[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39143-39145]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-18809]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of the Census

[Docket Number 010209034-1162-02]
RIN 0607-XX63


Urban Area Criteria for Census 2000--Proposed Criteria

AGENCY: Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of proposed criteria; reopening for public comment; 
Correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On March 28, 2001 (66 FR 17018), the Bureau of the Census 
(Census Bureau) published a Notice of Proposed Criteria and Request for 
Public Comment concerning its proposed criteria for defining urban and 
rural population. In response to numerous public comments, the Census 
Bureau is reopening the comment period for 30 days. In addition, the 
Census Bureau is including corrections, clarifications, and additional 
information to its original notice.

DATES: Comments must be received by August 27, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Address all written comments to the Director, U.S. Census 
Bureau, Room 2049, Federal Building 3, Washington, DC 20233-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Robert Marx, Chief, Geography 
Division, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC 20233-7400; telephone 
(301) 457-2131, or e-mail ([email protected]).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 28, 2001 (66 FR 17018), the Census 
Bureau published a Notice of Proposed Criteria and Request for Public 
Comment concerning its proposed criteria for defining urban and rural 
population. In response to numerous public comments, the Census Bureau 
is reopening the comment period for 30 days. In addition, the Census 
Bureau is including corrections, clarifications, and additional 
information to its original notice.

    Note: None of the following information represents a substantive 
change to the original proposed criteria.

Corrections

    The Census Bureau is providing the following corrections to the 
original notice.
    Page 17018, Column 3, Section I.A.3., fourth line of that section: 
``* * * that are contiguous with the census BGs and census blocks 
identified * * *.'' is corrected to read ``* * * that are contiguous 
with the census BGs identified * * *.'' This correction is being made 
to correct an error that referenced census blocks.
    Page 17019, Column 1, Section I.B., first line of that section: 
``Census BGs and/or census blocks adjacent to a UA or UC core consists 
of the following:'' is corrected to read, ``Census BGs and/or census 
blocks that are noncontiguous to the interim core of a UA or UC (area 
defined by criteria I.A.1. through 7.) may be added to the UA or UC as 
follows:'' This correction is being made to clarify the spatial 
relationship of nearby BGs and census blocks to UA and UC cores by 
using the term ``noncontiguous'' instead of ``adjacent,'' and also to 
provide a better identification of the version of the UA and UC cores 
at this stage of delineation.
    Page 17019, Column 2, Section I.B.2.a.(1), first line of that 
section: ``adjacent to'' is corrected to read ``conjoint with.'' This 
is to clarify the spatial relationship of a qualifying area to a road 
connection.
    Page 17019, Column 2, Section I.B.2.a.(3), fifteenth line of that 
section: ``I.B.1.b.'' is corrected to read ``I.B.2.a.'' This is to 
correct a typographical error.
    Page 17019, Column 2, Section I.B.2.b.(2), ninth line of that 
section: ``I.B.1.b.'' is corrected to read ``I.B.2.b.'' This is to 
correct a typographical error.
    Page 17019, Column 2, Section I.B.2.c., first line of that section: 
``The Census Bureau will include uninhabitable territory to the main 
body of the core or adjacent qualifying territory if the area to 
connect it is within 5 road miles, and as long as the 5 miles include 
no more than 2.5 miles of otherwise habitable territory'' is corrected 
to read, ``The Census Bureau will include additional densely settled 
noncontiguous area in a UA or UC using a connection of up to 5 road 
miles, provided that the connection contains uninhabitable territory 
and that no more than 2.5 miles of the road connection is across 
habitable territory.'' This correction is provided to clarify the 
criteria for linking a qualifying area to a UA or UC core via a jump 
that includes uninhabitable territory.
    Page 17019, Column 2, footnote 6, first line of that footnote: 
``Uninhabitable territory is defined as territory in which residential 
development is not possible; that is, it consists of bodies of water, 
national parks and monuments, and military installations' is corrected 
to read, ``Uninhabitable territory is defined as territory within 
bodies of water, national parks and monuments, and military bases where 
residential development is not possible.'' This correction is provided 
to clarify the definition of uninhabitable territory.
    Page 17019, Column 3, Section I.B.2.c.(2), eighth line of that 
section: ``I.B.1.a.'' is corrected to read ``I.B.2.b.'' This is to 
correct a typographical error.
    Page 17022, Column 1, Section VII.C., first data line in the table: 
``Bristol, VA'' is corrected to read ``Bristol, TN--Bristol, VA.'' This 
is to correct a typographical error.
    Page 17022, Column 1, Section VII.C., second data line in the 
table: ``47,282'' is corrected to read ``37,720.'' This is to correct a 
computation error that mistakenly included population from the St. 
Simons area.
    Page 17022, Column 2, Section VII.A., first line of that section: 
``A.'' is corrected to read ``D.'' This is to correct a typographical 
error.

Clarifications

    In response to many questions regarding the application of the 
criteria, the Census Bureau is providing the following clarifications 
of the proposed criteria.
    Page 17019, Column 1, Section I.A.4.: This section applies to 
building the initial core of a UA or UC by adding blocks with a minimum 
population density of 500 people per square mile (ppsm) to those areas 
that qualify based on the criteria in Sections I.A.1. through 3. To 
clarify, all blocks that have the minimum density of 500 ppsm and are 
contiguous to each other are added in their entirety to the initial 
core, as long as one of these blocks is contiguous to a block or BG 
that qualifies based on the criteria in Sections I.A.1. through 3.

[[Page 39144]]

This clarification is provided because of the number of questions that 
were received regarding how blocks are added to the core.
    Page 17019, Column 1, Sections I.A.5. and I.B.2.: These sections 
make reference to population density criteria. To clarify, all 
calculations of population density for adding noncontiguous areas to a 
UA or UC core include the population and habitable land area of all 
qualifying and linking blocks. This clarification is provided because 
of the number of questions that were received regarding how blocks are 
added to the core via hops and jumps.
    Page 17019, Column 1, Sections I.A.5. and I.B.2.: These sections 
make reference to distance criteria for hops and jumps. To clarify, 
distance measurements are based on measuring the road connection 
between blocks that have a minimum density of 500 ppsm. This 
clarification is provided because of the number of questions that were 
received regarding how hops and jumps are measured.
    Page 17019, Column 1, Section I.B.2.: This section refers to 
``densely settled noncontiguous territory.'' The reference is to the 
blocks that qualify as such, as specified in Section I.B.1. This 
clarification is provided to identify the area referred to as densely 
settled, noncontiguous territory.
    Page 17019, Column 1, Section I.B.2.a.: This section refers to 
adding noncontiguous qualifying area to the main body of a core. To 
clarify, the reference to ``main body'' refers to the area of the core 
that qualifies based on the criteria in Sections I.A.1. through 7. This 
clarification is provided to identify what constitutes a core at this 
point in the delineation process.
    Page 17019, Column 2, Section I.B.2.a.(3): The second paragraph of 
this section refers to the Census Bureau's criteria that place a limit 
of only one jump to noncontiguous qualifying area along the same road 
connection. To clarify, the Census Bureau will permit an additional 
jump for an interim core that has a population of 50,000 or greater 
when the interim core is connected to a larger core via a jump 
connection. This clarification is provided to explain the condition 
under which a second jump may occur.
    Page 17020, Column 2, Section IV.A.: This section contains criteria 
for splitting UAs and specifies that 3 miles is the maximum distance 
for determining if a split can occur. To clarify, the distance is based 
on a straight-line measurement from one edge of the UA to the other 
edge. If a split qualifies, the actual UA boundary will follow block 
boundaries that deviate the least distance from that straight line. 
This clarification is provided to explain how the Census Bureau will 
measure to determine if a narrow section meets part of the UA split 
criteria.

Additional Information

    Page 17019, Column 2, footnote 6: This footnote provides the 
definition of uninhabitable area. The Census Bureau has identified two 
1990 UAs, using 1990 census data, where significant portions of the UAs 
would be excluded under the proposed criteria specified in footnote 6. 
The Arkansas portion (1990 census population, 34,600) of the 1990 
Memphis, TN-AR-MS UA (i.e., potential West Memphis UC) and the Kentucky 
portion (1990 census population, 26,517) of the 1990 Evansville, IN-KY 
UA (i.e., potential Henderson UC) would be excluded from their 
respective UAs. In both cases, the 1990 UA delineation included these 
areas in the UAs by identifying an undevelopable jump where a flood 
plain prohibits development. The proposed criteria do not include flood 
plains in the list of situations that define uninhabitable territory, 
and the distance of the road connections across the flood plains 
(considered as habitable land under the proposed criteria) exceeds the 
maximum standard jump distance of 2.5 miles. While the Kentucky portion 
of the 1990 Evansville UA (i.e., Henderson and surrounding area) and 
the Arkansas portion of the 1990 Memphis UA (i.e., West Memphis and 
surrounding area) do not qualify as UA components by using 1990 data 
and Census 2000 proposed criteria, they do qualify as medium-size UCs 
when applying the aforementioned data and criteria (i.e., UCs with 
populations of 25,000 or greater).
    Page 17020, Column 2, Section IV.: This section specifies the 
criteria to split UAs. Using 1990 census data, the following contiguous 
1990 UAs would be merged because they do not meet all of the conditions 
as specified in the proposed UA split criteria and could not be 
separated into individual UAs:

San Francisco--Oakland, CA/Antioch--Pittsburg, CA
Palm Springs, CA/Indio--Coachella, CA
Simi Valley, CA/Oxnard--Ventura, CA (part) \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under the proposed criteria, using 1990 census data, only 
the eastern portion of the Oxnard--Ventura, CA UA (Agoura Hills, 
Camarillo, Thousand Oaks, and Westlake Village cities) would merge 
with the Simi Valley, CA UA. The remaining western portion of the 
Oxnard--Ventura, CA UA would be a separate UA under the proposed 
criteria. For the 1970 census, the Census Bureau defined the 
Oxnard--Ventura--Thousand Oaks, CA UA because the criteria permitted 
the combining of legal entities into a UA if their boundaries 
touched, which these communities did--and still do. The UA remained 
essentially unchanged for the 1980 and 1990 censuses due to the 
effect of grandfathering criteria that were in effect for the 1980 
and 1990 census delineations. Under the proposed criteria, the two 
sections of the UA cannot be linked, because more than one jump must 
be used to connect the areas; the fact that the corporate limits 
touch is no longer a factor in the delineation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boulder, CO/Longmont, CO
Bridgeport--Milford, CT/New Haven--Meriden, CT/Norwalk, CT/
Stamford, CT--NY
Bristol, CT/Hartford--Middletown, CT/New Britain, CT
Annapolis, MD/Baltimore, MD/Washington, DC--MD--VA
Fort Lauderdale--Hollywood--Pompano Beach, FL/Miami--Hialeah, FL/West 
Palm Beach--Boca Raton--Delray Beach, FL
Fort Pierce, FL/Stuart, FL
Honolulu, HI/Kailua, HI
Aurora, IL/Chicago, IL--Northwestern Indiana/Crystal Lake, IL/Elgin, 
IL/Joliet, IL/Round Lake Beach--McHenry, IL--WI
Boston, MA/Brockton, MA/Lawrence--Haverhill, MA--NH/Lowell, MA--NH/
Taunton, MA
Charlotte, NC/Gastonia, NC
Greensboro, NC/High Point, NC
Cleveland, OH/Lorain--Elyria, OH
Philadelphia, PA--NJ/Wilmington, DE--NJ--MD--PA
Dallas--Fort Worth, TX/Denton, TX/Lewisville, TX
Richmond, VA/Petersburg, VA
Salt Lake City, UT/Ogden, UT
Seattle, WA/Tacoma, WA

    Page 17022, Section VII.C., table: This section lists four 1990 
census UAs that would not qualify as UAs if the proposed criteria were 
applied using 1990 census population data. The Census Bureau has 
identified two additional 1990 UAs that would not qualify under the 
proposed criteria using 1990 census data:
     Lompoc, CA, 1990 UA population 56,591: This area would 
have a 1990 census population of 46,312 by applying the proposed 
criteria. The drop in population is attributed to removing the 
population that was contained on Vandenberg Air Force Base, where all 
of the population resided in large census blocks with population 
densities that were less than the required 500 ppsm.
     Cumberland, MD-WV, 1990 UA population 54,655: This area 
would have a 1990 census population of 40,130 by applying the proposed 
criteria. The drop in population is due primarily to removing the city 
of Frostburg from the UA. The 1990 UA delineation connected Frostburg 
to the Cumberland UA by identifying an ``undevelopable

[[Page 39145]]

jump'' where steep topography impeded development. The proposed 
criteria do not include steep topography in the list of situations that 
define uninhabitable territory.

    Dated: July 23, 2001.
William G. Barron, Jr.,
Acting Director, Bureau of the Census.
[FR Doc. 01-18809 Filed 7-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-U