Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Notices 29513 

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. 

The Census Bureau will summarize 

and/or include comments submitted in 

response to this notice in the request for 

OMB approval of this information 

collection; the comments also will 

become a matter of public record. 

Dated: May 21, 2010. 

Glenna Mickelson, 

Management Analyst, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12626 Filed 5–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of the Census 

[Docket Number 100429203–0204–01] 

Developing a Supplemental Poverty 

Measure 

AGENCY: Bureau of the Census, 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice and solicitation of 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of the Census 

(Census Bureau) issues this notice to 

request comments on the approach to 

developing a Supplemental Poverty 

Measure (SPM) presented in a report 

entitled ‘‘Observations from the 

Interagency Technical Working Group 

on Developing a Supplemental Poverty 

Measure,’’ which was recently released 

by the Interagency Technical Working 

Group on Developing a Supplemental 

Poverty Measure (Working Group). This 

report was produced as part of an effort 

by the Working Group to suggest how 

the Census Bureau, in cooperation with 

the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau 

of Labor Statistics (BLS), should 

develop a new Supplemental Poverty 

Measure. The report provides 

observations about how to make a series 

of initial choices in the development of 

the SPM. The eventual publication of 

the SPM will not replace the official 

poverty measure, nor will it have any 

impact on allocations determined by the 

poverty measurement. Rather, it is part 

of the Census Bureau’s ongoing effort to 

more accurately measure poverty levels 

in the United States. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, written 

comments must be submitted to the 

office listed in the ADDRESSES section of 

this notice on or before June 25, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to David 

Johnson, Housing and Household 

Economic Statistics Division, Census 

Bureau, 4600 Silver Hill Road, Stop 

8500, Washington, DC 20233–8500 or to 

spm@census.gov. The Interagency 

Technical Working Group’s report may 

be found at: http://www.census.gov/

hhes/www/poverty/SPM_

TWGObservations.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Johnson, Housing and Household 

Economic Statistics Division, Census 

Bureau, telephone number 301–763– 

6443 (this is not a toll-free number), email to: spm@census.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Since the publication of the first 

official U.S. poverty estimates in 1964, 

there has been continuing debate about 

the best approach to measuring poverty 

in the United States. Recognizing that 

supplemental estimates of poverty can 

provide very useful information to the 

public as well as to the Federal 

Government, in 2009, the Office of 

Management and Budget’s (OMB) Chief 

Statistician formed an Interagency 

Technical Working Group on 

Developing a Supplemental Poverty 

Measure (Working Group). This group 

included representatives from BLS, the 

Census Bureau, the Economics and 

Statistics Administration, the Council of 

Economic Advisers, the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, and OMB. The Working Group 

asked the Census Bureau, in cooperation 

with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, to 

develop a Supplemental Poverty 

Measure (SPM) to obtain an improved 

understanding of the economic wellbeing of American families and of how 

Federal policies affect those living in 

poverty, and offered its observations on 

how the Census Bureau should do so in 

the above-referenced report. 

The SPM ultimately produced by the 

Census Bureau would not replace the 

official poverty measure, and the SPM 

will not be the measure used to estimate 

eligibility for government programs. The 

official statistical poverty measure, as 

defined in OMB Statistical Policy 

Directive No. 14, will continue to be 

produced and updated every year. The 

SPM is instead designed as an 

experimental measure that defines 

income thresholds and resources in a 

manner different from the official 

poverty measure. The Census Bureau 

considers the SPM a work in progress, 

and both the Working Group and the 

Census Bureau expect that there will be 

improvements to the SPM over time. 

The first publication of the SPM will be 

accompanied by a detailed description 

of the methodology used to estimate the 

new supplemental measure, and the 

Census Bureau expects to update this 

description as changes are incorporated 

in the SPM. 

The new supplemental measure 

would be published initially in the fall 

of 2011 at the same time and level of 

detail as the 2010 income and poverty 

statistics that reflect the official poverty 

measure, and annually thereafter. 

Developing and estimating an SPM will 

take substantial advance work and 

planning, and the Working Group’s 

observations are meant to assist the 

Census Bureau and the BLS in such 

planning. 

II. Defining the Supplemental Poverty 

Measure 

In its report, the Working Group laid 

out a series of suggestions and 

recommendations that, taken together, 

provide a roadmap through which the 

Census Bureau, with the assistance of 

BLS, can use to produce the initial set 

of estimates of the number and 

percentage of people in poverty based 

on the SPM in 2011. It is likely that the 

procedures used to create this first set 

of estimates will closely resemble the 

Working Group’s recommendations. A 

much abbreviated summary of the 

group’s suggestions follows. The Census 

Bureau invites the public to read and 

offer comments on the approach 

described in the Working Group’s full 

report, which can be found at http:// 

www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/ 

SPM_TWGObservations.pdf. The Census 

Bureau is especially interested in 

receiving comments on the methodology 

the Working Group employed in making 

its recommendations. 

The poverty threshold is the annual 

expenditure amount below which a 

family is considered poor. The Working 

Group recommended that the poverty 

threshold for the SPM should be 

established on the basis of expenditures 

for commodities that all families must 

purchase: Food, shelter, clothing, and 

utilities (collectively, FSCU). This 

threshold should be derived from 

expenditure data from BLS’ U.S. 

Consumer Expenditure Survey. The 

Working Group recommended that the 

reference sample for this threshold be 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
29514 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 26, 2010 / Notices 

an average of all families with exactly 

two children. A ‘‘family unit’’ should 

consist of all related individuals who 

live at the same address, any co-resident 

unrelated children who are cared for by 

the family, and any cohabiters and their 

children. Using the most recent fiveyear distribution of FSCU expenditures, 

the Working Group recommended that 

the Census Bureau set the dollar amount 

of the poverty threshold at the 33rd 

percentile of the distribution of FCSU 

expenditures. To account for differences 

among those who rent, own a home 

with a mortgage, and own a home 

without a mortgage, the Working Group 

recommended the Census Bureau 

develop an adjustment factor for the 

shelter component, to reflect differences 

in expenditures among these three 

groups. To account for basic 

expenditures outside of FCSU, the 

Working Group recommended that the 

Census Bureau multiply the dollar 

amount (as calculated above) by 1.2. To 

define thresholds for different families, 

the Working Group recommended the 

use of the so-called ‘‘three-parameter 

equivalence scale’’ that has been used by 

the Census in recent years. The Working 

Group also recommended that 

thresholds be updated annually using 

an updated five-year distribution of 

FSCU expenditures. 

The Working Group also 

recommended that poverty thresholds 

should be adjusted for price differences 

across geographic areas. American 

Community Survey (ACS) data, which is 

collected annually by the Census 

Bureau, appear to be the best data 

currently available from which one can 

create a housing price index based on 

differences in rental prices of housing 

across areas. Future work may provide 

price data that can be used to measure 

interarea price differentials on more 

items than housing alone. 

To determine poverty status under the 

SPM, resources (income plus noncash 

benefits, minus necessary expenses) are 

compared to a family’s poverty 

threshold (as calculated in the method 

described above). If a family’s resources 

are below its poverty threshold, that 

family and all persons in the family are 

counted as poor. The Working Group 

recommended that family resources be 

estimated as the sum of cash income, 

plus any Federal government in-kind 

benefits that families can use to meet 

their FCSU. From this amount, the 

Working Group recommended 

subtracting taxes (or adding tax credits), 

work expenses, child support paid, and 

out-of-pocket medical expenses to 

determine poverty status. The survey 

used to make these calculations will be 

the Current Population Survey’s Annual 

Social and Economic Supplement, (CPS 

ASEC), which is jointly sponsored by 

the Census Bureau and BLS. 

Work expenses have an impact on 

poverty status. The Working Group 

therefore recommended that the 

definition of resources used to calculate 

the SPM should exclude expenses 

associated with commuting and child 

care. For child care, the Working Group 

recommended that actual expenses, 

either reported on the CPS ASEC or 

assigned to CPS ASEC families based on 

other household surveys that collect 

these data, should be used. For other 

work expenses, the Working Group 

recommended that the Census Bureau 

investigate the advantages and 

disadvantages of using actual expenses 

versus an average amount for all 

working adults. 

To account for medical out-of-pocket 

(MOOP) expenses, the Working Group 

recommended that the Census Bureau 

examine the reliability of questions 

newly added to the CPS ASEC in 2010. 

If these data are found to be reliable, the 

Working Group recommended that the 

Census Bureau use data from the CPS 

ASEC in the calculation of family 

resources. If these data are found to be 

unreliable, then the Working Group 

recommended that MOOP should be 

assigned to CPS ASEC families and 

individuals from other surveys that 

collect reliable information on MOOP, 

in a way that takes into account the 

differences in medical expenses among 

demographic groups. The Working 

Group also suggested that the Census 

Bureau investigate the advantages and 

disadvantages of adjusting MOOP for 

those who are uninsured, to reflect that 

the uninsured may be paying less than 

is customary because they lack health 

insurance and cannot pay for health 

services. 

III. Desired Focus of Comments 

While the Census Bureau welcomes 

public comments on the approaches 

described in the report of the Working 

Group, the Census Bureau is 

particularly interested in receiving 

comments on the specific methods used 

in the report, to ensure that the Census 

Bureau uses best practices in developing 

the SPM. Specifically, the Census 

Bureau is interested in comments on: 

• Methods and data sources used to 

geographically adjust poverty 

thresholds; 

• Methods and data sources used to 

adjust resources to account for child 

care and other work-related expenses; 

• Methods and data sources used to 

adjust resources to account for medical 

out-of-pocket expenses; and 

• Methods and data sources used to 

impute dollar values for in-kind benefits 

and taxes. 

For more information on the Working 

Group’s observations on the 

components for the new SPM, see the 

report entitled ‘‘Observations from the 

Interagency Technical Working Group 

on Developing a Supplemental Poverty 

Measure.’’ For more information/ 

background on issues related to 

alternative poverty measures, see 

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/ 

povmeas/papers.html. 

Dated: May 18, 2010. 

Robert M. Groves, 

Director, Bureau of the Census. 

[FR Doc. 2010–12628 Filed 5–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[Application No. 10–00001] 

Export Trade Certificate of Review 

ACTION: Notice of Issuance of an Export 

Trade Certificate of Review to Alaska 

Longline Cod Commission (Application 

No. 10–00001). 

SUMMARY: On May 13, 2010, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce issued an 

Export Trade Certificate of Review to 

the Alaska Longline Cod Commission 

(‘‘ALCC’’). This notice summarizes the 

conduct for which certification has been 

granted. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph E. Flynn, Director, Office of 

Competition and Economic Analysis, 

International Trade Administration, by 

telephone at (202) 482–5131 (this is not 

a toll-free number), or by E-mail at 

oetca@ita.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of 

the Export Trading Company Act of 

1982 (15 U.S.C. Sections 4001–21) 

authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to 

issue Export Trade Certificates of 

Review. The regulations implementing 

Title III are found at 15 CFR Part 325 

(2009). 

The Office of Competition and 

Economic Analysis is issuing this notice 

pursuant to 15 CFR section 325.6(b), 

which requires the Secretary of 

Commerce to publish a summary of the 

certification in the Federal Register. 

Under Section 305(a) of the Act and 15 

CFR section 325.11(a), any person 

aggrieved by the Secretary’s 

determination may, within 30 days of 

the date of this notice, bring an action 

in any appropriate district court of the 

United States to set aside the 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1