section II.
II. Docketed Proceeding(s)
1. Docket No(s).: MC2021–111 and
CP2021–113; Filing Title: USPS Request
to Add Priority Mail & First-Class
Package Service Contract 199 to
Competitive Product List and Notice of
Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing
Acceptance Date: July 12, 2021; Filing
Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR
3040.130 through 3040.135, and 39 CFR
3035.105; Public Representative:
Kenneth R. Moeller; Comments Due:
July 20, 2021.
2. Docket No(s).: MC2021–112 and
CP2021–114; Filing Title: USPS Request
1 See Docket No. RM2018–3, Order Adopting
Final Rules Relating to Non-Public Information,
June 27, 2018, Attachment A at 19–22 (Order No.
4679).
E:\FR\FM\16JYN1.SGM
16JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 134 (Friday, July 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37770-37778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15159]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas
AGENCY: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President.
ACTION: Notice of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice announces the adoption of 2020 Standards for
Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). The 2020 standards, which reflect modest revisions to
the 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas, supersede the 2010 standards. The SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION in this Notice provides background information on the
standards (Section A), a brief synopsis of the public comments OMB
received in response to the January 19, 2021 Federal Register notice
describing the recommendations of the Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Area Standards Review Committee (Section B), the statement
of the Standards Review Committee in response to public comment
(Section C), and OMB's decisions on the recommendations of the
Standards Review Committee (Section D). The 2020 standards appear at
the end of this Notice (Section E).
DATES: This Notice is effective immediately. OMB plans to publish
delineations of areas based on the 2020 standards and 2020 Census data
in 2023. Federal agencies should begin to use the new area delineations
to tabulate and publish statistics when the delineations are published.
ADDRESSES: Please send correspondence about OMB's decision to Dominic
Mancini, Acting Chief Statistician and Deputy Administrator, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
Room 9264, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, or
email [email protected] with the subject ``2020 Metro
Areas.''
Electronic Availability: This notice is available on the internet
from the OMB website at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Sivinski, Senior Statistician,
Office of Management and Budget, telephone (202) 395-1205; or email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 37771]]
Outline of Notice
A. Background and Review Process
B. Summary of Comments Received in Response to the Recommendations
of the Standards Review Committee
C. Standards Review Committee Response to Comments
D. OMB's Decisions Regarding Changes to the 2010 Standards for
Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas
E. 2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas, and
Key Terms
A. Background and Review Process
1. Background
In its role as coordinator of the Federal statistical system under
the Budget and Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 (31 U.S.C. 1104(d))
and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3504(e)), OMB is
required to ensure the system's efficiency and effectiveness. A key
method used by OMB to achieve this responsibility is the promulgation,
maintenance, and oversight of Government-wide principles, policies,
standards, and guidance concerning the development, presentation, and
dissemination of Federal statistical products. OMB's Office of
Statistical and Science Policy, within the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, relies on public comment and subject matter
expertise across the Federal government to help OMB identify policies
or guidance that may be out of date, lacking clarity, or inefficient.
One of the long-standing statistical standards maintained by OMB is
the core based statistical areas program. This program, under various
names, has provided standard statistical area delineations for
approximately 70 years. In the 1940s, it became clear that the value of
statistics produced by Federal agencies would be greatly enhanced if
statistical agencies used a single set of geographic delineations for
the Nation's largest centers of population and activity. OMB's
predecessor, the Bureau of the Budget, led the effort to develop what
were then called ``standard metropolitan areas'' in time for their use
in 1950 census publications. Since then, comparable data products for
metropolitan areas have been available.
The general concept of a core based statistical area (CBSA) is that
of an area containing a large population nucleus, or urban area, and
adjacent communities that have a high degree of integration with that
nucleus. There are two types of CBSAs: Metropolitan statistical areas
(MSAs) and micropolitan statistical areas ([micro]SAs). Metropolitan
and micropolitan statistical areas are conceptually similar to each
other, but a micropolitan area features a smaller nucleus.
Both metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas are composed
of entire counties. ``Central counties'' are those that contain the
population nucleus mentioned above. These nuclei are identified by a
separate geographic statistical program, the urban areas program at the
Census Bureau. ``Outlying counties'' qualify to join a central county
based on demonstrating sufficient commuting with the central county or
counties of the area. Counties that do not fall within metropolitan or
micropolitan statistical areas are ``outside of a CBSA. ''
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16JY21.001
The purpose of these statistical areas is unchanged from when
standard metropolitan areas were first delineated: The classification
provides a nationally consistent set of delineations for collecting,
tabulating, and publishing Federal statistics for geographic areas.
OMB establishes and maintains these areas solely for statistical
purposes. In reviewing and revising these areas, OMB does not take into
account, or attempt to anticipate, any public or private sector
nonstatistical uses of the delineations. While the use of these areas
in nonstatistical programs is
[[Page 37772]]
relatively common, and will be discussed in more detail below as those
potential impacts were the subject of the vast majority of public
comments OMB received on the proposed standards, these areas are not
designed for the purpose of serving as a general-purpose geographic
framework applicable for use in program administration or funding
formulas. If these areas are used for program administration, OMB
recommends structuring the use in a way that prevents any unintended
disruption that may be caused by OMB's regular review and revision of
the standards.
Furthermore, the MSA and [micro]SA delineations do not produce an
urban-rural classification, and confusion of these concepts has the
potential to affect the ability of a program to effectively target
either urban or rural areas, if that is the program goal. Counties
included in metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas may contain
both urban and rural territory and population. For instance, programs
that seek to strengthen rural economies by focusing solely on counties
located outside MSAs could ignore a predominantly rural county that is
included in an MSA because a high percentage of the county's residents
commute to urban centers for work. OMB urges agencies, organizations,
and policy makers to review carefully the goals of nonstatistical
programs and policies to ensure that appropriate geographic entities
are used to determine the allocation of Federal funds.
2. Review Process
Periodic review of the standards is necessary to ensure their
continued usefulness and relevance. Every decade OMB reviews the
statistical area standards and, if warranted, revises them prior to
their application to new decennial census data. The current review of
the CBSA standards is the seventh such review. In 2018, OMB charged the
Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards Review
Committee (Standards Review Committee) with examining the 2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical
Areas (available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2010/06/28/2010-15605/2010-standards-for-delineating-metropolitan-and-micropolitan-statistical-areas) and providing recommendations for how
to improve the standards. The Standards Review Committee is a standing
committee composed of subject matter experts at the agencies that rely
on the statistical areas to produce official statistics. Agencies
represented on the review committee include the U.S. Census Bureau
(Chair), Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
Economic Research Service, National Center for Health Statistics,
Statistics of Income, and ex officio, OMB. The Census Bureau provided
research support to the committee.
OMB published the Review Committee's recommendations for revisions
to the 2010 standards in a Federal Register Notice (FRN) on January 19,
2021: ``Recommendations From the Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Area Standards Review Committee to the Office of Management
and Budget Concerning Changes to the 2010 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas'' (86 FR 5263). The
notice described six recommendations from the Standards Review
Committee. The Standards Review Committee recommended that:
(1) The minimum urban area population to qualify an MSA be
increased from 50,000 to 100,000;
(2) The delineation of New England city and town areas (NECTAs),
NECTA divisions, and combined NECTAs be discontinued;
(3) Research be undertaken on an additional, territorially
exhaustive classification that covers all of the United States and
Puerto Rico;
(4) The first annual delineation update of the coming decade be
combined with the decennial-based delineations;
(5) OMB should make publicly available a schedule for updates to
the core based statistical areas (see proposed update schedule below);
and
(6) OMB continue use of American Community Survey commuting data in
measurement of intercounty connectivity, though changing societal and
economic trends may warrant considering changes in the 2030 standards.
After the public comment period closed, OMB reconvened the
Standards Review Committee to analyze and respond to the resulting
comments. After taking into consideration public comment and the
position of the Standards Review Committee, OMB is publishing this FRN
to announce final decisions and the content of the 2020 Standards for
Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas. The 2020 standards replace
and supersede OMB's 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and
Micropolitan Statistical Areas.
B. Summary of Public Comments Received in Response to the Review
Committee's Recommendations
After removing duplicate submissions from the same senders, OMB
received 848 comments in response to the Standards Review Committee's
recommendations.
Recommendation 1: Raise the minimum MSA core population threshold
from 50,000 to 100,000.
Seven hundred thirty-four comments remarked on Recommendation 1,
increasing the minimum population threshold of an urban area to qualify
an MSA from 50,000 to 100,000, with 21 in favor (5 of which
conditionally agreed with additional suggestions regarding population
thresholds) and 712 opposed. In addition, there was one comment that
was neutral toward Recommendation 1.
Many of the comments opposing Recommendation 1 did not provide a
rationale for their opposition. Of the commenters who did cite a
rationale for their opposition, almost all cited a nonstatistical
rationale, such as concerns about loss of federal or other funding;
concerns about other programmatic consequences; and concerns about
economic development for individual areas that would be reclassified
from metropolitan to micropolitan. Some comments cited both
nonstatistical and statistical rationales, such as concerns about
potential loss of data for individual areas that would be reclassified
from a metropolitan to a micropolitan statistical area; concerns about
long term data analysis and longitudinal analysis if such a change led
to a break in data series or the type of statistics collected and
produced at this level of geographic area; concern that the recommended
change was too modest to justify making any change; failure to consider
another approach (such as adding a top size class using some definition
of the ``largest'' areas); and perceived failure on behalf of the
Standards Review Committee to show a sufficient rationale for doubling
the current threshold. A few of the comments presented a purely
statistical rationale.
Twenty-one comments were in favor of raising the minimum population
threshold of an urban area to qualify an MSA from 50,000 to 100,000.
Five of these comments offered additional suggestions, such as
modifying the minimum population to qualify a [micro]SA.
Recommendation 2: Discontinue Updates to the New England City and
Town Areas, New England City and
[[Page 37773]]
Town Area Divisions, and Combined New England City and Town Areas.
Ten comments remarked on Recommendation 2, the discontinuation of
New England City and Town Area delineations, with three in favor, two
neutral, and five opposed to the recommendation.
Among points cited by those opposed to Recommendation 2 were the
relative prominence of cities and towns (as opposed to counties) in the
six New England states, and concerns about impact of the recommendation
on data availability and longitudinal data analysis.
An argument in favor of the recommendation advocated against
providing special treatment to one region of the country.
Recommendation 3: Launch a research effort into delineating
territorially exhaustive areas.
Seven comments remarked on Recommendation 3 concerning research
into developing a set of territorially exhaustive areas. All seven
comments were in favor of the recommendation, with one of the comments
also in favor of delineation of areas in United States Island Areas, in
addition to the United States and Puerto Rico. Comments offered
technical suggestions on different means of delineating the territory
of the United States and Puerto Rico, such as the use of Bureau of
Economic Analysis (BEA) Economic Areas, United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) commuting zones, USDA data, regional
intergovernmental organizations, and substate districts.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate the results of the decade's first
annual update review into the results of the decade's decennial census-
based update.
Eight comments remarked on Recommendation 4 concerning combining
the publication of the first annual delineation update with the
decennial-based redelineation, with three in favor (with one comment
not wanting any updates during the decade except this one). An argument
in favor was to minimize statistical area churn in the inventory.
Five comments expressed general concerns about OMB conducting
updates during the decade, but did not provide a specific opinion on
this particular recommendation to combine the annual and decennial
updates.
Recommendation 5: Establish a Publicly Available Update Schedule.
Two comments remarked on Recommendation 5, which involved
establishing and publishing a public schedule for the release of
delineations and updates. The two comments were both in favor of
publishing an update schedule. An argument in favor was increased
transparency and predictability.
Recommendation 6: Continue use of American Community Survey
commuting data to measure intercounty connectivity.
There was a total of 45 comments on Recommendation 6, concerning
the continued use of American Community Survey (ACS) commuting data for
the 2023 delineations.
Forty-one comments discussed Recommendation 6, while simultaneously
arguing for an outcome for a specific area or set of areas. Suggestions
for additional or alternative datasets included the commodity flow
survey (Bureau of Transportation Statistics), shopping and transaction
data, the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (Census Bureau), new
modes of transportation, and geographic proximity between cities.
Two of the four remaining comments offered support for the
recommendation (with one suggesting that other data may be needed to
determine if areas should change during the mid-decade update), and two
provided suggestions for other datasets, such as primary care service
areas and other measures of economic activity.
A few comments not included in this count suggested specific
changes to how the ACS commuting data are used in the standards, such
as modifying commuting thresholds, without discussing whether the ACS
data should continue to be used or what other sources of data might
replace or supplement it.
Other Comments
The remaining comments mostly raised issues outside of the scope of
the request, in that they were directed at specific applications of the
standards, and did not offer recommendations that were relevant to the
potential modification of the standards themselves. Several comments
expressed concern about the current configuration of one or more
metropolitan areas and requested changes. For example, forty-two
comments requested modification to the components of the Evansville,
IN-KY metropolitan area; two comments requested modification to the
components of the Idaho Falls, ID metropolitan area, and one comment
requested modification to the components of the Sioux City, IA-NE-SD
metropolitan area. Five comments requested using subcounty units to
possibly identify a separate area within the current Riverside-San
Bernardino-Ontario, CA metropolitan area. Other comments requested
different arrangements of multiple metropolitan areas, including three
comments concerning merging the Raleigh-Cary, NC and Durham-Chapel
Hill, NC metropolitan areas, and one comment concerning merging the
Greenville-Anderson, SC and Spartanburg, SC metropolitan areas.
C. Standards Review Committee Response to Comments
After the close of the public comment period, OMB reconvened the
Standards Review Committee and asked them to provide a statement on
their earlier recommendations, taking into account the public comments
received and potential impacts of the coronavirus pandemic. The
Standards Review Committee statement reads, in its entirety:
``The Committee subscribes without reservation to the view that
federal statistical standards require regular review and sometimes
revision to stay abreast of the phenomena they describe. Over the
course of nearly ten months, the Committee reviewed the ``2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical
Areas,'' and, in the end, it recommended six revisions to OMB. Now, the
Committee also has examined public comment received on those
recommendations.''
``Each of the recommendations followed from thoughtful
consideration and discussion, both within the Committee and with a
panel of external experts. In addition, nearly all of the topics
addressed in the recommendations were familiar from Committee
discussions in previous reviews of the standards.''
``Having reviewed the public comment, the Committee stands by five
of its six recommendations but now recommends that action on the first
of those recommendations--regarding the minimum population core size
for metropolitan statistical areas--be delayed pending completion of
additional research on the topic.''
``Reviewing the public comment. Public comment received on
Recommendations 2 through 6 generally was supportive or offered no
counter-arguments that the Committee found sufficiently compelling to
change its earlier views. In general, these recommendations generated
modest amounts of comment. Implementing these recommendations will
improve the performance of the program in the near term, lay the
foundation for improved data availability in the future, and increase
transparency and usability.''
[[Page 37774]]
``Recommendation 1, on the other hand, received substantial
comment, and that comment raised a number of concerns of potential
importance to the federal statistical system. One such concern focused
on a possible reduction in federal statistical data available for areas
that would change status from metropolitan statistical areas to
micropolitan statistical areas as a result of an increased core
population requirement. Another concern was with discontinuities in
longitudinal federal statistical data series that could come with a
changed population requirement.''
``A third identified statistical issue relative to Recommendation 1
focused on the size of the recommended core population requirement
increase (from 50,000 to 100,000). For some, that increase--if needed
at all--was viewed as too large; on the other side, there were
indications of dissatisfaction that the Committee did not consider
alternative or larger changes to address the wide range of core
populations currently covered within the category of ``metropolitan.''
Finally, public comment challenged the Committee to justify more
clearly its Recommendation 1 with documented research results.''
``Next steps. The Committee now recommends OMB's delaying action on
Recommendation 1 in order to complete further analysis and research. A
side benefit of this work is that it might help to reassure data users
that appropriate consideration has been invested in a key change to the
standards.''
``With assistance from the statistical agencies, OMB could, with
medium level of effort, address two of the concerns raised about
Recommendation 1:
Provide a thorough assessment of the anticipated effects
of a changed minimum core population size on federal statistical data
availability, reviewing possible effects in individual data programs
across the full set of statistical agencies.
Conduct an analysis of changes in thresholds in other
statistical programs over the years to provide guidance on mitigating
discontinuities in time series data. Programs change requirements with
different frequencies and using different approaches. The fact that
this program has held the minimum metropolitan statistical area core
population size constant in the name of stability for an extended
period should not permanently preclude adjustments to fit changed
circumstances.''
``Robust examination of the appropriate size for an increase in
required core population for metropolitan statistical areas as well as
associated, derived area classification issues will require a more
extensive effort. Experience suggests these tasks would be addressed
most effectively by a combination of statistical agency research and
two to three external research projects. Those projects would analyze
evolving U.S. central place hierarchies and economic agglomeration
thresholds during the period 1940-2020. Also, consideration should be
given to including within the scope of these research projects an
examination of changed commuting patterns (pertinent to Recommendation
6, in light of changes in commuting behavior associated with the COVID-
19 pandemic that occurred after the Committee had submitted its
recommendations). This work would best take place between late 2023
(once new statistical areas are delineated based on 2020 data) and the
end of 2025 so results would be available to OMB and the Committee in
early 2026. By 2023, the lasting effects of the pandemic on journey to
work should have started becoming clearer.''
``(In the interest of smoothing resource demands for research over
the decade, conducting the groundwork on approaches to preparing
territorially exhaustive statistical areas (Recommendation 3) can
follow and benefit from the work on core size and commuting data and
should be scheduled to start in 2026 and conclude in 2028.)''
``Final thought. In view of the considerable volume of public
comment addressing issues extraneous to the purpose of the metropolitan
and micropolitan statistical areas program, the Committee urges OMB to
assume a more assertive posture in reiterating through various
available channels the value and role of this federal statistical
standard. Part of that effort will require continued efforts to educate
nonstatistical program users of the limitations of these statistical
areas to meet their programs' needs; the other side of the effort will
be to ensure that federal statistical agencies and programs are taking
full advantage of the areas to disseminate data for the benefit of data
users. The success of the program depends in part on the continued
demonstration of its usefulness across the federal statistical
system.''
--Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards Review
Committee
D. OMB's Decisions Regarding Changes to the 2010 Standards for
Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas
This section of the Notice presents the decisions OMB made on the
Standards Review Committee's recommendations. In arriving at these
decisions, we considered the Standards Review Committee's
recommendations, the public comments we received on those the Standards
Review Committee's recommendations, and the Standards Review
Committee's subsequent statement in Section C.
OMB also benefited from the continued and thorough deliberations of
the statistical experts that constitute the Standards Review Committee,
as well as the research and analytic support provided by the Census
Bureau. As in past reviews of the standards, we relied upon the
technical and subject-matter expertise, insight, and dedication of the
Standards Review Committee members. We sincerely appreciate these
contributions to the rigor, objectivity, and usefulness of the CBSA
program, and offer special thanks to the invaluable support of the
Population Division at the Census Bureau.
OMB's decisions on each of the Review Committee's recommendations
are discussed below. OMB did not make any substantive changes to the
2010 standards beyond the revisions discussed in this section.
Recommendation 1: Raise the minimum MSA core population threshold
from 50,000 to 100,000.
OMB Decision: OMB does not accept the initial recommendation to
raise the MSA core population threshold in the 2020 standards, and has
decided to leave the current threshold of 50,000 in place. A change to
the fundamental criteria that determine whether an area is considered
metropolitan would cause disruption to statistical programs and
products, and would be difficult for the statistical agencies to
implement. OMB decided that there is insufficient justification at this
time to raise the threshold to 100,000 and that further research is
necessary before deciding whether to change the criteria that determine
whether an area is considered metropolitan. Finally, we also note the
Standard Review Committee's subsequent modification of their initial
recommendation recognizing the value of additional research before
modifying the threshold.
We acknowledge the Standards Review Committee's concern that the
MSA thresholds have not kept pace with population growth, which affects
the ability of the CBSA program to meet
[[Page 37775]]
its intended purpose of identifying the primary centers of population
and economic activity in the United States for use in official
statistics. OMB commits to working with the Standards Review Committee
to conduct research and stakeholder outreach over the next four years
to closely examine the utility of the current requirements for an area
to qualify as an MSA, and for outlying counties to join an MSA (See
Recommendation 6). This research will be guided by the MSA program's
primary goal of identifying the major centers of population and
economic activity of the United States, and will include exploring
different frameworks and data sources for classifying metropolitan
areas, including alternate core population thresholds, features and
amenities of areas, evolving U.S. central place hierarchies, potential
economic thresholds, and other topics identified by the Standards
Review Committee or outside experts. The Standards Review Committee
will advise OMB on the impact of any potential revisions on the
statistical products released by their agencies.
Recommendation 2: Discontinue Updates to the NECTAs, NECTA
Divisions, and Combined NECTAs.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation, and the conclusion
of the Committee that the significant complexity generated by
maintaining these areas is not justified by their use in Federal
statistical products and programs.
We recognize that NECTAs are more granular than county-based CBSAs,
and more closely reflect the functional local government structure in
New England. However, Federal statistical programs often do not release
two sets of data for both NECTAs and MSAs in the New England states,
because doing so would create unacceptable risk of disclosure or
reidentification. As a result, several statistical programs currently
release data by NECTAs in New England and by county-based CBSAs for the
rest of the country. This practice is contrary to the intent of the
standards to provide a nationally consistent geographic framework.
After consulting with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is the
primary user of these areas, OMB is confident that BLS programs can
continue to release high quality and useful statistics across the
country. This decision will not affect the release of BLS products at
finer geographic scales, such as the release of Local Area Unemployment
Statistics data by minor civil division.
Recommendation 3: Launch a research effort into delineating
territorially exhaustive areas.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation. The CBSA program
currently does not delineate a large portion of U.S. territory. A
territorially exhaustive delineation would increase the utility of the
CBSA program and improve coordination of Federal statistics. OMB
commits to working with the Review Committee on the plans for the
research necessary to provide a robust, exhaustive delineation of the
United States and Puerto Rico.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate the results of the decade's first
annual update review into the results of the decade's decennial census-
based update.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation. As background, on an
annual basis and according to the standards, OMB makes small changes,
generally to just a few MSAs, based on annual updates to the Census
population data used to determine a county's CBSA status. In the past a
small number of counties experienced change in delineation status
between the comprehensive, decennial delineations issued in the third
year after the Decennial Census and in the subsequent annual update
that follows, due in part to the different geographic units used in the
decennial update and annual updates. The Committee believes this has
led to unnecessary uncertainty and instability in the program.
Implementing this recommendation will improve the consistency of the
areas with negligible impact on timing or resources.
Recommendation 5: Establish a Publicly Available Update Schedule.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation. To increase
transparency and consistency, we have provide a high level, preliminary
schedule below, and will publish and maintain a schedule of upcoming
CBSA delineations and updates on our Statistical Policies and Programs
web page (https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/). Because the timing of OMB
updates depends in part on the timing of delivery of the inputs by the
Census Bureau, we also intend to include the input dates into this
schedule. If OMB is unable to meet the public update schedule, we will
notify the public as soon as feasible through the web page.
As described in the final 2020 standards in Section E, OMB will
release three different types of updates. (1) Annual Updates--These
updates would address qualification of new metropolitan and
micropolitan statistical areas and typically would affect a small
number of counties. (In some years, there may be no updates warranted
by the data.) (2) Five-Year (``mid-decade'') Update--This broader
update would include: Qualification of metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas, qualification of outlying counties, merging of
adjacent metropolitan or micropolitan statistical areas, qualification
of principal cities, categorization of metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas, qualification of metropolitan divisions,
qualification of combined statistical areas, and titling of
metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas, metropolitan
divisions, and combined statistical areas. (3) Decennial Delineation--
The initial re-delineation following adoption of revised standards
would include all of the changes listed for the five-year update, plus
the qualification of central counties.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update type Release date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decennial Delineation..................... June 2023.
Annual Update............................. December 2024.
Annual Update............................. December 2025.
Annual Update............................. December 2026.
Annual Update............................. December 2027.
Five-Year Update.......................... December 2028.
Annual Update............................. December 2029.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendation 6: Continue use of American Community Survey
commuting data to measure intercounty connectivity.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation for the 2020
standards. We note that changes in commuting behavior as a result of
the pandemic could result in a reduction in the five-year average ACS
estimates of commuting which will contribute to the planned CBSA update
in 2028. This anticipated reduction could result, if no other
adjustments are made, in a large number of outlying counties getting
dropped from their CBSAs, at least until the next time commuting data
is updated in 2033.
OMB recognizes that the pandemic's impact on commuting patterns may
create an acute challenge for the 2028 mid-decade update, as well as a
longer-term challenge for the continued use of ACS commuting data as
the sole measure of intercounty connectivity and economic integration.
We especially recognize the importance of additional research in this
area in light of the changing nature of work patterns, which the
pandemic may have accelerated, and other ways in which geography and
economic activity interact.
To that end, OMB will reconvene the Standards Review Committee to
conduct a full review of intercounty connectivity measures before 2028,
and to advise OMB on whether pandemic-
[[Page 37776]]
related changes in commuting patterns warrant any adjustments to the
standards prior to the mid-decade update in 2028 to minimize the risk
of unintended and potentially temporary pandemic-related changes to the
CBSAs in 2028. In addition, we expect that the scope of this research
will also encompass whether other measures of economic activity may be
useful in the identification of CBSAs, and position OMB to ensure that
the standards for including outlying counties in CBSAs are robust and
meaningful.
E. 2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas, and Key
Terms
A Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) is a geographic entity
associated with at least one core of 10,000 or more population, plus
adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic
integration with the core as measured by commuting ties. The standards
delineate two categories of CBSAs: Metropolitan statistical areas
(MSAs) and micropolitan statistical areas ([micro]SAs). CBSAs consist
of counties and equivalent entities throughout the United States and
Puerto Rico. Throughout these standards, the term ``county'' is used to
refer to counties and county-equivalents.
The purpose of the CBSA standards is to provide nationally
consistent delineations for collecting, tabulating, and publishing
Federal statistics for a set of geographic areas. The Office of
Management and Budget establishes and maintains these areas solely for
statistical purposes as part of their statutory responsibilities to
coordinate and ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the Federal
statistical system.
CBSAs are not designed as a geographic framework for nonstatistical
activities or for use in program funding formulas. The CBSA
classification is not an urban-rural classification; MSAs, [micro]SAs,
and many counties outside CBSAs contain both urban and rural
populations.
The following criteria apply to all CBSAs nationwide. Commuting and
employment estimates are derived from the Census Bureau's American
Community Survey. Whenever American Community Survey commuting and
employment data are referred to below, the criteria use point estimates
and do not incorporate a measure of sampling variability of the
estimates.
Section 1. Population Size Requirements for Qualification of Core Based
Statistical Areas
Each CBSA must have a Census Bureau-delineated Urban Area of at
least 10,000 population.
Section 2. Central Counties
The central county or counties of a CBSA are those counties that:
(a) Have at least 50 percent of their population in Urban Areas of
at least 10,000 population; or
(b) Have within their boundaries a population of at least 5,000
located in a single Urban Area of at least 10,000 population.
A central county is associated with the Urban Area that accounts
for the largest portion of the county's population. The central
counties associated with a particular Urban Area are grouped to form a
single cluster of central counties for purposes of measuring commuting
to and from potentially qualifying outlying counties.
Section 3. Outlying Counties
A county qualifies as an outlying county of a CBSA if it meets the
following commuting requirements:
(a) At least 25 percent of the workers living in the county work in
the central county or counties of the CBSA; or
(b) At least 25 percent of the employment in the county is
accounted for by workers who reside in the central county or counties
of the CBSA.
A county may be included in only one CBSA. If a county qualifies as
a central county of one CBSA and as outlying in another, it falls
within the CBSA in which it is a central county. A county that
qualifies as outlying to multiple CBSAs falls within the CBSA with
which it has the strongest commuting tie, as measured by either 3(a) or
3(b) above. The counties included in a CBSA must be contiguous; if a
county is not contiguous with other counties in the CBSA, it will not
fall within the CBSA.
Section 4. Merging of Adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas
Two adjacent CBSAs will merge to form one CBSA if the central
county or counties (as a group) of one CBSA qualify as outlying to the
central county or counties (as a group) of the other CBSA using the
measures and thresholds stated in 3(a) and 3(b) above.
Section 5. Identification of Principal Cities
The principal city (or cities) of a CBSA will include:
(a) The largest incorporated place with a 2020 Census population of
at least 10,000 in the CBSA or, if no incorporated place of at least
10,000 population is present in the CBSA, the largest incorporated
place or census designated place in the CBSA; and
(b) Any additional incorporated place or census designated place
with a 2020 Census population of at least 250,000 or in which 100,000
or more persons work; and
(c) Any additional incorporated place or census designated place
with a 2020 Census population of at least 50,000, but less than
250,000, and in which the number of workers working in the place meets
or exceeds the number of workers living in the place; and
(d) Any additional incorporated place or census designated place
with a 2020 Census population of at least 10,000, but less than 50,000,
and at least one-third the population size of the largest place, and in
which the number of workers working in the place meets or exceeds the
number of workers living in the place.
Section 6. Categories and Terminology
A CBSA is categorized based on the population of the largest Urban
Area within the CBSA. Categories of CBSAs are: Metropolitan statistical
areas, based on Urban Areas of 50,000 or more population, and
micropolitan statistical areas, based on Urban Areas of at least 10,000
population but less than 50,000 population. Counties that do not fall
within CBSAs will represent ``outside core based statistical areas.''
Section 7. Divisions of Metropolitan Statistical Areas
An MSA containing a single Urban Area with a population of at least
2.5 million may be subdivided to form smaller groupings of counties
referred to as metropolitan divisions. A county qualifies as a ``main
county'' of a metropolitan division if 65 percent or more of workers
living in the county also work within the county and the ratio of the
number of workers working in the county to the number of workers living
in the county is at least 0.75. A county qualifies as a ``secondary
county'' if 50 percent or more, but less than 65 percent, of workers
living in the county also work within the county and the ratio of the
number of workers working in the county to the number of workers living
in the county is at least 0.75.
A main county automatically serves as the basis for a metropolitan
division. For a secondary county to qualify as the basis for forming a
metropolitan division, it must join with either a contiguous secondary
county or a contiguous main county with which it has the highest
employment interchange
[[Page 37777]]
measure of 15 or more (where the employment interchange measure is the
sum of the percentage of workers living in the smaller entity who work
in the larger entity and the percentage of employment in the smaller
entity that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger
entity). After all main counties and secondary counties are identified
and grouped (if appropriate), each additional county that already has
qualified for inclusion in the MSA falls within the metropolitan
division associated with the main/secondary county or counties with
which the county at issue has the highest employment interchange
measure. Counties in a metropolitan division must be contiguous.
Section 8. Combining Adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas
(a) Any two adjacent CBSAs will form a combined statistical area if
the employment interchange measure between the two areas is at least
15.
(b) The CBSAs thus combined will also continue to be recognized as
individual CBSAs within the combined statistical area.
Section 9. Titles of Core Based Statistical Areas, Metropolitan
Divisions, and Combined Statistical Areas
(a) The title of a CBSA will include the name of its principal city
with the largest 2020 Census population. If there are multiple
principle cities, the names of the second-largest and (if present)
third-largest principle cities will appear in the title in order of
descending population size. If the principal city with the largest 2020
Census population is a census designated place, the name of the largest
incorporated place of at least 10,000 population that also is a
principal city will appear first in the title followed by the name of
the census designated place. If the principal city with the largest
2020 Census population is a census designated place, and there is no
incorporated place of at least 10,000 population that also is a
principal city, the name of that census designated place principal city
will appear first in the title.
(b) The title of a metropolitan division will include the name of
the principal city with the largest 2020 Census population located in
the metropolitan division. If there are multiple principle cities, the
names of the second-largest and (if present) third-largest principle
cities will appear in the title in order of descending population size.
If there are no principle cities located in the metropolitan division,
the title of the metropolitan division will use the names of up to
three counties in order of descending 2020 Census population size.
(c) The title of a combined statistical area will include the names
of the two largest principle cities in the combination and the name of
the third-largest principal city, if present. If the combined
statistical area title duplicates that of one of its component CBSAs,
the name of the third-most-populous principal city will be dropped from
the title of the Combined Statistical Area.
(d) Titles also will include the names of any State in which the
area is located.
Section 10. Updating Schedule
(a) The Office of Management and Budget will delineate CBSAs in
2023 based on 2020 Census data and 2016-2020 American Community Survey
five-year estimates. Release of these delineations will take place
during June 2023.
(b) In the 2023 delineations and in subsequent years, the Office of
Management and Budget will designate a new [micro]SA if:
(1) A city that is outside any existing CBSA has a Census Bureau
special census count of 10,000 to 49,999 population, or a population
estimate of 10,000 to 49,999 for two consecutive years from the Census
Bureau's Population Estimates Program, or
(2) A Census Bureau special census results in the delineation of an
Urban Area of 10,000 to 49,999 population that is outside of any
existing CBSA.
(c) Also in the 2023 delineations and in subsequent years, the
Office of Management and Budget will designate a new MSA if:
(1) A city that is outside any existing MSA has a Census Bureau
special census count of 50,000 or more population, or a population
estimate of 50,000 or more for two consecutive years from the Census
Bureau's Population Estimates Program, or
(2) A Census Bureau special census results in the delineation of an
Urban Area of 50,000 or more population that is outside of any existing
MSA.
(d) Outlying counties of CBSAs that qualify in this section will
qualify according to the criteria in Section 3 above, on the basis of
American Community Survey five-year commuting estimates.
(e) OMB will review the delineations of all existing CBSAs and
related statistical areas in 2028 using 2021-2025 five-year commuting
and employment estimates from the Census Bureau's American Community
Survey. The Urban Areas used in these delineations will be those based
on 2020 Census data or subsequent special censuses for which Urban
Areas are created. The central counties of CBSAs identified on the
basis of a 2020 Census population count, or on the basis of population
estimates from the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program or a
special census count in the case of postcensally delineated areas, will
constitute the central counties for purposes of these area
delineations. New CBSAs will be designated in 2028 on the basis of
Census Bureau special census counts or population estimates as
described above in Sections 10(b) and 10(c); outlying county
qualification will be based on five-year commuting estimates from the
American Community Survey.
(f) Other aspects of the CBSA delineations are not subject to
change between decennial censuses.
(g) OMB will issue delineation updates (one per year in those years
when there is an update) in years other than 2023 during December.
(h) OMB will maintain a publicly available release schedule for
these updates on its statistical programs and standards web page
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/). Any delays will be announced on the
website as soon as possible, along with an updated release date.
Section 11. Definitions of Key Terms
Census designated place--A statistical geographic entity that is
analogous to an incorporated place, delineated for the decennial census
and consisting of a locally recognized, unincorporated concentration of
population that is identified by name.
Central county--The county or counties of a Core Based Statistical
Area containing a substantial portion of an Urban Area, and to and from
which commuting is measured to determine qualification of outlying
counties.
Combined Statistical Area--A geographic entity consisting of two or
more adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas with employment interchange
measures of at least 15.
Core--A densely settled concentration of population, comprising an
Urban Area (of 10,000 or more population) delineated by the Census
Bureau, around which a Core Based Statistical Area is delineated.
Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA)--A statistical geographic entity
consisting of the county or counties associated with at least one core
(Urban Area) of at least 10,000 population, plus adjacent counties
having a high degree of social and economic integration with the core
as measured through commuting ties
[[Page 37778]]
with the counties containing the core. Metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas are the two categories of core based statistical
areas.
Delineation--The establishment of the boundary of a statistical
area, or the boundary that results.
Employment interchange measure--A measure of ties between two
adjacent entities. The employment interchange measure is the sum of the
percentage of workers living in the smaller entity who work in the
larger entity and the percentage of employment in the smaller entity
that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger entity.
Geographic building block--The geographic unit, such as a county,
that constitutes the basic geographic component of a statistical area.
Main county--A county that acts as an employment center within a
CBSA that has a core with a population of at least 2.5 million. A main
county serves as the basis for delineating a metropolitan division.
Metropolitan Division--A county or group of counties within a CBSA
that contains an Urban Area with a population of at least 2.5 million.
A metropolitan division consists of one or more main/secondary counties
that represent an employment center or centers, plus adjacent counties
associated with the main/secondary county or counties through commuting
ties.
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)--A Core Based Statistical Area
associated with at least one Urban Area that has a population of at
least 50,000. The MSA comprises the central county or counties
containing the core, plus adjacent outlying counties having a high
degree of social and economic integration with the central county or
counties as measured through commuting.
Micropolitan Statistical Area ([micro]SA)--A Core Based Statistical
Area associated with at least one Urban Area that has a population of
at least 10,000, but less than 50,000. The [micro]SA comprises the
central county or counties containing the core, plus adjacent outlying
counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with
the central county or counties as measured through commuting.
Outlying county--A county that qualifies for inclusion in CBSA on
the basis of commuting ties with the CBSA's central county or counties.
Outside Core Based Statistical Areas--Counties that do not qualify
for inclusion in a CBSA.
Principal City--The largest city of a CBSA, plus additional cities
that meet specified statistical criteria.
Secondary county--A county that acts as an employment center in
combination with a main county or another secondary county within a
CBSA that has a core with a population of at least 2.5 million. A
secondary county may serve as the basis for delineating a metropolitan
division, but only when combined with a main county or another
secondary county.
Urban Area-- A statistical geographic entity delineated by the
Census Bureau, which represents densely developed territory, and
encompasses residential, commercial, and other non-residential urban
land uses. For purposes of delineating MSAs, at least one Urban Area of
50,000 or more population is required; for purposes of delineating
[micro]SAs, at least one Urban Area of 10,000 to 49,999 population is
required.
Sharon Block,
Acting Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2021-15159 Filed 7-13-21; 5:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P