Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2004 / Notices 63355

approximately 55,000 multiestablishment companies, we will mail 

form NC–99007 to approximately 10,000 

single-location companies asking for 

their establishment breakouts. 

COS inquiries to each of the 55,000 

multi-establishment enterprises will 

include questions on ownership or 

control by a domestic parent, ownership 

or control by a foreign parent, and 

ownership of foreign affiliates. 

Additional COS inquiries will apply to 

approximately 1.2 million 

establishments operated by these 55,000 

enterprises. These additional inquiries 

will list an inventory of establishments 

and request updates to the inventory, 

including additions, deletions, and 

changes to Federal Employer 

Identification number, name and 

address, and industrial classification. 

Further, the additional inquiries will 

collect the following basic operating 

data for each listed establishment: Endof-year operating status, mid-March 

employment, first quarter payroll, and 

annual payroll. 

In addition to the 55,000 multiestablishment enterprises, the COS will 

include up to 10,000 single-location 

business entities that may have added 

some locations. 

The information collected by the COS 

is used to maintain and update the BR. 

The BR serves two fundamental 

purposes: 

First and most important, it provides 

sampling populations and enumeration 

lists for the Census Bureau’s economic 

surveys and censuses, and it serves as 

an integral part of the statistical 

foundation underlying those programs. 

Essential for this purpose is the BR’s 

ability to identify all known United 

States business establishments and their 

parent companies. Further, the BR must 

accurately record basic business 

attributes needed to control sampling 

and enumeration. These attributes 

include industrial and geographic 

classifications, measures of size and 

economic activity, ownership 

characteristics, and contact information 

(for example, name and address). 

Second, it provides establishment 

data that serve as the basis for the 

annual County Business Patterns (CBP) 

statistical series. The CBP reports 

present data on number of 

establishments, first quarter payroll, 

annual payroll, and mid-March 

employment summarized by industry 

and employment size class for the 

United States, the District of Columbia, 

Puerto Rico, counties, and countyequivalents. No other annual or more 

frequent series of industry statistics 

provides comparable detail, particularly 

for small geographic areas. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions; Farms; 

State, Local or Tribal Government. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. 

Legal Authority: Title 13 U.S.C., 

Sections 182, 195, 224, and 225. 

OMB Desk Officer: Susan Schechter, 

(202) 395–5103. 

Copies of the above information 

collection proposal can be obtained by 

calling or writing Diana Hynek, 

Departmental Paperwork Clearance 

Officer, (202) 482–0266, Department of 

Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 

dhynek@doc.gov). 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to Susan Schechter, OMB Desk 

Officer either by fax (202–395–7245) or 

e-mail (susan_schechter@omb.eop.gov).

Dated: October 26, 2004. 

Madeleine Clayton, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–24293 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[I.D. 102704B]

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request

The Department of Commerce has 

submitted 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: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Title: NOAA Satellite Ground Station 

Customer Questionnaire.

Form Number(s): None.

OMB Approval Number: 0648–0227.

Type of Request: Regular submission.

Burden Hours: 25.

Number of Respondents: 300.

Average Hours Per Response: 5 

minutes.

Needs and Uses: NOAA asks people 

who operate ground receiving stations 

that receive data from NOAA satellites 

to complete a questionnaire about the 

types of data received, its use, the 

equipment involved, and similar 

subjects. The data obtained are used by 

NOAA for short-term operations and 

long-term planning.

Affected Public: Individuals or 

households; Business or other for-profit 

organizations; Not-for-profit 

institutions; Farms; Federal 

Government; State, Local or Tribal 

Government.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, 

(202) 395–3897.

Copies of the above information 

collection proposal can be obtained by 

calling or writing Diana Hynek, 

Departmental Paperwork Clearance 

Officer, (202) 482–0266, Department of 

Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and 

Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, 

DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 

dHynek@doc.gov).

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to David Rostker, OMB Desk 

Officer, FAX number (202) 395–7285, or 

DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov.

Dated: October 25, 2004.

Gwellnar Banks,

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–24345 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–HR–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Census Bureau 

2005 National Census Test

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment 

request. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork and 

respondent burden, invites the general 

public and other Federal agencies to 

take this opportunity to comment on 

proposed and/or continuing information 

collections, as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. 

L. 104–13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before January 3, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to Diana Hynek, Departmental 

Paperwork Clearance Officer, 

Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 

14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230 (or via the 

Internet at DHynek@doc.gov).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

instrument(s) and instructions should 

be directed to Edison Gore, U.S. Census 

Bureau, Building 2, Room 2012, 

Washington, DC 20233–9200, (301) 763–

3998.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

63356 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2004 / Notices 

I. Abstract 

The 2005 National Census Test (NCT) 

is part of the research and development 

cycle leading up to the re-engineered 

2010 Census. The NCT will help the 

U.S. Census Bureau achieve one of its 

Strategic Goals—developing a census 

that is cost-effective, improves coverage, 

and reduces operational risk. 

The Objectives of the 2005 NCT 

include studying methods for: 

• Improving completeness and 

accuracy of reporting for short form 

items. 

• Reducing respondent and data 

capture errors. 

• Making questionnaires more 

respondent friendly. 

• Improving coverage accuracy. 

• Improving the operational 

feasibility of a targeted mailing for 

replacement questionnaires. 

• Improving self-response and 

maintaining data quality by mailing 

bilingual questionnaires. 

In conjunction with the 2005 NCT, 

the Census Bureau will conduct the 

2005 Coverage Followup (CFU) 

operation. This operation is a 

continuation of the research and testing 

program begun in 2002 that is intended 

to develop and evaluate new procedures 

to improve coverage and reduce 

duplication. The CFU operation will 

collect data to evaluate the different 

versions of the coverage questions and 

different presentations of the residence 

rules instructions (See Definition of 

Terms). A separate Federal Register

notice will be submitted for this 

operation. 

Components of the Test 

A. Control 

The Control questionnaire will 

include short-form topics from the 

Census 2000 questionnaire. The 

standard mailing strategy will be used 

for both the initial and replacement 

Control questionnaires. All wording 

changes in the control questionnaire 

that are different from the Census 2000 

questionnaire reflect refinements based 

on the 2004 Census Test questionnaire. 

The short form questions included in 

the Control questionnaire are currently 

considered to be the ‘‘best’’ version of 

each question. Our objective is to 

determine whether the experimental 

panels’ question wording can improve 

the item response and data 

completeness over the control panel 

questions. 

The control questionnaire will use the 

Residence Rules Instructions (See

Definition of Terms) tested in the 

Alternative Questionnaire Experiment 

(AQE) 2000 (See Definition of Terms). 

This design will serve as the control for 

some of the experimental treatments 

because the results of tests conducted 

during Census 2000 indicated that the 

residence rules instructions used in the 

AQE questionnaire yielded better 

quality data than did the Census 2000 

questionnaire residence rules 

instructions. The changes in format, 

presentation, and wording of the 

residence rules instructions used in the 

AQE resulted in a significantly higher 

response to the household count 

question (an important indicator of 

missing data and a flag for large 

household followup). In addition, the 

AQE questionnaire also produced better 

data for Hispanics who were likely to be 

left off census forms. 

The Control Component includes four 

Self Response Option (SRO) treatments, 

each using the same form, content and 

initial questionnaire mailing strategy. 

Previous tests have shown that sending 

non-respondents a replacement 

questionnaire significantly increases 

response rates. We will employ four 

variations of the traditional replacement 

mailing strategy. 

• Two treatments are planned to test 

the operational feasibility of two 

different replacement questionnairepackaging strategies. Since the 

questionnaires designed to be included 

in these treatments may also ‘‘look’’

different, we also need to evaluate the 

response to them. 

• A third treatment is planned to test 

the effect of providing a letter 

encouraging respondents to send in 

their original questionnaire or respond 

via the Internet. Households in this 

panel will not receive a replacement 

questionnaire. 

• The fourth treatment is planned to 

test whether using messaging on the 

replacement questionnaire (that 

distinguishes it from the initial 

questionnaire) will increase response 

rates as well as reduce response 

duplication. This treatment is intended 

to create a clear differentiation between 

the replacement questionnaire and the 

original in order to make it easier for 

respondents to understand the intent of 

the replacement questionnaire. 

The questionnaires for the Control 

component and the four (SRO) 

treatments share the same design and 

mailing strategy for the initial 

questionnaire. Consequently, we will be 

able to compare the results from the 

Control questionnaire with the results 

from the initial questionnaires in the 

SOR treatments. Doing so will give us a 

much larger sample for comparisons. 

B. Hispanic Origin/Race 

For the 2005 NCT, we plan to test 

modifications of the questions on race 

and Hispanic origin that are consistent 

with the 1997 Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Directive 15 (i.e., test 

a question on race that includes only the 

five minimum OMB race categories—

See Definition of Terms). The version of 

the question chosen for future testing 

must produce data that is comparable in 

quality or better than the data produced 

by the Census 2000 questions. 

The Hispanic origin and race 

component of the 2005 NCT is intended 

to evaluate the following elements: 

question design, the use of examples, 

revised wording of the questions and 

instructions, and a tribal enrollment 

question. 

Question Design 

We plan to test two fundamentally 

different designs—the traditional 

Hispanic origin and race design and a 

new design that includes shortened 

questions on Hispanic origin and race 

combined with a third question on 

ancestry. The shortened design includes 

only the five minimum OMB race 

categories and eliminates all write-ins. 

The Hispanic origin question 

component will consist of a yes/no 

option with no write-in option. The 

ancestry question component will 

include write-in lines that are intended 

to permit respondents to provide 

detailed information on their ancestry or 

country of origin. 

Examples 

We need to determine how useful it 

is to include examples of the OMB race 

categories to help respondents 

understand the intent of the design that 

includes the shortened questions. 

Consequently we plan to test this design 

with and without examples. We are 

currently conducting cognitive tests in 

order to select the most promising sets 

of examples for the 2005 NCT. We will 

choose the examples that yield the 

highest quality data for use in the 2008 

Dress Rehearsal. 

Secondly, based on the results of past 

censuses, we know that the specific 

examples used in the ancestry question 

can affect reporting. Since the detailed 

Hispanic origin (e.g., Mexican) and race 

information (e.g., Japanese) only will be 

collected in the ancestry question, we 

intend to evaluate the effect of using 

two different sets of examples on the 

reporting of detailed ancestry groups in 

that question.

Wording and Instructions 

We plan to test the effect of changing 

the word order of the Hispanic origin 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2004 / Notices 63357

item so that it reads, ‘‘Is this person of 

Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish origin?’’

(Census 2000 order: ‘‘Spanish, Hispanic, 

Latino’’). The instruction for the 

Hispanic origin item will reflect the 

OMB definition of Hispanic origin (See

Definition of Terms) rather than relying 

on examples to communicate the intent 

of the question. 

In addition, we plan to test revisions 

to the ‘‘MARK ONE OR MORE’’

instruction in order to make it more 

user-friendly, and we plan to test the 

effectiveness of the revised note that is 

intended to encourage respondents to 

answer both of the traditionally 

formulated race and Hispanic origin 

questions. The note is intended to 

reduce the number of Hispanics who 

report ‘‘Some other race’’. The final 

wording of the question will be 

determined by cognitive testing that is 

currently underway. 

Tribal Enrollment 

The 2005 NCT plans to test a tribal 

enrollment question to attempt to 

determine what proportion of those who 

report a tribe are enrolled. We are 

currently conducting cognitive testing to 

determine the final wording of the 

question. We plan to evaluate the 

quality of tribal enrollment data. 

C. Tenure and Other Population 

Questions 

Tenure 

We plan to test the following elements 

in the Tenure (own or rent) and other 

population questions: dropping the 

reference to ‘‘cash’’ rent, adding an 

instruction to improve the reporting of 

home equity loans, and a version that 

combines both treatments. 

We intend to test the effect of 

eliminating the term ‘‘cash’’ from the 

tenure question, since the traditional 

formulation of the question has been 

criticized as not accurately depicting 

how rent is actually paid (e.g., by 

check). We plan to compare missing 

item data rates for the test questions to 

those for the Census 2000 question in 

order to determine the effect of 

eliminating the term. 

Since we are not sure whether 

respondents understand that home 

equity loans are liens against the home, 

we also plan to test an instruction 

asking respondents who own their own 

homes whether they have a mortgage or 

loan, including home equity loans. We 

plan to evaluate the resulting owner 

distribution (owned free and clear vs. 

owned with a mortgage or loan). We 

plan to evaluate both variables in order 

to choose the version of the question 

that yields the highest quality data for 

use in future tests. 

Age 

In Census 2000, many respondents 

incorrectly reported the age of babies 

under one year of age. The 2005 NCT 

will test an instruction in the Age 

question to help respondents correctly 

determine the age of babies who are less 

than one year old. We also plan to 

reverse the order of the Age and Date of 

Birth questions to make them consistent 

with electronic modes such as the 

Internet. 

Modified Categories in the Relationship 

Question 

We plan to test the effect on response 

distributions of replacing ‘‘Foster Child’’

with ‘‘Foster child or foster adult’’. 

Cognitive tests indicate that respondents 

understand the phrase ‘‘foster adult’’

and do not consider it to be offensive. 

We plan to test the effect on data 

quality of replacing ‘‘Natural-born son/

daughter’’ with ‘‘Biological son/

daughter’’ [used in the Survey of Income 

and Program Participation]. Adoptive 

parents have received the term 

‘‘Natural-born’’ unfavorably. 

D. Residence Rules Instructions and 

Coverage Questions 

Improving the accuracy of census 

coverage is one of the major goals of 

reengineering the 2010 Decennial 

Census Program. As a result of the 

Census 2000 Testing, Evaluation, and 

Experimentation Program and the 

Coverage Measurement Program, we 

implemented a research and 

development program to investigate 

ways of improving our coverage of 

persons and housing units in 

preparation for the 2010 Census. The 

2005 NCT is part of this effort. Specific 

areas that we intend to evaluate in the 

2005 NCT include improving withinhousehold coverage and revising 

residence rules instructions so that they 

are clear and unambiguous to the 

respondent. 

The panels in this section of the 2005 

NCT are planned to evaluate the main 

effects and anticipated interactions of 

the residence rules instructions (See

Definition of Terms) and two versions of 

the 2004 Census Test coverage 

questions. 

The Control for this section of the 

2005 NCT is the experimental roster 

tested in the AQE in the 2000 Census. 

This design was chosen as the control 

because it out-performed the Census 

2000 residence rules instructions in two 

ways: It had significantly lower item 

nonresponse, and, in low coverage 

areas, the rate at which Hispanics were 

not included on the AQE questionnaire 

was significantly lower than for the 

Census 2000 questionnaire. 

The following are the features of the 

residence rules instructions that will be 

evaluated: 

• Content, order, and wording of cues 

and bullets in the include/exclude lists 

(See Definition of Terms). 

• List order. 

• Presentation of the basic ‘‘usual 

residence’’ concept. 

• Approach to structuring the 

residence rules instructions (for 

example, using an alternative approach 

that eliminates the include/exclude lists 

and relies instead on explaining the 

basic concept behind the lists). 

The Coverage Followup (CFU) 

operation will evaluate the effects of the 

alternative residence rules instructions 

on gross coverage errors. 

The Census Bureau is currently 

conducting cognitive tests using four 

versions of the 2004 Census Test 

undercount question (Question 2) and 

overcount question (Question 10). The 

versions of the questions that produce 

the best results will be chosen for use 

in the 2005 NCT. The experimental 

treatments are intended to isolate some 

of the individual effects of each version 

of the coverage questions by crossing 

them with the different residence rules 

instructions. We plan to evaluate the 

coverage questions’ efficacy in flagging 

potential omissions or erroneous 

enumerations by implementing the CFU 

operation. 

E. Respondent-Friendly Design 

The questionnaire for this panel will 

have design changes intended to make 

it easier to use. The changes that this 

questionnaire will test include: 

• Color as a navigational tool. 

• Lightly embedded text that 

describes what should be entered in 

response boxes. 

• Consistent formats between check 

boxes and write-in answer fields (for 

example, all answer fields will be 

outlined with a strong black line). Using 

consistent formats for all answer fields 

is intended to help respondents identify 

all fields where a response is required.

F. Language 

The 2005 NCT will include a 

bilingual English/Spanish questionnaire 

panel in an effort to improve selfresponse in the growing number of 

households in which Spanish is a 

primary language. We plan to 

implement an English/Spanish 

questionnaire mailout treatment that is 

intended to evaluate the effect of a 

bilingual questionnaire on response 

rates, public reaction, and data quality. 

63358 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 210 / Monday, November 1, 2004 / Notices 

G. Internet Option 

All respondents (including those in 

the Language panel) will have the 

opportunity to respond via the Internet, 

but while the general content of the 

Internet questionnaire will be the same 

as other test questionnaires, it is not 

planned to mirror the exact wording of 

any one specific paper questionnaire. 

Instead, the Internet Questionnaire will 

be designed using questions from 

several of the 2005 NCT questionnaires 

and rewording the questions to reflect 

the wording that works best for this 

response mode. 

Respondents who ask to respond via 

the Internet (including those in the 

language panel) will be randomly 

assigned to answer either a personbased or a topic-based format. In the 

person-based approach, responses for all 

items (e.g., name, date of birth, gender, 

race) are collected for one household 

member (person), after which the same 

questions are repeated for each 

successive household member. In the 

topic-based approach, responses for a 

given topic/item (e.g., age) are collected 

for all persons in the household, after 

which responses for the next topic/item 

(e.g., date of birth) are collected. This 

process continues for each successive 

topic/item. We will evaluate the quality 

of Internet data collected using these 

two design treatments. 

II. Method of Collection 

In late August, we will mail an 

advance letter to a national sample of 

about 420,000 households. This letter 

will explain why we are conducting the 

mandatory 2005 NCT. The letter also 

will assure respondents that their 

answers are confidential. We will 

inform them of the measures we take to 

keep their personal information secure. 

The 2005 NCT questionnaires will be 

mailed approximately a week later. 

Respondents will be asked to mail back 

their completed questionnaires or 

respond via the Internet by Census Day 

(September 15, 2005). Early in 

September, we will send reminder/

thank you postcards thanking those who 

have already responded and asking nonrespondents to send in their 

questionnaires or reply via the Internet. 

As part of the Census Bureau’s efforts to 

improve response rates and contain 

costs, most nonrespondents will receive 

replacement questionnaires a few days 

after Census Day. Households assigned 

to the panel for which the experimental 

treatment consists of a letter in lieu of 

a replacement questionnaire will not 

receive the second questionnaire. 

The Coverage Followup (CFU) 

operation is scheduled to begin in 

December. The CFU operation will 

obtain additional information by 

telephone from a sample of respondents 

in order to evaluate the residence rules 

instructions and coverage questions. 

Approximately six months after Census 

Day, we will begin formal evaluations of 

population and housing content, 

coverage, language, race and ethnicity, 

and self-response options. 

Definition of Terms 

Alternative Questionnaire 

Experiment—The 2000 AQE 

incorporated three separate 

experiments, one involving census long 

forms and the other two involving short 

forms, with different objectives. This 

experiment was conducted during 

Census 2000 under census conditions. 

Consequently, we were able to compare 

the effectiveness of the AQE 

questionnaire designs with the Census 

2000 questionnaires. 

All three experiments tested 

combinations or ‘‘packages’’ of design 

features, rather than testing each design 

change separately in a controlled 

fashion that would permit inferences 

about their individual effects. Thus, 

firm conclusions only were drawn about 

the combined effect of multiple design 

features. This is an important limitation 

of all three experiments. The three 

experiments were: 

• 1.1 Experiment A: Effects of 

Altering the Design of Branching 

Instructions on Navigational 

Performance. 

• 1.2 Experiment B: An Experiment 

to Improve Coverage Through Revised 

Roster Instructions. 

• 1.3 Experiment C: Questionnaire 

Effects on Reporting of Race and 

Hispanic Origin: Results of a 

Replication of the 1990 Mail Short Form 

in Census 2000. 

The report describing the experiment 

is located at the following address: 

http://www.census.gov/pred/www/rpts/

TR17.pdf.

Include/exclude List—The list of the 

people the respondent should include 

in the household count and those who 

should be left out because they should 

not be counted or will be counted 

elsewhere. 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) definition of Hispanic origin—A 

person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, 

Cuban, Central or South American or 

other Spanish culture or origin, 

regardless of race. 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) race categories—American 

Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or 

African American, Native Hawaiian or 

Other Pacific Islander, and White. 

Residence Rules Instructions—

Instructions that respondents use to 

determine who should be counted in 

that household. They are meant to 

insure that everyone is counted once 

and in the right place for the primary 

purposes of apportionment and 

redistricting. 

III. Data 

OMB Number: None. 

Form Number: DC–1A through DC–1X 

(2005 Census Test questionnaires). 

Type of Review: Regular. 

Affected Public: Individuals or 

households. 

Estimated Number of Respondents:

Approximately 420,000 households. 

Estimated Time Per Response: 10 

minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 70,000. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: There is 

no cost to respondents except for their 

time to respond. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. 

Legal Authority: Title 13 of the United 

States Code, sections 141 and 193. 

IV. Request for Comments 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden 

(including hours and cost) of the 

proposed collection of information; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection; 

they also will become a matter of public 

record.

Dated: October 26, 2004. 

Madeleine Clayton, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–24294 Filed 10–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P