80 FR 29609 - Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 99 (May 22, 2015)

Page Range		29609-29614
FR Document		2015-12140
Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29609-29614]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12140]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of 
information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 
U.S.C. chapter 35).
    Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.
    Title: 2015 National Content Test
    OMB Control Number: 0607-XXXX.
    Form Number(s):

Questionnaire

DE-1A(E/S)
DE-1C(E/S)
DE-1D(E/S)
DE-1D2(E/S)
DE-1G(E/S)
DE-1H(E/S)
DE-1I(E/S)
DE-1W(E/S)
DE-1C(E/S)PR
DE-1I(E/S) PR

Instruction Card

DE-33
DE-33 PR

Questionnaire Cover Letters

DE-16(L1)
DE-16(L1)(FB)
DE-16(L1)(E/S)
DE-16(L1)(E/S)PR
DE-16(L2)
DE-16(L2)(F/B)
DE-16(L2)(E/S)
DE-16(L2)(E/S)PR
DE-17(L1)

[[Page 29610]]

DE-17(L1)(F/B)
DE-17(L1)(E/S)
DE-17(L2)
DE-17(L2)(F/B)
DE-17(L2)(E/S)
DE-17(L3)
DE-17(L3)(F/B)
DE-17(L3)(E/S)
DE-17(L4)
DE-17(L4)(F/B)
DE-17(L4)(E/S)
DE-17(L4)(E/S)PR
DE-17(L5)
DE-17(L5)(F/B)
DE-17(L5)(E/S)

Postcards

DE-9
DE-9(E/S)PR
DE-9(I)
DE-9(v2)
DE-9(v3)
DE-9(ES)(PR)
DE-9(v3)(E/S)(PR)
DE-9(2A)
DE-9(2A)(E/S)PR
DE-9(2B)
DE-9(2B)(E/S)PR
DE-9(2C)
DE-9(2D)

Envelopes

DE-6A(IN)
DE-6A(IN)(E/S)
DE-6A(1)(IN)
DE-6A(1)(IN)(E/S)
DE-8A
DE-8A(E/S)

Internet Instrument Spec
Reinterview Instrument Spec (Coverage)
Reinterview Instrument Spec (Race)
Wording for Emails and Text Messages

    Type of Request: New Collection.
    Number of Respondents: 1.3 million households.
    Average Hours per Response: 0.2.
    Burden Hours: 216,667.


                              Estimated Burden Hours for 2015 National Content Test
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Estimated
                                                                   Total number    response time     Estimated
                                                                  of respondents     (minutes)     burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Response................................................       1,200,000              10         200,000
Telephone Reinterview...........................................         100,000              10          16,667
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................       1,300,000  ..............         216,667
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Needs and Uses: During the years preceding the 2020 Census, the 
Census Bureau will pursue its commitment to reducing the cost of 
conducting the next decennial census while maintaining the highest data 
quality possible. A primary decennial census cost driver is the 
collection of data from members of the public for which the Census 
Bureau received no reply via initially offered response options. We 
refer to these cases as nonrespondents. Increasing the number of people 
who take advantage of self response options (such as completing a paper 
questionnaire and mailing it back to the Census Bureau, or responding 
via telephone or Internet alternatives) can contribute to a less costly 
census.
    The 2015 National Content Test (NCT) is part of the research and 
development cycle leading up to the 2020 Census.
    The first objective of this test is to evaluate and compare 
different versions of questions about such things as race and Hispanic 
origin, relationship, and within-household coverage. The 2015 NCT is 
the primary mid-decade opportunity to compare different versions of 
questions prior to making final decisions for the 2020 Census. The test 
will include a reinterview to further assess the accuracy and 
reliability of the question alternatives about race and origin and 
within-household coverage.
    For the decennial census, the Census Bureau adheres to the U.S. 
Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) October 30, 1997 ``Revisions to 
the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and 
Ethnicity'' (see www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_1997standards) for 
classifying racial and ethnic responses. There are five broad 
categories for data on race: ``White,'' ``Black or African American,'' 
``American Indian or Alaska Native,'' ``Asian,'' and ``Native Hawaiian 
or Other Pacific Islander.'' There are two broad categories for data on 
ethnicity: ``Hispanic or Latino'' and ``Not Hispanic or Latino.'' The 
OMB standards advise that respondents shall be offered the option of 
selecting one or more racial designations. The OMB standards also 
advise that race and ethnicity are two distinct concepts; therefore, 
Hispanics or Latinos may be of any race.
    Additionally, the 1997 OMB standards permit the collection of more 
detailed information on population groups, provided that any additional 
groups can be aggregated into the standard broad set of categories. 
Currently, the Census Bureau collects additional detailed information 
on Hispanic or Latino groups, American Indian and Alaska Native tribes, 
Asian groups, and Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander groups.
    For example, responses to the race question such as Navajo Nation, 
Nome Eskimo Community, and Mayan are collected and tabulated separately 
in Census Bureau censuses and surveys, but also are aggregated and 
tabulated into the total American Indian or Alaska Native population. 
Similarly, responses to the race question such as Chinese, Asian, 
Indian, and Vietnamese are collected and tabulated separately, but also 
aggregated and tabulated into the total Asian population, while 
responses such as Native Hawaiian, Chamorro, or Fijian are collected 
and tabulated separately, but also tabulated, and aggregated into the 
total Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander population. Responses 
to the ethnicity question such as Mexican, Puerto Rican, and Cuban are 
collected and tabulated separately, but also are tabulated and 
aggregated in Census Bureau censuses and surveys, but also tabulated 
and aggregated into the total Hispanic or Latino population.
    The 2015 NCT will test ways to collect and tabulate detailed 
information for the detailed groups, not just to the broad groups 
identified above. Detailed data for specific White population groups, 
such as German, Irish, and Polish, and Black population groups, such as 
African American, Jamaican, and Nigerian, will be collected and 
tabulated, and may be aggregated into the total ``White'' or ``Black or 
African American'' populations respectively.
    The 2015 NCT also includes testing of a separate ``Middle Eastern 
or North African'' (MENA) category and the collection of data on 
detailed MENA groups, such as Lebanese, Egyptian, and Iranian. 
Currently, following the 1997 OMB standards, Middle Eastern and North 
African responses are classified under the White racial category, per 
OMB's definition of ``White.''

[[Page 29611]]

    The second objective of the NCT is to test different contact 
strategies for optimizing self-response. The Census Bureau has 
committed to using the Internet as a primary response option in the 
2020 Census. The 2015 NCT includes nine different approaches to 
encouraging households to respond and, specifically, to respond using 
the less costly and more efficient Internet response option. These 
approaches include altering the timing of the first reminder, use of 
email as a reminder, altering the timing for sending the mail 
questionnaire, use of a third reminder, and sending a reminder letter 
in place of a paper questionnaire to non-respondents.
    One benefit of the Internet response mode is that it allows for 
more functionality and greater flexibility in designing questions 
compared to paper, which is constrained by space availability. The 2015 
NCT will utilize web-based technology, such as the Internet, smart 
phones, and tablets to improve question designs, and to optimize 
reporting of detailed racial and ethnic groups (e.g., Samoan, Iranian, 
Blackfeet Tribe, Filipino, Jamaican, Puerto Rican, Irish, etc.).
    Web-based designs also provide much more utility and flexibility 
for using detailed checkboxes and write-in spaces to elicit and collect 
data for detailed groups than traditional paper questionnaires, and 
will help collect data for both the broader OMB categories, as well as 
more detailed responses across all groups.

Components of the Test

Race and Origin Content

    The 2015 NCT builds on extensive research previously conducted by 
the Census Bureau as part of the 2010 Census. One major study was the 
2010 Census Race and Hispanic Origin Alternative Questionnaire 
Experiment (AQE) (for details, see www.census.gov/2010census/news/press-kits/aqe/aqe.html). The 2010 AQE examined alternative strategies 
for improving the collection of data on a race and Hispanic origin, 
with four goals in mind:
    1. Increasing reporting in the standard race and ethnic categories 
as defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget;
    2. Decreasing item non-response for these questions;
    3. Increasing the accuracy and reliability of the results for this 
question; and
    4. Eliciting detailed responses for all racial and ethnic 
communities (e.g., Chinese, Mexican, Jamaican, etc.).
    Some of the findings from this research include:
     Combining race and ethnicity into one question did not 
change the proportion of people who reported as Hispanics, Blacks, 
Asians, American Indians and Alaska Natives, or Native Hawaiians and 
Other Pacific Islanders.
     The combined question yielded higher item response rates, 
compared with separate question approaches.
     The combined question increased reporting of detailed 
responses for most groups, but decreased reporting for others.
    The successful strategies from the AQE research have been employed 
in the design of the Census Bureau's 2020 Census research. Four key 
dimensions of the questions on race and Hispanic origin are being 
tested in the 2015 NCT. These include question format, response 
categories, wording of the instructions, and question terminology.

Question Format

    The 2015 NCT will evaluate the use of two alternative question 
approaches for collecting detailed data on race and ethnicity. One 
approach uses two separate questions: The first about Hispanic origin, 
and the second about race. The other approach combines the two items 
into one question about race and origin. The 2015 NCT research will 
test both approaches with new data collection methods, including 
Internet, telephone, and in-person response. Each approach is described 
below, with its associated data collection modes.
1. Separate Race and Origin Questions (Paper and Internet)
    This is a modified version of the race and Hispanic origin approach 
used in the 2010 Census. Updates since the 2010 Census include added 
write-in spaces and examples for the White response category and the 
Black or African American response category, removal of the term 
``Negro,'' and the addition of an instruction to allow for multiple 
responses in the Hispanic origin question.
2. Combined Question With Checkboxes and Write-Ins Visible at Same Time 
(Paper)
    This is a modified version of the combined question approaches 
found to be successful in the 2010 AQE research. Checkboxes are 
provided for the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) broad 
categories (per the 1997 Standards for the Classification of Federal 
Data on Race and Ethnicity), with a corresponding write-in space for 
detailed response to each checkbox category. In this version, all 
checkboxes and write-in spaces are visible at all times. Each response 
category contains six example groups, which represent the diversity of 
the geographic definitions of the OMB category. For instance, the Asian 
category examples of Chinese, Filipino, Asian, Indian, Vietnamese, 
Korean, and Japanese represent the six largest detailed Asian groups in 
the United States, reflecting OMB's definition of Asian (``A person 
having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, 
Southeast Asia, and the Indian subcontinent.''). Respondents do not 
have to select an OMB checkbox, but may enter a detailed response in 
the write-in space without checking a category.
3. Combined Question With Major Checkboxes, Detailed Checkboxes, and 
Write-Ins (Paper)
    This is a modified version of the combined question approaches 
found to be successful in the 2010 AQE. Checkboxes are provided for the 
OMB categories, along with a series of detailed checkboxes under each 
major category, and a corresponding write-in space and examples to 
elicit and collect all other detailed responses within the major 
category. In this version, all checkboxes and write-in spaces are 
visible at all times. Again, the detailed response categories represent 
the diversity of the geographic definitions of the OMB category.
    For instance, under the Asian category (and major checkbox), a 
series of detailed checkboxes is presented for Chinese, Filipino, Asian 
Indian, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese, which represent the six 
largest detailed Asian groups in the United States. Then, instructions 
to enter additional detailed groups (with the examples of ``Pakistani, 
Thai, Hmong, etc.'') precede a dedicated write-in area to collect other 
detailed responses. Again, these detailed groups reflect OMB's 
definition of Asian (``A person having origins in any of the original 
peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, and the Indian 
subcontinent.''). Respondents do not have to select an OMB checkbox, 
but may enter a detailed response in the write-in space without 
checking a category.
4. Combined Question With Major Checkboxes and Write-Ins on Separate 
Screens (Internet)
    In this version, the detailed origin groups are solicited on 
subsequent screens after the OMB response categories have been 
selected. On the first screen, the OMB checkbox categories are shown 
along with their six representative example groups. Once

[[Page 29612]]

the OMB categories have been selected, one at a time, subsequent 
screens solicit further detail for each category that was chosen (e.g., 
Asian), using a write-in space, with examples, to collect the detailed 
groups (e.g., Korean and Japanese). The intent is to separate mouse 
click tasks (checkbox categories) and typing tasks (write-ins) in an 
attempt to elicit responses that are more detailed. This approach was 
used as one of three race and origin Internet panels in the 2014 Census 
Test.
5. Combined Question Branching With Detailed Checkbox Screens 
(Internet)
    This version is an alternative method of soliciting detailed origin 
groups using separate screens, detailed checkboxes, and write-in 
spaces. On the first screen, the OMB checkbox categories are shown 
along with their six representative example groups. Once the OMB 
categories have been selected, one at a time, subsequent screens 
solicit further detail for each category, this time using a series of 
additional checkboxes for the six largest detailed groups (e.g., 
Chinese, Filipino, Asian, Indian, Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese) 
with a write-in space also provided to collect additional groups.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22MY15.007

Race Response Categories

    The 2015 NCT will also evaluate the use of a ``Middle Eastern or 
North African'' (``MENA'') response category. There will be two 
treatments for testing this dimension:
    1. Use of a MENA category: This treatment tests the addition of a 
MENA checkbox category to the race question. The MENA category is 
placed within the current category lineup, based on estimates of 
population size, between the category for American Indians and Alaska 
Natives and the category for Native Hawaiians and Other Pacific 
Islanders. With the addition of this new category, the ``White'' 
example groups are revised. The Middle Eastern and North African 
examples of Lebanese and Egyptian are replaced with the European 
examples of Polish and French. The MENA checkbox category will have the 
examples of Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Syrian, Moroccan, and 
Algerian. All other checkbox categories and write-in spaces remain the 
same.
    2. No separate MENA category: This treatment tests approaches 
without a separate MENA checkbox category, and represents the current 
OMB definition of White (``A person having origins in any of the 
original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.''). Here 
the category will provide examples of Middle Eastern and North African 
origins (e.g., Lebanese; Egyptian) along with examples of European 
origins (e.g., German; Irish) as part of the ``White'' racial category.

Wording of the Instructions

    The 2015 NCT will evaluate the use of different approaches for 
wording the instructions used to collect data on race and ethnicity. 
The 2010 AQE research found that respondents frequently overlook the 
instruction to ``Mark [X] one or more boxes'' and have difficulty 
understanding the instructions. From the 2010 AQE qualitative research 
we learned that some respondents stop reading the instruction after 
noticing the visual cue [X] and proceed directly to do just that--mark 
a box--overlooking the remainder of the instruction. The new 
instruction being tested in the 2015 NCT (``Mark all boxes that 
apply'') is an attempt to improve the clarity of the question and make 
it more apparent that more than one group may be selected. The 
following options will be tested in the 2015 NCT.
    1. ``Mark [X] one or more'': One version (old instructions) will 
advise respondents to, ``Mark [X] one or more boxes AND print [origins/
ethnicities/details].''
    2. ``Mark all that apply'': An alternative version (new 
instructions), will advise respondents to, ``Mark all boxes that apply 
AND print [origins/ethnicities/details] in the spaces below. Note, you 
may report more than one group.''

Instructions for American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Write-In Area

    The 2015 NCT will also examine different instructions to optimize 
detailed reporting within the AIAN write-in area. From the 2010 AQE 
research and recent 2014 qualitative research that the Census Bureau 
conducted with American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Central and South 
American Indian respondents, we know the instruction to ``Print 
enrolled or principal tribe'' causes confusion for many AIAN 
respondents and means

[[Page 29613]]

different things to different people. The research found that AIAN 
respondents were confused by the use of different terms and concepts 
(e.g., ``enrolled'', ``affiliated,'' ``villages,'' ``race,'' 
``origin,'' ``tribe,'' etc.) and there was disagreement among focus 
group participants as to what ``affiliated tribe'' or ``enrolled'' or 
``villages'' meant.
    The overwhelming sentiment from 2014 AIAN focus group participants 
was that they want to be treated equally with other race/ethnic groups, 
and this was accomplished by not using different terminology (i.e., 
enrolled, affiliated, villages, etc.). Asking ``What is your race or 
origin?'' in conjunction with ``Print, for example, . . .'' (along with 
AIAN example groups) allowed the respondents to understand what the 
question asked them to report (their race or origin) and did not limit 
their write-in response by confounding the instructions with terms that 
mean different things to different people (e.g., tribes, villages, 
etc.). Therefore, the instruction to, ``Print, for example, . . .'' 
presented a viable alternative for further exploration in 2015 NCT 
research.
    Based on the findings and recommendations from this research, the 
2015 NCT will test variations of the instructions for the AIAN write-in 
area. We plan to test the instruction, ``Print enrolled or principal 
tribe, for example . . .'' on control versions, and the instruction, 
``Print, for example . . .'' on experimental versions, to see how they 
perform.

Question Terms

    The 2015 NCT will evaluate the use of different conceptual terms 
(e.g., origin, ethnicity, or no terms) in the wording of questions for 
collecting data on race and ethnicity. Recent qualitative focus groups 
and qualitative research (e.g., 2010 AQE research; 2013 Census Test 
research; cognitive pre-testing for the 2016 American Community Survey 
(ACS) Content Test) found that the terms ``race,'' ``ethnicity,'' and 
``origin'' are confusing or misleading to many respondents, and mean 
different things to different people. The 2010 AQE research tested the 
removal of the term ``race'' from the question, and showed no evidence 
that removal of the term had any effect on either unit or item response 
rates. Recent cognitive research for the 2016 ACS Content Test tested 
an open-ended instruction (``Which categories describe you?'') and 
found that respondents did not have issues with understanding what the 
question was asking. The following options will be tested in the 2015 
NCT.
    1. ``Origin'' term: The current version of the race and Hispanic 
origin questions, and the combined question, use the terms ``race'' 
and/or ``origin'' to describe the concepts and groups in the question 
stem and/or instructions. For instance, in the combined race and 
Hispanic origin approach, the question stem is ``What is Person 1's 
race or origin?''
    2. ``Ethnicity'' term: One alternative option being explored tests 
the use of both the terms ``ethnicity'' along with ``race'' in the 
question stem and/or instructions (e.g., ``What is Person 1's race or 
ethnicity?'').
    3. NO terms: A second alternative option being explored tests the 
removal of the terms ``race,'' ``origin,'' and ``ethnicity'' from the 
question stem and instructions. Instead, a general approach asks, 
``Which categories describe Person 1?''

Relationship Content

    Two versions of the relationship question will be tested. Both 
versions are the same as those used in a split-sample in the 2014 
Census Test, with no changes. These relationship categories were 
previously tested in other Census Bureau surveys including the American 
Housing Survey, American Community Survey, and the Survey of Income and 
Program Participation (currently used in production). Although research 
to date has been informative, leading to the development of the revised 
relationship question, additional quantitative testing is needed. 
Because the incidence of some household relationships--such as same-sex 
couples--is relatively low in the general population, the revised 
question needs to be tested with large, nationally representative 
samples prior to a final decision to include them in the 2020 Census 
questionnaire.
    The first version uses the 2010 Census relationship question 
response options, but in a new order, starting with ``husband or wife'' 
and then the ``unmarried partner'' category. This version also re-
introduces the foster child category, which was removed from the 2010 
Census form due to space issues.
    The second version includes the same basic response options as the 
2010 Census version, but modifies/expands the ``husband or wife'' and 
``unmarried partner'' categories to distinguish between same-sex and 
opposite-sex relationships.

Coverage Content (Internet Only)

    The 2012 NCT experimented with several methods to improve within-
household coverage for Internet respondents. One benefit of the online 
response mode is that it allows for more functionality and greater 
flexibility in designing questions compared to paper, which is 
constrained by space availability. The 2012 NCT included a coverage 
follow-up reinterview to evaluate the different Internet design 
options, but some results were inconclusive. In the 2015 NCT, two 
designs will be tested to compare different approaches for helping 
respondents provide a more accurate roster of household residents.
    The first approach is the ``Rules-Based'' approach, and will allow 
us to see whether the presence of a question asking the number of 
people in the household, along with the residence rule instructions, 
helps respondents create an accurate roster. This is similar to the 
approach used across all modes in Census 2000 and the 2010 Census, 
where the respondent was expected to understand various applications of 
our residence rules and apply them to their household. The roster 
creation is followed by a household-level question that probes to 
determine if any additional people not listed originally should be 
included for consideration as residents of the household (several types 
of people and living situations are shown in a list).
    The ``Question-Based'' approach allows us to ask guided questions 
to help improve resident responses. Respondents are not shown the 
residence rule instructions and are only asked to create an initial 
roster of people they consider to be living or staying at their address 
on Census Day. This is followed by several short household-level 
questions about types of people and living situations that might apply 
to people in the household that were not listed originally.
    The materials mailed to the respondents will inform them that the 
survey is mandatory in accordance with Title 13, United States Code, 
Sections 141 and 193. This information also will be available via a 
hyperlink from within the Internet Instrument.
    The results of the 2015 NCT will help guide the design of 
additional 2020 Census testing later this decade. The 2015 NCT will be 
the only opportunity to test content with a nationally representative 
sample prior to the 2020 Census. Testing in 2015 is necessary to 
establish recommendations for contact strategies, response options, and 
content options that can be further refined and tested in later tests. 
At this point in the decade, the Census Bureau needs to acquire 
evidence showing whether the strategies being tested can reduce the 
cost per housing unit during a decennial census, while providing high 
quality and accuracy of the census data. The nationally-representative 
sample is

[[Page 29614]]

designed to ensure that the unbiased estimates from this test 
accurately reflect the nation as a whole, across a variety of 
demographic characteristics.
    Along with other results, the response rates to paper and Internet 
collection will be used to help inform 2020 Decennial program planning 
and cost estimation metrics values. In addition, several demographic 
questions and coverage probes are included in this test to achieve 
improved coverage by future decennial censuses and surveys.
    Information quality is an integral part of the pre-dissemination 
review of the information disseminated by the Census Bureau (fully 
described in the Census Bureau's Information Quality Guidelines). 
Information quality is also integral to the information collections 
conducted by the Census Bureau and is incorporated into the clearance 
process required by the Paperwork Reduction Act.
    Affected Public: Individuals or Households.
    Frequency: One Time.
    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
    Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. 141 and 193.
    This information collection request may be viewed at 
www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce 
collections currently under review by OMB.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice 
to [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-5806.

    Dated: May 14, 2015.
Glenna Mickelson,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-12140 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 2015 / Notices 29609

3. Reporting reported by the Subrecipient (if the 9410, by fax (202) 690–7442 or email at
a. Performance reporting. All Subrecipient meets the criteria under 2 program.intake@usda.gov.
recipients of DLT financial assistance CFR part 170) to the Recipient by the 3. Persons With Disabilities
must provide annual performance end of the month following the month Individuals who are deaf, hard of
activity reports to RUS until the project in which the subaward was made. hearing or have speech disabilities and
is complete and the funds are expended. d. Record Keeping and Accounting. that wish to file either an EEO or
A final performance report is also The grant contract will contain program complaint may contact USDA
required; the final report may serve as provisions relating to record keeping through the Federal Relay Service at
the last annual report. The final report and accounting requirements. (800) 877–8339 or (800) 845–6136 (in
must include an evaluation of the Spanish).
G. Federal Awarding Agency Contacts Persons with disabilities who wish to
success of the project in meeting DLT
1. Web site: http://www.rd.usda.gov/ file a program complaint, please see
Program objectives. See 7 CFR 1703.107
programs-services/distance-learning- information above on how to contact us
for additional information on these
telemedicine-grants. The DLT Web site by mail directly or by email. If you
reporting requirements.
b. Financial reporting. All recipients maintains up-to-date resources and require alternative means of
of DLT financial assistance must contact information for DLT programs. communication for program information
provide an annual audit, beginning with 2. Telephone: 202–720–0800. (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)
the first year in which a portion of the 3. Fax: 202–205–2921. please contact USDA’s TARGET Center
financial assistance is expended. Audits 4. Email: dltinfo@wdc.usda.gov. at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD).
are governed by United States 5. Main point of contact: Shawn Dated: May 14, 2015.
Department of Agriculture audit Arner, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Brandon McBride,
regulations. Please see 7 CFR 1703.108 Loan Origination and Approval
Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
and Subpart F (Audit Requirements) of Division, Rural Utilities Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–12222 Filed 5–21–15; 8:45 am]
2 CFR part 200 for a description of the H. Other Information BILLING CODE P
financial reporting requirements of all
recipients of DLT financial assistance. 1. USDA Non-Discrimination Statement
c. Recipient and Subrecipient USDA prohibits discrimination DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Reporting. The applicant must have the against its customers, employees, and
necessary processes and systems in applicants for employment on the bases Submission for OMB Review;
place to comply with the reporting of race, color, national origin, age, Comment Request
requirements for first-tier sub-awards disability, sex, gender identity, religion,
and executive compensation under the reprisal, and where applicable, political The Department of Commerce will
Federal Funding Accountability and beliefs, marital status, familial or submit to the Office of Management and
Transparency Act of 2006 in the event parental status, sexual orientation, or all Budget (OMB) for clearance the
the applicant receives funding unless or part of an individual’s income is following proposal for collection of
such applicant is exempt from such derived from any public assistance information under the provisions of the
reporting requirements pursuant to 2 program, or protected genetic Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
CFR part 170, § 170.110(b). The information in employment or in any chapter 35).
reporting requirements under the program or activity conducted or funded Agency: U.S. Census Bureau.
Transparency Act pursuant to 2 CFR by USDA. (Not all prohibited bases will Title: 2015 National Content Test
part 170 are as follows: apply to all programs and/or OMB Control Number: 0607–XXXX.
i. First Tier Sub-Awards of $25,000 or employment activities.) Form Number(s):
more (unless they are exempt under 2 Questionnaire
2. How To File a Complaint
CFR part 170) must be reported by the
Recipient to http://www.fsrs.gov no later If you wish to file an employment DE–1A(E/S)
complaint, you must contact your DE–1C(E/S)
than the end of the month following the
agency’s EEO Counselor within 45 days DE–1D(E/S)
month the obligation was made. Please
DE–1D2(E/S)
note that currently underway is a of the date of the alleged discriminatory
DE–1G(E/S)
consolidation of eight federal act, event, or in the case of a personnel
DE–1H(E/S)
procurement systems, including the action. Additional information can be
DE–1I(E/S)
Sub-award Reporting System (FSRS), found online at http://
DE–1W(E/S)
into one system, the System for Award www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_ DE–1C(E/S)PR
Management (SAM). As result the FSRS file.html. DE–1I(E/S) PR
will soon be consolidated into and If you wish to file a Civil Rights
accessed through https://www.sam.gov/ program complaint of discrimination, Instruction Card
portal/public/SAM/. complete the USDA Program DE–33
ii. The Total Compensation of the Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), DE–33 PR
Recipient’s Executives (5 most highly found online at http://
compensated executives) must be www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_ Questionnaire Cover Letters
reported by the Recipient (if the cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

DE–16(L1)
Recipient meets the criteria under 2 CFR (866) 632–9992 to request the form. You DE–16(L1)(FB)
part 170) to https://www.sam.gov/ may also write a letter containing all of DE–16(L1)(E/S)
portal/public/SAM/ by the end of the the information requested in the form. DE–16(L1)(E/S)PR
month following the month in which Send your completed complaint form or DE–16(L2)
the award was made. letter to us by mail at U.S. Department DE–16(L2)(F/B)
iii. The Total Compensation of the of Agriculture, Director, Office of DE–16(L2)(E/S)
Subrecipient’s Executives (5 most Adjudication, 1400 Independence DE–16(L2)(E/S)PR
highly compensated executives) must be Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250– DE–17(L1)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 May 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM 22MYN1
29610 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 2015 / Notices

DE–17(L1)(F/B) Postcards DE–6A(IN)(E/S)
DE–17(L1)(E/S) DE–9 DE–6A(1)(IN)
DE–17(L2) DE–9(E/S)PR DE–6A(1)(IN)(E/S)
DE–17(L2)(F/B) DE–9(I) DE–8A
DE–17(L2)(E/S) DE–9(v2)
DE–9(v3) DE–8A(E/S)
DE–17(L3)
DE–9(ES)(PR) Internet Instrument Spec
DE–17(L3)(F/B) DE–9(v3)(E/S)(PR) Reinterview Instrument Spec (Coverage)
DE–17(L3)(E/S) DE–9(2A)
DE–9(2A)(E/S)PR Reinterview Instrument Spec (Race)
DE–17(L4)
DE–17(L4)(F/B) DE–9(2B) Wording for Emails and Text Messages
DE–17(L4)(E/S) DE–9(2B)(E/S)PR Type of Request: New Collection.
DE–9(2C)
DE–17(L4)(E/S)PR Number of Respondents: 1.3 million
DE–9(2D)
DE–17(L5) households.
DE–17(L5)(F/B) Envelopes Average Hours per Response: 0.2.
DE–17(L5)(E/S) DE–6A(IN) Burden Hours: 216,667.

ESTIMATED BURDEN HOURS FOR 2015 NATIONAL CONTENT TEST
Estimated re-
Total number Estimated
sponse time
of respondents burden hours
(minutes)

Initial Response ........................................................................................................................... 1,200,000 10 200,000
Telephone Reinterview ................................................................................................................ 100,000 10 16,667

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 1,300,000 ........................ 216,667

Needs and Uses: During the years Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity’’ collected and tabulated separately, but
preceding the 2020 Census, the Census (see www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_ also aggregated and tabulated into the
Bureau will pursue its commitment to 1997standards) for classifying racial and total Asian population, while responses
reducing the cost of conducting the next ethnic responses. There are five broad such as Native Hawaiian, Chamorro, or
decennial census while maintaining the categories for data on race: ‘‘White,’’ Fijian are collected and tabulated
highest data quality possible. A primary ‘‘Black or African American,’’ separately, but also tabulated, and
decennial census cost driver is the ‘‘American Indian or Alaska Native,’’ aggregated into the total Native
collection of data from members of the ‘‘Asian,’’ and ‘‘Native Hawaiian or Other Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
public for which the Census Bureau Pacific Islander.’’ There are two broad population. Responses to the ethnicity
received no reply via initially offered categories for data on ethnicity: question such as Mexican, Puerto Rican,
response options. We refer to these ‘‘Hispanic or Latino’’ and ‘‘Not Hispanic and Cuban are collected and tabulated
cases as nonrespondents. Increasing the or Latino.’’ The OMB standards advise separately, but also are tabulated and
number of people who take advantage of that respondents shall be offered the aggregated in Census Bureau censuses
self response options (such as option of selecting one or more racial and surveys, but also tabulated and
completing a paper questionnaire and designations. The OMB standards also aggregated into the total Hispanic or
mailing it back to the Census Bureau, or advise that race and ethnicity are two Latino population.
responding via telephone or Internet distinct concepts; therefore, Hispanics
The 2015 NCT will test ways to
alternatives) can contribute to a less or Latinos may be of any race.
collect and tabulate detailed
costly census. Additionally, the 1997 OMB
information for the detailed groups, not
The 2015 National Content Test (NCT) standards permit the collection of more
just to the broad groups identified
is part of the research and development detailed information on population
above. Detailed data for specific White
cycle leading up to the 2020 Census. groups, provided that any additional
population groups, such as German,
The first objective of this test is to groups can be aggregated into the
Irish, and Polish, and Black population
evaluate and compare different versions standard broad set of categories.
Currently, the Census Bureau collects groups, such as African American,
of questions about such things as race
additional detailed information on Jamaican, and Nigerian, will be
and Hispanic origin, relationship, and
within-household coverage. The 2015 Hispanic or Latino groups, American collected and tabulated, and may be
NCT is the primary mid-decade Indian and Alaska Native tribes, Asian aggregated into the total ‘‘White’’ or
opportunity to compare different groups, and Native Hawaiian and Other ‘‘Black or African American’’
versions of questions prior to making Pacific Islander groups. populations respectively.
final decisions for the 2020 Census. The For example, responses to the race The 2015 NCT also includes testing of
test will include a reinterview to further question such as Navajo Nation, Nome a separate ‘‘Middle Eastern or North
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

assess the accuracy and reliability of the Eskimo Community, and Mayan are African’’ (MENA) category and the
question alternatives about race and collected and tabulated separately in collection of data on detailed MENA
origin and within-household coverage. Census Bureau censuses and surveys, groups, such as Lebanese, Egyptian, and
For the decennial census, the Census but also are aggregated and tabulated Iranian. Currently, following the 1997
Bureau adheres to the U.S. Office of into the total American Indian or Alaska OMB standards, Middle Eastern and
Management and Budget’s (OMB) Native population. Similarly, responses North African responses are classified
October 30, 1997 ‘‘Revisions to the to the race question such as Chinese, under the White racial category, per
Standards for the Classification of Asian, Indian, and Vietnamese are OMB’s definition of ‘‘White.’’

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 May 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM 22MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 2015 / Notices 29611

The second objective of the NCT is to Some of the findings from this and write-in spaces are visible at all
test different contact strategies for research include: times. Each response category contains
optimizing self-response. The Census • Combining race and ethnicity into six example groups, which represent the
Bureau has committed to using the one question did not change the diversity of the geographic definitions of
Internet as a primary response option in proportion of people who reported as the OMB category. For instance, the
the 2020 Census. The 2015 NCT Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, American Asian category examples of Chinese,
includes nine different approaches to Indians and Alaska Natives, or Native Filipino, Asian, Indian, Vietnamese,
encouraging households to respond and, Hawaiians and Other Pacific Islanders. Korean, and Japanese represent the six
specifically, to respond using the less • The combined question yielded largest detailed Asian groups in the
costly and more efficient Internet higher item response rates, compared United States, reflecting OMB’s
response option. These approaches with separate question approaches. definition of Asian (‘‘A person having
include altering the timing of the first • The combined question increased origins in any of the original peoples of
reminder, use of email as a reminder, reporting of detailed responses for most the Far East, Southeast Asia, and the
altering the timing for sending the mail groups, but decreased reporting for Indian subcontinent.’’). Respondents do
questionnaire, use of a third reminder, others. not have to select an OMB checkbox,
and sending a reminder letter in place The successful strategies from the but may enter a detailed response in the
of a paper questionnaire to non- AQE research have been employed in write-in space without checking a
respondents. the design of the Census Bureau’s 2020 category.
One benefit of the Internet response Census research. Four key dimensions
of the questions on race and Hispanic 3. Combined Question With Major
mode is that it allows for more Checkboxes, Detailed Checkboxes, and
functionality and greater flexibility in origin are being tested in the 2015 NCT.
These include question format, response Write-Ins (Paper)
designing questions compared to paper,
which is constrained by space categories, wording of the instructions, This is a modified version of the
availability. The 2015 NCT will utilize and question terminology. combined question approaches found to
web-based technology, such as the be successful in the 2010 AQE.
Question Format Checkboxes are provided for the OMB
Internet, smart phones, and tablets to
improve question designs, and to The 2015 NCT will evaluate the use categories, along with a series of
optimize reporting of detailed racial and of two alternative question approaches detailed checkboxes under each major
ethnic groups (e.g., Samoan, Iranian, for collecting detailed data on race and category, and a corresponding write-in
Blackfeet Tribe, Filipino, Jamaican, ethnicity. One approach uses two space and examples to elicit and collect
Puerto Rican, Irish, etc.). separate questions: The first about all other detailed responses within the
Web-based designs also provide much Hispanic origin, and the second about major category. In this version, all
more utility and flexibility for using race. The other approach combines the checkboxes and write-in spaces are
detailed checkboxes and write-in spaces two items into one question about race visible at all times. Again, the detailed
and origin. The 2015 NCT research will response categories represent the
to elicit and collect data for detailed
test both approaches with new data diversity of the geographic definitions of
groups than traditional paper
collection methods, including Internet, the OMB category.
questionnaires, and will help collect
telephone, and in-person response. Each For instance, under the Asian
data for both the broader OMB
approach is described below, with its category (and major checkbox), a series
categories, as well as more detailed
associated data collection modes. of detailed checkboxes is presented for
responses across all groups.
Chinese, Filipino, Asian Indian,
Components of the Test 1. Separate Race and Origin Questions Vietnamese, Korean, and Japanese,
(Paper and Internet) which represent the six largest detailed
Race and Origin Content This is a modified version of the race Asian groups in the United States. Then,
The 2015 NCT builds on extensive and Hispanic origin approach used in instructions to enter additional detailed
research previously conducted by the the 2010 Census. Updates since the groups (with the examples of ‘‘Pakistani,
Census Bureau as part of the 2010 2010 Census include added write-in Thai, Hmong, etc.’’) precede a dedicated
Census. One major study was the 2010 spaces and examples for the White write-in area to collect other detailed
Census Race and Hispanic Origin response category and the Black or responses. Again, these detailed groups
Alternative Questionnaire Experiment African American response category, reflect OMB’s definition of Asian (‘‘A
(AQE) (for details, see www.census.gov/ removal of the term ‘‘Negro,’’ and the person having origins in any of the
2010census/news/press-kits/aqe/ addition of an instruction to allow for original peoples of the Far East,
aqe.html). The 2010 AQE examined multiple responses in the Hispanic Southeast Asia, and the Indian
alternative strategies for improving the origin question. subcontinent.’’). Respondents do not
collection of data on a race and have to select an OMB checkbox, but
Hispanic origin, with four goals in 2. Combined Question With Checkboxes
may enter a detailed response in the
mind: and Write-Ins Visible at Same Time
write-in space without checking a
1. Increasing reporting in the standard (Paper)
category.
race and ethnic categories as defined by This is a modified version of the
the U.S. Office of Management and combined question approaches found to 4. Combined Question With Major
Budget; be successful in the 2010 AQE research. Checkboxes and Write-Ins on Separate
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

2. Decreasing item non-response for Checkboxes are provided for the U.S. Screens (Internet)
these questions; Office of Management and Budget In this version, the detailed origin
3. Increasing the accuracy and (OMB) broad categories (per the 1997 groups are solicited on subsequent
reliability of the results for this Standards for the Classification of screens after the OMB response
question; and Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity), categories have been selected. On the
4. Eliciting detailed responses for all with a corresponding write-in space for first screen, the OMB checkbox
racial and ethnic communities (e.g., detailed response to each checkbox categories are shown along with their
Chinese, Mexican, Jamaican, etc.). category. In this version, all checkboxes six representative example groups. Once

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 May 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM 22MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 2015 / Notices 29613

different things to different people. The questions, and the combined question, designing questions compared to paper,
research found that AIAN respondents use the terms ‘‘race’’ and/or ‘‘origin’’ to which is constrained by space
were confused by the use of different describe the concepts and groups in the availability. The 2012 NCT included a
terms and concepts (e.g., ‘‘enrolled’’, question stem and/or instructions. For coverage follow-up reinterview to
‘‘affiliated,’’ ‘‘villages,’’ ‘‘race,’’ ‘‘origin,’’ instance, in the combined race and evaluate the different Internet design
‘‘tribe,’’ etc.) and there was Hispanic origin approach, the question options, but some results were
disagreement among focus group stem is ‘‘What is Person 1’s race or inconclusive. In the 2015 NCT, two
participants as to what ‘‘affiliated tribe’’ origin?’’ designs will be tested to compare
or ‘‘enrolled’’ or ‘‘villages’’ meant. 2. ‘‘Ethnicity’’ term: One alternative different approaches for helping
The overwhelming sentiment from option being explored tests the use of respondents provide a more accurate
2014 AIAN focus group participants was both the terms ‘‘ethnicity’’ along with roster of household residents.
that they want to be treated equally with ‘‘race’’ in the question stem and/or The first approach is the ‘‘Rules-
other race/ethnic groups, and this was instructions (e.g., ‘‘What is Person 1’s Based’’ approach, and will allow us to
accomplished by not using different race or ethnicity?’’). see whether the presence of a question
terminology (i.e., enrolled, affiliated, 3. NO terms: A second alternative asking the number of people in the
villages, etc.). Asking ‘‘What is your race option being explored tests the removal household, along with the residence
or origin?’’ in conjunction with ‘‘Print, of the terms ‘‘race,’’ ‘‘origin,’’ and rule instructions, helps respondents
for example, . . .’’ (along with AIAN ‘‘ethnicity’’ from the question stem and create an accurate roster. This is similar
example groups) allowed the instructions. Instead, a general approach to the approach used across all modes
respondents to understand what the asks, ‘‘Which categories describe Person in Census 2000 and the 2010 Census,
question asked them to report (their race 1?’’ where the respondent was expected to
or origin) and did not limit their write- understand various applications of our
Relationship Content
in response by confounding the residence rules and apply them to their
instructions with terms that mean Two versions of the relationship household. The roster creation is
different things to different people (e.g., question will be tested. Both versions followed by a household-level question
tribes, villages, etc.). Therefore, the are the same as those used in a split- that probes to determine if any
instruction to, ‘‘Print, for example, . . .’’ sample in the 2014 Census Test, with no additional people not listed originally
presented a viable alternative for further changes. These relationship categories should be included for consideration as
exploration in 2015 NCT research. were previously tested in other Census residents of the household (several
Based on the findings and Bureau surveys including the American types of people and living situations are
recommendations from this research, Housing Survey, American Community shown in a list).
the 2015 NCT will test variations of the Survey, and the Survey of Income and The ‘‘Question-Based’’ approach
instructions for the AIAN write-in area. Program Participation (currently used in allows us to ask guided questions to
We plan to test the instruction, ‘‘Print production). Although research to date help improve resident responses.
enrolled or principal tribe, for example has been informative, leading to the Respondents are not shown the
. . .’’ on control versions, and the development of the revised relationship residence rule instructions and are only
instruction, ‘‘Print, for example . . .’’ on question, additional quantitative testing asked to create an initial roster of people
experimental versions, to see how they is needed. Because the incidence of they consider to be living or staying at
perform. some household relationships—such as their address on Census Day. This is
same-sex couples—is relatively low in followed by several short household-
Question Terms
the general population, the revised level questions about types of people
The 2015 NCT will evaluate the use question needs to be tested with large, and living situations that might apply to
of different conceptual terms (e.g., nationally representative samples prior people in the household that were not
origin, ethnicity, or no terms) in the to a final decision to include them in listed originally.
wording of questions for collecting data the 2020 Census questionnaire. The materials mailed to the
on race and ethnicity. Recent qualitative The first version uses the 2010 Census respondents will inform them that the
focus groups and qualitative research relationship question response options, survey is mandatory in accordance with
(e.g., 2010 AQE research; 2013 Census but in a new order, starting with Title 13, United States Code, Sections
Test research; cognitive pre-testing for ‘‘husband or wife’’ and then the 141 and 193. This information also will
the 2016 American Community Survey ‘‘unmarried partner’’ category. This be available via a hyperlink from within
(ACS) Content Test) found that the version also re-introduces the foster the Internet Instrument.
terms ‘‘race,’’ ‘‘ethnicity,’’ and ‘‘origin’’ child category, which was removed The results of the 2015 NCT will help
are confusing or misleading to many from the 2010 Census form due to space guide the design of additional 2020
respondents, and mean different things issues. Census testing later this decade. The
to different people. The 2010 AQE The second version includes the same 2015 NCT will be the only opportunity
research tested the removal of the term basic response options as the 2010 to test content with a nationally
‘‘race’’ from the question, and showed Census version, but modifies/expands representative sample prior to the 2020
no evidence that removal of the term the ‘‘husband or wife’’ and ‘‘unmarried Census. Testing in 2015 is necessary to
had any effect on either unit or item partner’’ categories to distinguish establish recommendations for contact
response rates. Recent cognitive between same-sex and opposite-sex strategies, response options, and content
research for the 2016 ACS Content Test options that can be further refined and
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

relationships.
tested an open-ended instruction tested in later tests. At this point in the
(‘‘Which categories describe you?’’) and Coverage Content (Internet Only) decade, the Census Bureau needs to
found that respondents did not have The 2012 NCT experimented with acquire evidence showing whether the
issues with understanding what the several methods to improve within- strategies being tested can reduce the
question was asking. The following household coverage for Internet cost per housing unit during a decennial
options will be tested in the 2015 NCT. respondents. One benefit of the online census, while providing high quality
1. ‘‘Origin’’ term: The current version response mode is that it allows for more and accuracy of the census data. The
of the race and Hispanic origin functionality and greater flexibility in nationally-representative sample is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 May 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM 22MYN1
29614 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 2015 / Notices

designed to ensure that the unbiased Regulations, including notice in the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
estimates from this test accurately Federal Register inviting public
reflect the nation as a whole, across a comment (80 FR 10456–10457, 02–26– International Trade Administration
variety of demographic characteristics. 2015). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed [A–427–818]
Along with other results, the response the application and determined that it
rates to paper and Internet collection meets the criteria for approval. Low Enriched Uranium From France:
will be used to help inform 2020 Final Results of Changed
Decennial program planning and cost Pursuant to the authority delegated to
the FTZ Board’s Executive Secretary (15 Circumstances Review
estimation metrics values. In addition,
several demographic questions and CFR 400.36(f)), the application to AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
coverage probes are included in this test establish Subzone 61O is approved, International Trade Administration,
to achieve improved coverage by future subject to the FTZ Act and the Board’s Department of Commerce.
decennial censuses and surveys. regulations, including Section 400.13, SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
Information quality is an integral part and further subject to FTZ 61’s 1,821.07- (the Department) has granted an
of the pre-dissemination review of the acre activation limit. extension of time for the re-exportation
information disseminated by the Census Dated: May 14, 2015. of one specified entry of low enriched
Bureau (fully described in the Census uranium (LEU) that entered under a
Andrew McGilvray,
Bureau’s Information Quality narrow provision that conditionally
Guidelines). Information quality is also Executive Secretary. excludes it from the scope of the
integral to the information collections [FR Doc. 2015–12516 Filed 5–21–15; 8:45 am] antidumping (AD) order. The
conducted by the Census Bureau and is BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Department extends the exportation
incorporated into the clearance process deadline until January 31, 2018.
required by the Paperwork Reduction DATES: Effective date: May 22, 2015.
Act. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Affected Public: Individuals or Andrew Huston, AD/CVD Operations,
Households. Foreign-Trade Zones Board
Office VII, Enforcement and
Frequency: One Time.
Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. Compliance, International Trade
[B–04–2015] Administration, U.S. Department of
Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C. 141
and 193. Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 26—Atlanta, Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
This information collection request Georgia; Authorization of Production
may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. telephone: (202) 482–4261.
Activity; Mizuno USA, Inc. (Golf Clubs),
Follow the instructions to view SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Braselton, Georgia
Department of Commerce collections Background
currently under review by OMB. On January 15, 2015, Georgia Foreign-
Written comments and On February 17, 2015, the Department
Trade Zone, Inc., grantee of FTZ 26, published the initiation and preliminary
recommendations for the proposed
submitted a notification of proposed results of the changed circumstances
information collection should be sent
production activity to the Foreign-Trade review (CCR).1 In the Initiation and
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to OIRA_Submission@ Zones (FTZ) Board on behalf of Mizuno Preliminary Results the Department
omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806. USA, Inc., within Site 31 of FTZ 26, in preliminarily determined that changed
Braselton, Georgia. circumstances did not exist, and that
Dated: May 14, 2015.
The notification was processed in Eurodif SA and Areva Inc. (collectively
Glenna Mickelson,
accordance with the regulations of the AREVA) would not be granted an
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief additional extension of time to re-export
Information Officer. FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including
notice in the Federal Register inviting the specified entry of low-enriched
[FR Doc. 2015–12140 Filed 5–21–15; 8:45 am]
public comment (80 FR 5507, 02–02– uranium. Since the publication of the
BILLING CODE 3510–07–P Initiation and Preliminary Results, the
2015). The FTZ Board has determined
that no further review of the activity is following events have taken place.
warranted at this time. The production AREVA, Centrus Energy Corporation
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (Petitioners), and the Nuclear Energy
activity described in the notification is
Foreign-Trade Zones Board Institute submitted comments on March
authorized, subject to the FTZ Act and
17, 2015. Chubu Electric Power
[S–20–2015] the Board’s regulations, including
Company, Inc. submitted comments on
Section 400.14. March 24, 2015. No rebuttal comments
Approval of Subzone Status; Roger Dated: May 15, 2015. were filed.
Electric Corporation; Bayamon, Puerto
Andrew McGilvray, Scope of the Order
Rico
Executive Secretary.
On February 20, 2015, the Executive The product covered by the order is
[FR Doc. 2015–12550 Filed 5–21–15; 8:45 am]
Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones all low-enriched uranium. Low-
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P enriched uranium is enriched uranium
(FTZ) Board docketed an application
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

submitted by the Puerto Rico Trade & hexafluoride (UF6) with a U235 product
Export Company, grantee of FTZ 61, assay of less than 20 percent that has
requesting subzone status subject to the not been converted into another
existing activation limit of FTZ 61, on
1 See Low Enriched Uranium from France:
behalf of Roger Electric Corporation in
Initiation of Expedited Changed Circumstances
Bayamon, Puerto Rico. Review and Preliminary Results of Changed
The application was processed in Circumstances Review, 80 FR 8285 (February 17,
accordance with the FTZ Act and 2015) (Initiation and Preliminary Results).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:19 May 21, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM 22MYN1
Document Created: 2015-12-15 15:46:22
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 15:46:22
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
FR Citation		80 FR 29609