[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17696-17706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06064]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Census Bureau

15 CFR Part 90

[Docket Number: 230313-0072]
RIN 0607-AA60


Population Estimates Challenge Program

AGENCY: Census Bureau, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) amends the 
regulations for the Population Estimates Challenge Program which will 
provide eligible general-purpose governmental entities (local 
governments) with the opportunity to file requests for the review of 
their population estimates for 2021 and subsequent years in forthcoming 
estimates series, beginning with the Vintage 2022 series that is 
scheduled to be published in 2023. Under this program, a governmental 
unit may file a challenge to its official population estimate by 
submitting additional data to the Census Bureau for evaluation, or by 
identifying a technical error in processing input data or producing the 
estimates. Specifically, the Census Bureau amends its regulations to 
update the regulation's references pertaining to the input data which 
are used to produce the official population estimates and revise the 
evidence required to support a challenge. In this final rule, the 
Census Bureau responds to comments received during the public comment 
period--closed on December 22, 2022--on the notice of proposed 
rulemaking posted in the Federal Register pertaining to ways in which 
the Population Estimates Challenge Program might be improved.

DATES: This final rule is effective on April 24, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information 
should be directed to Amel Toukabri, Chief, Local Government Estimates 
and Migration Processing Branch, Population Division, 301-763-2461 or 
census.gov">POP.challenge@census.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The Census Bureau typically releases annual population estimates, 
in accordance with Title 13 of the United States Code (U.S.C.). These 
estimates are typically based to some extent upon the most recent 
Decennial Census of Population and Housing and compiled from the most 
current administrative and survey data available for that purpose. 
Although not required by any statute, the Census Bureau also typically 
offers an opportunity for local units of general-purpose government 
(hereinafter collectively ``governmental unit'') to challenge these 
official estimates through its Population Estimates Challenge Program. 
Under this program, a governmental unit may challenge its population 
estimate by submitting additional data to the Census Bureau for 
evaluation, or by identifying a technical error in processing input 
data or producing the estimates. If the additional data are accepted 
during the review period by the Census Bureau, resulting in an updated 
population estimate, the Census Bureau will provide a written 
notification to the governmental unit and publish the revised estimate 
at www.census.gov. If the additional data are not accepted for a 
revised estimate, the Census Bureau will notify the governmental unit. 
In the challenge process, the Census Bureau will only accept a 
challenge when the evidence provided indicates the use of incorrect 
data, processes, or calculations in the estimates.
    In this final rule, the Census Bureau amends its regulations to: 
(1) update the regulation's references pertaining to the input data 
which are used to produce the official population estimates, and (2) 
revise the evidence required to support a challenge.
    The Census Bureau also solicited comments from the public about 
ways in which the program might be improved. In particular, the Census 
Bureau welcomed comments about (1) the methodology used in preparing 
the annual Population Estimates, (2) the sources of data that the 
agency considers (or does not consider) in preparing the annual 
Population Estimates, and (3) what sorts of factual

[[Page 17697]]

or methodological arguments the agency considers (or does not consider) 
in evaluating a potential challenge.
    Based on the public comments received, the Census Bureau is 
amending its final rule to: (1) retain the flexibility to accept a 
physical copy of challenge materials rather than exclusively accepting 
digital challenge submissions; and (2) increase communication with 
localities by encouraging the appropriate Federal State Cooperative for 
Population Estimates (FSCPE) members to serve as conduits with local 
governments in the review of pre-release estimates, to the extent that 
this is possible given data confidentiality requirements for pre-
release data. Furthermore, to the extent that research findings 
indicate that additional recommendations/changes support the 
development of accurate estimates and ensure equity for all general-
purpose governmental units, the Census Bureau is open to expanding the 
scope of the Challenge Program. Nonetheless, this is contingent on the 
Population Estimates Program (PEP)'s programmatic capacity, future 
research priorities, and the outcome of such research. For the reasons 
explained below, at least at this time, the Census Bureau is not 
implementing the comments that advocated for an expansion of the 
Program (e.g., the use of more flexible methodology, a wider range of 
data sources to support a challenge, and removal of the county 
control). The Census Bureau intends, however, to study more closely the 
issues raised in those comments, and commits to conducting future 
research that will allow for regular enhancement of the current 
methodologies, and which would improve both the accuracy of the 
population estimates and the Challenge Program.
    Currently, the Census Bureau begins the process of preparing 
population estimates by updating population information from the most 
recent decennial census and other sources with information found in the 
annual administrative records of Federal and State agencies. The 
Federal agencies provide tax records, Medicare records, and some vital 
records and group quarters information. The FSCPE members, designated 
by their respective governors to work in cooperation with the Census 
Bureau's Population Estimates Program to produce population estimates, 
also supply vital statistics and information about group quarters like 
college dorms or prisons.\1\ The Census Bureau combines census base 
data, administrative records, and selected survey data (e.g., data from 
the American Community Survey, American Housing Survey, and the 
Building Permit Survey) to produce current population estimates that 
usually begin with the last decennial census. Additionally, the Census 
Bureau's general-purpose governmental units' population estimates are 
provided to the FSCPE agencies in preliminary form for review and 
comment to resolve data processing issues identified during that 
period. For the purposes of this program, the District of Columbia is 
treated as a statistical equivalent of a county and, therefore, is 
eligible to participate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/about/fscpe.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A major priority for the Census Bureau is balancing the need to use 
the 2020 Census counts at the lowest level of estimates geography as 
the starting point in estimates production with the statutory 
obligation to protect the respondents' confidentiality at every stage 
of the data lifecycle. Since the 1990 Census, the Bureau has added 
``noise''--or variations from the actual count--to the collected data 
to ensure privacy and confidentiality. For 2020 Census data, the Census 
Bureau applied noise using a newer disclosure avoidance technique based 
on ``differential privacy.'' \2\ The Census Bureau uses a housing unit 
method to distribute a county population to places within its legal 
boundaries. The components in this method include housing units 
estimates, average household population per housing unit, and an 
estimate of the population in group quarters. The estimation formula 
was simplified to increase the accuracy of the estimates and minimize 
the impact of differential privacy on the population estimates by 
reducing the number of components requiring privacy protection used to 
generate population estimates. Consequently, the occupancy rate and 
Persons Per Household (PPH) previously used in this method were 
replaced with the average household population per housing unit. The 
household population and the group quarters population used in the 
calculation of the estimate are the only two components subject to 
differential privacy protection compared to the prior three 
components--occupancy rate, PPH, and group quarters population--that 
would have otherwise required privacy protection. Therefore, the PPH 
and occupancy rate components are no longer inputs used to produce 
those population estimates. The distributive housing unit equation used 
to calculate the population estimates for governmental units is 
simplified to accommodate the application of the disclosure avoidance 
technique prior to releasing the estimates. As a result, the Census 
Bureau amends 15 CFR part 90 to revise: (1) the regulation's references 
pertaining to the input data which are used to produce the official 
population estimates, (2) where to file a challenge, and (3) the 
evidence required to support a challenge. These changes are captured in 
the updates to Sec. Sec.  90.2, 90.7, and 90.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For more information about the differential privacy 
technique, visit Understanding Differential Privacy (census.gov).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Previously, the Census Bureau published a final rule on January 9, 
2020, in the Federal Register (85 FR 1100) to announce that the Census 
Bureau would temporarily suspend the Population Estimates Challenge 
Program to accommodate the taking of the 2020 Census and subsequent 
review and evaluation activities. Efforts to resume the program were 
delayed in response to the changes to the operational schedule for the 
2020 Census which occurred due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. 
The Census Bureau followed the suspension of the Population Estimates 
Challenge Program with two Federal Register documents published on 
November 22, 2022. A document was posted in the Federal Register (87 FR 
71240), entitled ``Resumption of the Population Estimates Challenge 
Program,'' which resumed the suspended program to provide eligible 
entities the opportunity to file requests for the review of population 
estimates for 2021 and subsequent years beginning with the Vintage \3\ 
2022 series that is scheduled to be published in 2023. That rule also 
made clear that challenges to previous estimates series (for which the 
90-day limitations period set forth in 15 CFR 90.6 had long since 
elapsed) would not be accepted. The resumption document did not 
implement revisions to the program or its requirements. On November 22, 
2022, the Census Bureau published another notice of proposed rulemaking 
in the Federal Register (87 FR 71269) for its program, entitled 
``Resumption of the Population Estimates Challenge Program and Proposed 
Changes to the Program.'' In that announcement, the Census Bureau 
solicited comments from the public about ways in which the program 
might be improved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Annually, PEP revises and updates the entire time series of 
estimates from April 1, 2020 to July 1 of the year for which the 
estimates are published which is referred to as the vintage year. 
The term ``vintage'' is used to denote the entire time series 
created with a consistent population starting point and methodology.

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

[[Page 17698]]

    The proposal was available for comment during a 30-day period that 
ended on December 22, 2022. The Census Bureau has now reviewed these 
comments and responded to them in this final rule.

Summary of Comments and Responses

    The Census Bureau received 13 comments during the comment period 
pertaining to 11 separate topics. The contents of these recommendation 
received can be categorized according to a few main themes: (1) 
improving the Population Estimates Challenge process; (2) allowing the 
use of more flexible methodologies and a wider range of sources of data 
in both preparation of the annual population estimates and in challenge 
submissions, while increasing experts' participation such as through 
additional involvement from the FSCPE; and (3) investing in continuous 
research to improve the accuracy of the population estimates with a 
focus on the estimates base and the group quarters population. A 
summary of these comments and the detailed responses by the Census 
Bureau are provided below:

Comments Theme: Population Estimates Challenge Program Rulemaking

Topic 1. An Expansion of the Scope of the Challenge Program

    Several commenters favored a challenge program that actively 
encourages participation and is open to considering a wider variety of 
data sources than is currently accepted. Many suggested that the 
program accept data sources typically available to or curated by 
localities, such as (but not limited to) electric utilities, address 
lists, public school enrollment data, and local property tax records. 
Yet, these commenters also noted that an expanded challenge program 
will stretch the capacity of PEP.
    Commenters also acknowledged that revisions based on local 
government input or alternative methodologies do not always improve 
estimation accuracy, and so standards need to be maintained for 
accepting data in support of challenges. As an example of such 
criteria, it was recommended that the Census Bureau consider whether 
the alternative population estimate is developed by ``a methodology 
and/or data set that appears in and is used consistently within the 
applied demography literature?'' Then, in instances where that is not 
the case, ``does the locality provide research on the validity of that 
data set and why this methodology works better, and do applied 
demographers (at the Census Bureau or elsewhere) agree with the 
findings?''
    Even if a revision improves accuracy, commenters cited the 
potential for it to introduce other issues, such as questions of 
equity: challenges are issued seeking a higher population estimate, but 
not all jurisdictions have the resources to file a challenge and 
identify the necessary supporting evidence. Thus, governments with the 
resources to challenge could be in a position to receive greater shares 
of population and corresponding funding, possibly to the detriment of 
jurisdictions that do not challenge, perhaps due to fewer resources 
(e.g., many localities lack the technology, infrastructure, and/or 
expertise needed to compile, analyze, and present data in a manner that 
meets the foregoing requirements). Commenters emphasized that an 
expanded challenge program needs to be mindful of such concerns.
    Response 1.
    The Census Bureau recognizes that potential expansion of the scope 
of the Population Estimates Challenge Program could be beneficial, 
although specific changes are contingent on PEP's future research 
priorities and findings. Furthermore, PEP not only maintains that 
methodologies considered should be consistent with or advance applied 
demography literature, but also acknowledges the efficacy of engaging 
and sharing findings with outside experts to enhance PEP's challenge 
decision-making process. As we define and progress in research 
impacting the Challenge Program, this will be a priority for PEP.
    PEP is open to expanding the scope of the Challenge Program where 
science indicates that such changes support more accurate estimates and 
ensure equity for all general-purpose governmental units and the 
public. The Census Bureau is also considering alternative data sources, 
including administrative records, and methodologies for estimates 
production. This work is being led by the Base Evaluation and Research 
Team (BERT), which is tasked with researching the feasibility of taking 
coverage measures and/or administrative data into account in the 
development of the estimates base. Accordingly, the Census Bureau will 
explore the issues raised in the comments more closely in the future 
and will continue to consider possible ways to improve the Challenge 
Program. Until the results of these efforts suggest revisions to our 
approach, we foresee no changes in response to these comments at this 
time.

Topic 2. Challenge Process Recommendations

    Comment 2.1 One commenter expressed concern that the proposed 
changes to the Challenge Program would require that jurisdictions file 
challenges solely through email and would eliminate the option of 
submitting a ``hard copy'' of challenge materials through the U.S. 
postal service or some similar delivery option. The commenter urged the 
bureau to retain the latter option on behalf of localities that still 
lack email access through broadband technology and are thus unable to 
electronically send large document files quickly and easily-- 
particularly in remote or rural areas of the country.
    Response 2.1 The Census Bureau will still maintain the ability to 
receive a hard copy of challenge materials through the U.S. postal 
service, recognizing the need to retain the option of submitting a 
physical copy, rather than exclusively accepting digital submissions.
    Comment 2.2 Many commenters commended the Census Bureau for 
explicitly specifying in the proposed regulations that a phone number 
and email address will be provided for questions that localities may 
have about the Challenge Program. They also urged the Census Bureau to 
ensure that there is sufficient staffing to provide prompt responses 
through either of these modes to inquiries made by localities.
    Response 2.2 The Challenge Program staff in PEP prioritizes the 
experience of localities and the challenge process and routinely 
responds to inquiries (i.e., email, written requests, or telephone 
calls) in a timely manner. Additionally, as part of our commitment to 
continuous improvement, we will seek opportunities to further 
streamline the process of responding through all available modes.
    Comment 2.3 Several commenters indicated that a more robust and 
improved population estimates challenge process would likely result in 
a higher volume of requests. Thus, the commenters stated that the 
Census Bureau must provide the necessary resources, including adequate 
staffing, to meet this need. In any event, the Census Bureau should not 
be in a position to use lack of staffing or staffing hours as a reason 
for limiting appeals moving forward.
    Response 2.3. The Census Bureau concurs that increases in the 
challenge process will lead to incremental stresses on existing 
capacity. Consistent with our continuous improvement activities,

[[Page 17699]]

we are reviewing both the response process and resource flexibilities 
to facilitate the processing and turnaround time of a challenge while 
retaining the integrity of the challenge review process.
    Comment 2.4 Numerous commenters also recommended a ``change in 
nomenclature'' to replace Challenge Program, which described as an 
``adversarial term.'' To represent that successful challenges are the 
result of a cooperative partnership with local stakeholders to improve 
population estimates, a term that reflects the spirit of cooperation 
engendered by the new program should be used. One such suggestion was 
``Improvement Program.''
    Response 2.4 The Census Bureau acknowledges that successful 
challenges should be properly viewed as the result of a cooperative 
partnership with local stakeholders to improve population estimates. 
However, the current name of the Population Estimates Challenge Program 
encompasses a longstanding relationship and history, and so 
alternatives--as well as the best means to potentially transition to a 
new name for the program--must be carefully considered. For example, a 
name change might make it difficult for local governments to easily 
find the necessary information if they are interested in challenging 
their population estimates, particularly the ones with fewer resources. 
We will include this possibility in future discussions with 
stakeholders and the public to determine the feasibility and benefit of 
this proposed change.
    Comment 2.5 Commenters were also concerned that the 30-day comment 
period on the proposed regulations was too short, preferring at least 
60 days for comment on an issue of this significance, arguing that a 
longer comment period would have enhanced the quality of feedback and 
helped demonstrate a more consistent approach to advancing stakeholder 
engagement.
    Response 2.5 Although a longer comment period would have been more 
convenient for some, it was not possible to extend the comment period 
without jeopardizing PEP's ability to process and respond to comments 
received and subsequently update program materials accordingly in 
advance of the release of the upcoming Vintage 2022 county population 
estimates, which will be subject to challenge within 90 days of their 
release.
    Comment 2.6 Other commenters stated that with more resources and by 
embedding the call for feedback on methodology and data sources into 
the challenge program, there would be more opportunities to raise 
awareness of alternative methods and data sources and implement 
methodology changes to improve the estimates program.
    Response 2.6 The Census Bureau recognizes the importance of 
providing a mechanism for methodological feedback and input on data 
sources. So as to enable the Challenge Program staff to focus their 
time on processing challenges according to the program guidelines in 
place at that time, the Census Bureau is ensuring that this type of 
feedback may be shared via other means. In particular, BERT has created 
a dedicated email address, census.gov">pop.bert@census.gov, to provide stakeholders 
with an avenue for sharing ideas relating to alternative data sources 
or methodologies. This email address is currently active and will be 
advertised to localities as a destination for data and methodology 
suggestions relevant to their specific area.
    Comment 2.7  Multiple commenters recommended that the FSCPE members 
more directly serve as conduits with local governments in the review of 
estimates in a pre-release format and to coordinate challenges. To more 
effectively have direct rather than secondary input into the production 
and review of the data, it was stated that FSCPE State representatives 
should have Special Sworn Status.
    Response 2.7  The Census Bureau has already been actively 
consulting with the FSCPE member agencies regarding the Challenge 
Program. Additionally, PEP encourages the appropriate FSCPE members to 
serve as conduits with local governments in the review of pre-release 
estimates, to the extent that this is possible given data 
confidentiality requirements for pre-release data. A Memorandum of 
Agreement governs the partnership between the Census Bureau and the 
State agencies. The current agreements are set to expire in 2024, at 
which point it is anticipated that the agreements will be revised and 
renewed. During that renewal process, PEP will initiate discussions 
about the feasibility, expectations and responsibilities of the Census 
Bureau and the FSCPE members pertaining to annual data review.
    Comment 2.8  Many of the commenters recommended that the Census 
Bureau keep external partners apprised of challenge requests that are 
occurring, decisions that have been made on challenges, and areas of 
concern about the challenge process on a regular basis, suggesting that 
this information sharing occurs through presentations to the Census 
Scientific Advisory Committee (CSAC). They also advised the Census 
Bureau to increase its communications about the challenge process to be 
more inclusive of all governmental units (especially small towns and 
cities), supporting the recent recommendation by the CSAC that the 
Census Bureau conduct webinars on the ability of local governments to 
improve statistics by partnering with the Census Bureau in the 
Population Estimates Challenge Program and Special Censuses.
    Response 2.8  The Census Bureau concurs with this recommendation. 
PEP strives to make timely information readily available to its State 
partners in the FSCPE via the regular monthly meetings of the Steering 
Committee, Research and Methods Subcommittee, and Data Input 
Subcommittee, in addition to the twice-yearly meetings with the full 
membership. It has been the practice of the Challenge Program to keep 
the FSCPE members aware of any challenge requests in their States and 
to officially share the challenge outcomes. We plan to continue with 
this practice and further expand the outreach to other interested 
stakeholders, such as the CSAC via briefings and presentations. Another 
venue PEP is exploring to improve communication is the development of a 
video which would walk local governments through the process of 
submitting a challenge, and which would be supplemental to the 
Population Estimates Challenge Program Guide already made available on 
its website (www.census.gov).

Topic 3. Subcounty Estimation Formula and Updates to the Persons-per-
Household and Occupancy Rates

    At the subcounty level, numerous commenters argued that the Census 
Bureau's recent decision to eliminate vacancy [occupancy] and person-
per-household (PPH) rates by combining them into ``average population 
per housing unit'' is inconsistent with the literature on how to 
produce accurate population estimates. They recommended that the Census 
Bureau reverse this decision.
    One commenter urged the Census Bureau to ensure that the 
replacement in the estimation formula of the PPH and occupancy rate 
components with the average household population per housing unit does 
not have a detrimental impact on the accuracy of estimates produced for 
localities with undercounted populations and inform the public of 
analyses that demonstrate that outcome.
    Additionally, several commenters recommended that the Census Bureau 
should allow cities and other governmental units to challenge the April 
1, 2020 population base used for

[[Page 17700]]

the annual estimates with all relevant, reliable data, especially with 
respect to housing occupancy/vacancy and PPH rates. Furthermore, many 
commenters recommended that the Bureau should accept revisions to these 
components as part of the Challenge Program if a locality can provide 
reasonable and sufficient evidence of change.
    The recommendations suggested some methods that the Census Bureau 
may research in order to develop post-Census Day PPH and occupancy 
components, such as the expanded, modeled, or indexed use of IRS filer 
and exemption data at the sub-county (place or minor civil division) 
level; the use of local street address listings or local annual town 
Censuses, where available; USPS data; and the use of other State or 
local administrative records, including school or program enrollment 
information; or other high-quality data sources.
    Response 3.
    PEP combined the occupancy and PPH components to adhere to the 
Census Bureau's modernized disclosure avoidance requirements which are 
designed to protect the confidentiality of respondents. By combining 
PPH and occupancy into the average population per housing unit, the 
number of terms in the distributive housing unit equation subject to 
the application of differentially private noise was minimized, 
subsequently minimizing the impact of the noise on the estimates and 
maximizing their overall accuracy.
    Furthermore, whereas PEP recognizes that the ``average household 
population per housing unit'' ratio may not be a standard demographic 
measure, the new formula is mathematically equivalent to the old 
version where the ``Occupied Housing Units total'' in the first 
numerator and second denominator in line (2) shown below cancel each 
other out. Thus, the formula in use is a simplified version of the 
previous formula which no longer requires housing characteristics 
measures such as the occupancy and PPH. Replacing the PPH and occupancy 
rate with the ``average household population per housing unit'' does 
not structurally change the formula; therefore, the replacement will 
not introduce additional error to the population estimates.

Where:

SUBCO RESPOPt: Subcounty resident population total at 
time t
HUt: Housing unit total at time t
OCC RateBase year: Occupancy Rate at base year
HHPOPt: Household population total at time t
GQPOPt: Group quarters population total at time t

Consequently, there is no foundation for the commenter's concern as 
both the previous and updated equations result in the same subcounty 
household population value for a specific subcounty area.
    Although occupancy rates and PPH no longer factor into the 
calculation of subcounty population, PEP will consider conducting 
research on whether local PPH and occupancy data may be submitted in a 
subcounty challenge as an alternative to the 2020 Census household 
population per housing unit ratio used in the distributive household 
equation. Pending the research findings, this could be a potential 
mechanism to challenge the data in the April 1, 2020 population 
estimates base. Beyond that, the possibility of challenging the 
estimates base at the subcounty level would be contingent on 
identifying alternative sources of data which were of sufficient 
quality to serve as replacements for the other population components 
drawn from the Census results.
    At the county level of geography and above, it is not feasible to 
break down the base population into challengeable components, as it is 
created by integrating results from the 2020 Census, 2020 Demographic 
Analysis estimates, and Vintage 2020 estimates. As such, challenges to 
the population estimates base must remain out of scope.
    The Census Bureau appreciates the research ideas contributed by the 
commenters. To enhance the accuracy and reliability of the subsequent 
estimates, and to contribute to a longer-term goal of continuous 
improvement in the estimation processing, PEP will explore the 
practicability of the suggested research topics.

Topic 4. Re-Evaluate the Use of the County Control and Revisit HUBERT 
Research

    Numerous commenters recommended that the Census Bureau re-evaluate 
the use of the county control (or what some commenters referred to as a 
``county cap'') when processing sub-county population estimates 
challenges. Some argued that adhering to the control creates a 
situation whereby governments with the resources to successfully 
challenge receive greater shares of population and resultant funding, 
to the detriment of jurisdictions that do not challenge, perhaps 
because they have fewer resources.
    Various commenters suggested that research led by the Census 
Bureau's Housing Unit-Based Research Estimates Team (HUBERT) in 2007 to 
2008 be revisited and updated. This research program assessed whether, 
for some counties, a housing unit-based method of calculating 
population change at the county level was more effective than the 
cohort-component method used by the Census Bureau. The commenters 
highlighted how the Census Bureau has relied on the HUBERT research for 
many of its current decisions about data and methods used in the 
production of its annual population estimates.
    Pending an update of the HUBERT research, several commenters 
recommended that the Census Bureau utilize the findings from the 
original HUBERT research to:
     identify the 30% of counties that were more accurately 
estimated using HUM than the cohort-component approach;
     identify the characteristics of the counties that are 
better estimated by the HUM; and
     use that information to classify all counties and apply 
the method that is more accurate for each county type.
    Response 4.
    The Census Bureau recognizes that more current, in-depth research 
is needed to reevaluate the use of the county control for the 
incorporation of successful challenges. While no changes in response to 
this comment are being made at this time, PEP plans to update HUBERT 
research with current data and examine the impact of the county control 
to inform future changes to the methodology. When possible, PEP intends 
to research the feasibility and logistics of this change to ascertain 
if it is methodologically sound, including soliciting input from our 
FSCPE partners.

Comments Theme: Population Estimates Program

Topic 5. Investing in the Population Estimates Program and Ongoing 
Stakeholder Input

    Numerous commenters stated that PEP has limited capacity to execute 
much needed, updated research. Therefore, they proposed an expansion 
and additional investment in PEP and in the FSCPE partnership. Many 
commenters urged the Census Bureau to make improving the population 
estimates a high priority and work to increase the resources necessary 
by reallocating or requesting additional resources to support a 
continuous year-round estimates research program throughout the decade.
    Several commenters also advised to build and maintain collaborative

[[Page 17701]]

relationships throughout the decade with State, local and Tribal 
governments to take in additional anonymized official datasets to 
improve the estimates, and to seek ongoing stakeholder input, both from 
government entities as well as from other organizations.
    Many commenters recommended that the Department of Commerce provide 
a modest level of direct funding to every FSCPE representative so that 
every State can participate. At present, the effort is defined by a 
Memorandum of Agreement under which some States fund their 
participation, while others do not. This arrangement leads to some 
States participating actively in the FSCPE and others participating at 
extremely low levels or not at all.
    Response 5.
    The Census Bureau concurs with the importance of ensuring 
continuous research on population estimates related topics throughout 
the decade. In fact, planning and conducting prioritized research on an 
annual basis are ingrained in PEP's mission and construct a vital phase 
typically carried out after the conclusion and release of population 
estimates series, and before the new estimates production cycle starts. 
This yearly research cycle has been and will continue to be a priority 
for PEP, allowing for regular enhancement of the current methodologies 
used to improve the population estimates' accuracy, while approving a 
limited number of research topics to work on annually that are 
manageable by PEP and defer the remaining list of research topics to 
future years.
    The Census Bureau acknowledges the value and significance of the 
partnership with FSCPE State agencies and their role in producing high-
quality estimates products. The Census Bureau also concurs that it 
would be beneficial to engage with the FSCPE partners to explore 
creative and effective means to benefit from their local knowledge and 
suggestions, beyond what is currently done. PEP believes that the 
efficacy of the partnership is enhanced by robust participation across 
the country.
    PEP continues to explore ways to enhance outreach and increase 
current States' participation through the FSCPE partnership to provide 
local data inputs that are consistent with PEP's current methodologies 
for use in the annual estimates production such as housing unit 
components of change, vital statistics records, and group quarters 
reporting. For example, PEP will collaborate with more active States 
and seek input from less active States to identify options to encourage 
more participation. Additionally, PEP has created an email address 
associated with the BERT research_census.gov">pop.bert@census.gov--which could be 
advertised to localities as a destination for data and methodology 
suggestions relevant to their specific area.

Topic 6. Ways To Improve the Population Estimates

    Some commenters recommended that the Census Bureau consider more 
flexible methodologies (e.g., allow for probabilistic modeling in 
addition to demographic accounting methods) and broader use of 
administrative data to ensure meaningful opportunities to improve the 
accuracy of the estimates including appropriate improvements to the 
estimates base. Several commenters specifically recommended that ``the 
Census Bureau move from using just one method to estimate the total 
population of States and counties (cohort component method), to using 
multiple methods to produce the State and county estimates more 
accurately.'' They also suggested that ``the Census Bureau allow 
targeted, localized methods that do not apply to the entire country if 
they improve local accuracy.'' At the subcounty level, some commenters 
recommended the Census Bureau use its new research on Construction 
Starts \4\ based on artificial intelligence and satellite imagery as 
inputs for the number of housing units in HUM \5\ estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Econ Current Surveys Update Construction Re-engineering 
(census.gov).
    \5\ HUM: Distributive housing unit-based methodology, which is 
used by PEP to produce subcounty population estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Many commenters recommended that the Census Bureau conduct research 
on the efficacy of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) return data in 
reflecting overall migration patterns. They also suggested 
``researching the use of United States Postal Service Change of Address 
data for permanent moves to be incorporated into the estimated 
migration rates.''
    Response 6.
    The Census Bureau's ability to implement flexible/multiple 
methodologies and the use of a broader array of data sources is 
contingent upon two major components: first, ensure the capacity to 
conduct research on the proposed methodology and adhere to PEP's 
scientific and methodological principles; and second, the outcome of 
the methodological research. New methods must be found to be sound 
(based on solid reasoning respectful of the attributes of the input 
data as they relate to the estimation tasks), accountable 
(understandable and replicable), robust (insensitive to small 
departures from assumptions, reasonably accurate under changing 
demographic conditions), parsimonious (reflecting a simpler strategy 
versus a more complex one whenever possible), and to produce valid 
results.
    Given the vast range of individual geographies for which PEP 
produces estimates, we prefer methods and data that can be applied to 
entities across a geographic or multiple geographic levelsbased on the 
principle of parsimony and the accuracy and equity of the results. This 
is an important distinction because it underscores how differential 
methods across a geographic level are significantly labor-intensive to 
incorporate and require substantially longer time so as to enable PEP 
to research and test alternative methods and data to ensure equitable 
accuracy of population estimates across geographies).
    PEP will research the feasibility and logistics of alternative 
methods, including investigating how new and current research taking 
place at the Census Bureau, such as the efforts underway to modernize 
construction indicators, can be leveraged to improve the accuracy and 
reliability of the estimates. Accordingly, although no changes in 
response to this comment are being made at this time, the Census Bureau 
will continue to conduct research and consider possible ways to improve 
the Challenge Program and population estimates.
    Assessing the quality of the data is of the utmost importance in 
PEP's estimates production cycle. Therefore, PEP first evaluates time 
series of IRS filing statistics to identify any data quality issues 
that need to be addressed. PEP already makes use of the United States 
Postal Service (USPS) National Change of Address (NCOA) data as a 
benchmark to assess the quality of the IRS-based migration rates, and 
to validate permanent moves. Additionally, PEP compares migration 
trends between IRS and NCOA data to capture changes in domestic 
migration patterns across the country and particularly in disaster-hit 
counties.

Topic 7. The Estimation of Group Quarters Population

    Some commenters specifically supported PEP's ongoing research on 
alternative methods and data sources as it pertains to the estimation 
of group quarters populations. One of the commenters echoed the recent 
recommendation by the CSAC that the Census Bureau should collect group 
quarters lists by individual facility and include capacity and 
attendance information from FSCPE members for

[[Page 17702]]

the estimates base and throughout the decade.
    Response 7.
    The Census Bureau welcomes and concurs with the suggestion of 
continuous research on alternative methods and data sources for the 
estimation of the group quarters population. For instance, the 2020 
Post-Census Group Quarters Review (PCGQR) operation--unique to this 
decade--was created in response to public feedback to improve the 
counts of specific GQs. This program improves the accuracy of the GQ 
population in the estimates base: if the PCGQR review process finds 
discrepancies in these population counts supported by sufficient 
documentation, approved revisions to the group quarters population are 
provided to PEP. These updates are incorporated into the base 
population for upcoming vintages of estimates, as the production 
schedule allows.
    Additionally, the Census Bureau concurs with the recommendation to 
coordinate with the FSCPE regarding contents of their future Group 
Quarters Report data that they provide to PEP on an annual basis.

Topic 8. Re-Evaluate the ``College Fix'' in Estimates Production

    Referencing the current methodology for the annual population 
estimates, two commenters encouraged the Census Bureau to re-evaluate 
the criteria used for ``College Fix'' counties. PEP's application of a 
``college fix'' in the estimates is used to improve the estimates for 
counties with high shares of college-enrolled population, which would 
otherwise erroneously be ``aged forward'' within the cohort-component 
methodology. Instead, the ``college fix'' allows this population to be 
replaced each year by the newly incoming students, producing a more 
demographically reasonable age structure for that population. The 
commenters note that this adjustment is particularly needed because the 
sources used to directly capture migration in the estimates, namely IRS 
data, have proven less effective for capturing the migration of 
college-aged cohorts--``a phenomenon that is easily demonstrated by 
looking at Census-to-Census survival of these cohorts as versus 
populations estimated using IRS data.''
    Response 8.
    The Census Bureau concurs with the recommendation to re-evaluate 
the College Fix criteria and overall method to ensure the 
reasonableness of the resulting population estimates for affected 
counties. Therefore, to contribute to a longer-term goal of continuous 
improvement in the estimation processing, PEP will seek to include this 
research on the College Fix.

Comments Theme: Coverage and Improving Census Base Population

Topic 9. Inaccurate Estimates Due to Undocumented Immigration

    The commenter stated that ``the U.S. Census will continue to be 
inaccurate as long as there is uncontrolled illegal immigration due to 
the wide-open southern border,'' referencing ``thousands of `got-aways' 
in 2022 alone.'' The comment asserts that these individuals secure 
alternative living situations which result in their omittance from the 
census count. Additionally, the commentor maintains that the U.S. 
Census limits data collection to ``safe suburban environments'' to the 
exclusion of ``urban, violent areas,'' leading to inaccurate population 
counts for cities.
    Response 9.
    The goal of the Census Bureau is a complete and accurate census. 
The U.S. Constitution requires the census to count every resident in 
the nation. During the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau went to great 
lengths to count everyone, including people residing in housing units, 
including apartments and mobile homes; people in complex living 
situations; people who live or stay in a group living arrangement; and 
those experiencing homelessness. This included counting people where 
they received services, outdoors, and at other locations where they are 
known to sleep. The Census Bureau understood that many noncitizens were 
fearful that participating in the census could expose them and their 
families to harm, so the bureau continued working with trusted voices 
in local communities to encourage people to participate. We also hired 
locally, and our staff collectively spoke dozens of languages.
    The Census Bureau's Community Partnership and Engagement Program 
(CPEP) had 18 distinct initiatives that further enhanced focus on 
historically hard-to-count populations. One of those initiatives was 
the Foreign-Born and Immigrant Program. The CPEP specialists were 
placed locally on the basis of low-response score and population 
density. The specialists focused on local engagement and outreach, and 
specialized in languages specific to historically hard-to-count 
populations in their local community. The 2020 Census was the first 
census where everyone could respond online, by phone, or by mail. 
Census takers made in-person visits to every household that did not 
respond via one of these methods to make sure people who lived there 
were counted. These visits were made across the country, in all of the 
urban, suburban, and rural areas where people live. The Census Bureau 
also conducted a robust Integrated Communications Campaign to reach 
everyone living in the United States with information on how the 2020 
Census was easy, safe, and important. The cornerstone of this effort 
was a research-based communications campaign that covered all levels of 
geography.
    As a result, the findings from the Census Bureau's official 
coverage evaluations indicate that young children aged 0 to 4, the 
Black or African American population, the American Indian and Alaska 
Native population--especially on reservations--and the Hispanic 
population were likely undercounted in the 2020 Census. The Census 
Bureau takes these findings very seriously and is working to mitigate 
these issues in the 2030 Census. For example, in 2022, the Census 
Bureau formed the Young Children Working Group, which focuses on the 
coverage of young children and improving data on this population. In 
addition, the Census Bureau formed a separate working group in 2023 
focused on researching ways to improve the coverage of other 
Historically Undercounted Populations (HUPs). The Census Bureau is 
actively conducting outreach to stakeholders, partners and community 
organizations to expand and strengthen a trusted messenger ecosystem 
across the nation.

Topic 10. Persistent Undercounts in 2020 Census, Misallocation of 
Federal Funding, and Improving the Census Base

    Several of the comments were related to the issue of correcting 
undercounts that persisted in the 2020 Census, emphasizing that 
undercounts misdirect Federal and State funding. Although the April 1, 
2020 population estimates base has been identified as a possible 
mechanism for mitigating undercounts, many commenters acknowledged that 
the expectation for the estimates to compensate for coverage errors in 
a multi-billion-dollar census to achieve a fairer distribution of funds 
might be unrealistic.
    Various commenters suggested that the Census Bureau should research 
the best ways to make coverage adjustments, determine the feasibility 
of incorporating administrative data sources while maintaining quality 
standards, and build in an opportunity for feedback before final 
decisions around the base population are made. Furthermore, numerous 
commenters

[[Page 17703]]

expressed support for a continuation of the Census Bureau's efforts to 
research population base enhancements, but recommended the research 
examine possible adjustments at a more local level (e.g., adjusting age 
distributions in the estimates base by county, rather than applying the 
same distribution adjustment equally to every county across the 
country). Additionally, a few commenters advised the BERT research to 
make use of existing administrative records files and the Census 
Bureau's Frames Program to improve the accuracy of baseline data. Most 
commenters strongly supported the Census Bureau's creation of BERT and 
expressed ongoing support of their work.
    Other commenters noted that the 2020 Post-Enumeration Survey (PES), 
one of the Census Bureau's official coverage measures, is not 
sufficiently robust for adjusting undercounts at the local level. They 
recommended improving the estimates base by adjusting State-level 
counts using PES State-level results and then incorporating 
administrative data from programs such as Medicaid; the Supplemental 
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP); the Special Supplemental Nutrition 
Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC); etc. to distribute the 
increased or decreased population to the counties within each State.
    A collection of commenters also suggested that the total population 
in the April 1, 2020 estimates base no longer be restricted by the 
total population from the 2020 Census counts, due to the risk of 
underestimating children in some locations and inflating estimates of 
children in other locations, potentially at the expense of other age 
cohorts.
    Response 10.
    The Census Bureau appreciates the expression of support for BERT 
and the team's efforts to build the most accurate estimates base 
possible. BERT has specifically been formed to research the feasibility 
of taking coverage measures such as the PES, Demographic Analysis (DA) 
and other administrative records into account in the development of the 
estimates base. Moving forward, BERT's research findings will inform 
decisions about what 2020 Census data or administrative sources are 
used in the development of the estimates base, and whether there are 
adjustments that can be made to the Census data used in the base which 
could be applied in equitable, methodologically sound, and 
demographically plausible ways. As such, this research entails a 
careful evaluation of all data sources which would potentially be used 
to enhance or adjust the estimates base so that data (including the 
coverage measures from PES and DA) are not used in ways that extend 
beyond their design capacity. The research also includes assessing the 
impact of the blended estimates base on specific populations, such as 
the population of children, to ensure that the way the sources are 
combined in the estimates base produces the likeliest distribution by 
demographic characteristics.
    Moreover, the BERT research includes collaboration with other 
administrative records-based projects underway at the Census Bureau, 
such as the demographic frame developed by the Frames Program. These 
joint efforts will lend insight into the suitability of administrative 
data sources for researching coverage issues. This includes the 
potential to target specific populations or geographies, including the 
possibility of developing differential adjustments at subnational 
geographic levels.
    The BERT research is a prime example of how we are striving to 
mitigate coverage issues, and the work being undertaken by this team is 
a major priority for the Census Bureau.

Theme: Other Comments

Topic 11. Availability of BERT's Research Plans and Results

    Commenters recommended that the Census Bureau make publicly 
available:
    a. A detailed research schedule for each BERT subject matter 
component.
    b. A detailed representation of BERT's short-, medium- and long-
term goals and key decision points.
    c. Its evaluations of how specific decisions on population and 
housing base adjustments impact final statistics for States and sub-
State areas.
    d. Methodological reviews solicited by the Bureau from external 
researchers on BERT, PEP, and any potential application of privacy 
protection impacting PEP.
    Response 11.
    The Census Bureau acknowledges the importance of transparency 
regarding the work of BERT to the extent possible given the nature of 
the research. We will be seizing upon promising findings as our 
research progresses, and this will vary from one specific approach to 
the next. As such, it is neither advisable nor prudent to adhere to a 
strict, detailed research schedule by subject matter component. The 
research process will evolve as findings and insights emerge. With this 
in mind, BERT has distinct plans to promote transparency and 
disseminate information. These include regular public briefings as well 
as a dedicated email address, census.gov">pop.bert@census.gov, which provides 
stakeholders with a mechanism for sharing ideas relating to data 
sources or methodology, or to request information.

Changes From Proposed Rule

    The following are changes to the Challenge Program procedures 
resulting from the public comments received:
    (1) One commenter requested that the Census Bureau provide for some 
flexibility in the rule to allow submission of a physical copy of 
challenge materials through the U.S. postal service or some similar 
delivery option, rather than exclusively accepting digital submissions. 
The Census Bureau acknowledged the issue and agreed to implement 
appropriate language in Sec.  90.7 to address the request, and specify 
in the ``Population Estimates Challenge Review Guide'' a physical 
address where local governments could submit challenge materials to the 
Census Bureau for review and evaluation.
    (2) Many commenters advised to allow the FSCPE members to serve as 
conduits with local governments in the review of pre-release estimates. 
The Census Bureau encourages the designated FSCPE agency in each State 
to serve in that role to the extent possible given data confidentiality 
requirements for pre-release data and has added specific language to 
Sec.  90.9 to reflect the Census Bureau's intent.
    (3) The Census Bureau amended Sec.  90.9 to address local 
governments' demand for increased communications about the challenge 
process to be more inclusive of all governmental units (especially 
small towns and cities).

Summary of Provisions Implemented by This Final Rule

    In November of 2022, The Census Bureau resumed the Population 
Estimates Challenge Program to provide governmental units the 
opportunity to challenge population estimates for 2021 and subsequent 
years in forthcoming estimates series, beginning with the Vintage 2022 
series that is scheduled to be published in 2023. The Census Bureau now 
amends its regulations to: (1) ensure that the regulatory text more 
accurately describes how the Population Estimates Challenge Program has 
always functioned and is expected to function in the future; (2) update 
the regulation's references pertaining to the input data which are used 
to produce the official population estimates; and (3) allow the 
designated FSCPE agencies in each State to serve as conduits with local 
governments in the review of pre-release estimates, to the extent 
possible given

[[Page 17704]]

data confidentiality requirements for pre-release data. These changes 
are captured in the proposed updates to Sec. Sec.  90.2, 90.7, 90.8, 
and 90.9. At this time, the Census Bureau is making no technical 
changes to its regulations except in the sections noted below:

    Sections 90.2 and 90.7--to ensure that the regulatory text more 
accurately describes how the Population Estimates Challenge Program 
has always functioned and is expected to function in the future. 
This proposed clarification does not reflect any operational 
changes.
    Section 90.8--to update the challengeable components of change.
    Section 90.9--to allow the designated FSCPE agencies in each 
State to serve as conduits with local governments in the review of 
pre-release estimates, to the extent possible given data 
confidentiality requirements for pre-release data.

    The Census Bureau in Section Sec.  90.2 revises its policy which is 
to provide the most accurate population estimates possible given the 
constraints of resources and available statistical techniques. It is 
also the policy of the Census Bureau, to the extent feasible, to 
provide governmental units the opportunity to seek a review of and 
provide additional data for these estimates and to present evidence 
relating to the accuracy of the estimates.
    The Census Bureau in Sec.  90.7 updates information about where to 
file a challenge for the governmental units that would like to initiate 
a challenge process after the population estimates are posted on the 
Census Bureau's website (www.census.gov). A request for a population 
estimates challenge must be prepared in writing by the governmental 
unit and filed with the Chief, Population Division, Census Bureau by 
sending the request via email to census.gov">POP.challenge@census.gov or to a 
physical address that the Census Bureau will specify in the updated 
version of the ``Population Estimates Challenge Program Review Guide'' 
to be posted in the census.gov website. The governmental unit must 
designate a contact person who can be reached by telephone or email 
during normal business hours should questions arise regarding the 
submitted materials. In the event that a county-level governmental unit 
or statistical equivalent is not an active general-purpose government, 
the FSCPE member agency may serve as sponsor of the challenge and the 
governor will serve as the highest elected official.
    The Census Bureau also amends Sec.  90.8 by revising paragraphs 
(a), (c), and (d) that specify the evidence required for the challenge 
process. The types of data that are submitted must be consistent with 
the criteria, standards, and regular processes the Census Bureau 
employs to generate the population estimate. The Census Bureau will 
provide additional Web-based information describing the data that are 
required and how the governmental unit may contact the Census Bureau.
    The Census Bureau in Sec.  90.9 adds language to allow the 
designated FSCPE agencies in each State to serve as conduits with local 
governments in the review of pre-release estimates, to the extent 
possible given data confidentiality requirements for pre-release data.
    The sections that feature changes to the regulations are noted as 
``Revised'' in parentheses, for the public's convenience:
    The following are the current sections of part 90 procedure for 
challenging population estimates.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Former                      Effective April 24, 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 90 PROCEDURE FOR CHALLENGING        PART 90 PROCEDURE FOR
 POPULATION ESTIMATES.                    CHALLENGING POPULATION
                                          ESTIMATES
90.1 Scope and applicability...........  90.1 Scope and applicability.
90.2 Policy of the Census Bureau.......  (Revised) 90.2 Policy of the
                                          Census Bureau.
90.3 Definitions.......................  90.3 Definitions.
90.4 General...........................  90.4 General.
90.5 Who may file a challenge..........  90.5 Who may file a challenge.
90.6 When a challenge may be filed.....  90.6 When a challenge may be
                                          filed.
90.7 Where to file a challenge.........  (Revised) 90.7 Where to file a
                                          challenge.
90.8 Evidence required.................  (Revised) 90.8 Evidence
                                          required.
90.9 Review of challenge...............  (Revised) 90.9 Review of
                                          challenge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq., generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 
U.S.C. 553) or any other statute, unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Under section 605(b) of the RFA, however, if 
the head of an agency certifies that a rule will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, the statute does not 
require the agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis. 
Pursuant to section 605(b), the Chief Counsel for Regulation, 
Department of Commerce, submitted a memorandum to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy, Small Business Administration, certifying that this final 
rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.

Number of Small Entities

    This final rule would impact only governmental units, some of which 
may be considered a small entity under the RFA. The RFA defines ``small 
entity'' as a small business, small organization, or small governmental 
jurisdiction. Specifically, the RFA defines ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' as the government of a city, county, town, school 
district, or special district with a population of less than 50,000. 
Using this criterion, the Census Bureau estimates that around 37,000 
small governmental jurisdictions would be impacted by this rulemaking.

Economic Impact

    The Census Bureau does not anticipate any economic impact as a 
result of this final rule. This rulemaking intends to resume the 
implementation of the Population Estimates Challenge Program in 2023 to 
provide eligible entities the opportunity to file a challenge to 
population estimates for 2021 and subsequent years in forthcoming 
estimates series, beginning with the Vintage 2022 series that is 
scheduled to be published in 2023. There are no direct costs imposed on 
governmental entities (units) that wish to initiate a challenge under 
the Population Estimates Challenge Program.

[[Page 17705]]

Executive Orders

    This rulemaking has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866. This final rule does not contain 
policies with federalism implications as that term is defined in 
Executive Order 13132.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rulemaking does not contain a collection of information 
subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 
U.S.C., Chapter 35.
    Robert L. Santos, Director, Census Bureau, approved the publication 
of this notification in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 90

    Administrative practice and procedure, Census data, Population 
census, Statistics.

0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Census Bureau revises 15 CFR 
part 90 to read as follows:

PART 90--PROCEDURE FOR CHALLENGING POPULATION ESTIMATES

Sec.
90.1 Scope and applicability.
90.2 Policy of the Census Bureau.
90.3 Definitions.
90.4 General.
90.5 Who may file a challenge.
90.6 When a challenge may be filed.
90.7 Where to file a challenge.
90.8 Evidence required.
90.9 Review of challenge.

    Authority:  13 U.S.C. 4 and 181.


Sec.  90.1  Scope and applicability.

    Between decennial censuses, the Census Bureau annually prepares 
statistical estimates of the number of people residing in States and 
their governmental units. In general, these estimates are developed by 
updating the population counts produced in the most recent decennial 
census with demographic components of change data and/or other 
indicators of population change. These rules prescribe the 
administrative procedure available to governmental units to request a 
challenge to the most current of these estimates.


Sec.  90.2  Policy of the Census Bureau.

    It is the policy of the Census Bureau to provide the most accurate 
population estimates possible given the constraints of resources and 
available statistical techniques. It is also the policy of the Census 
Bureau, to the extent feasible, to provide governmental units the 
opportunity to seek a review of and provide additional data for these 
estimates and to present evidence relating to the accuracy of the 
estimates.


Sec.  90.3  Definitions.

    As used in this part (except where the context clearly indicates 
otherwise) the following definitions shall apply:
    (a) Census Bureau means the U.S. Census Bureau, Department of 
Commerce.
    (b) Population Estimates Challenge means, in accordance with this 
part, the process a governmental unit may use to provide additional 
input data for the Census Bureau's population estimate and the 
submission of substantive documentation in support thereof.
    (c) Director means Director of the Census Bureau, or an individual 
designated by the Director to perform under this part.
    (d) Population estimate means a statistically developed calculation 
of the number of people living in a governmental unit to update the 
preceding census or earlier estimate.
    (e) A governmental unit means the government of a county, 
municipality, township, incorporated place, or other minor civil 
division, which is a unit of general-purpose government below the 
State.
    (f) A non-functioning county or statistical equivalent means a sub-
State entity that does not function as an active general-purpose 
governmental unit. This situation exists in Connecticut, Rhode Island, 
for selected counties in Massachusetts, and for the Census Areas in 
Alaska.
    (g) For the purposes of this program, an eligible governmental unit 
also includes the District of Columbia and non-functioning counties or 
statistical equivalents represented by a FSCPE member agency.


Sec.  90.4  General.

    This part provides a procedure for a governmental unit to request a 
challenge of a population estimate of the Census Bureau. The Census 
Bureau, upon receipt of the appropriate documentation, will attempt to 
resolve the estimate with the governmental unit.


Sec.  90.5  Who may file a challenge.

    A request for a challenge of a population estimate generated by the 
Census Bureau may be filed only by the chief executive officer or 
highest elected official of a governmental unit. In those instances 
where the FSCPE member agency represents a non-functioning county or 
statistical equivalent, the governor will serve as the chief executive 
officer or highest elected official.


Sec.  90.6  When a challenge may be filed.

    (a) A request for a challenge to a population estimate may be filed 
any time up to 90 days after the release of the estimate by the Census 
Bureau. Publication by the Census Bureau on its website 
(www.census.gov) shall constitute release. Documentation requesting a 
challenge of any estimate may also be filed any time up to 90 days 
after the date the Census Bureau, on its own initiative, revises that 
estimate.
    (b) If, however, a governmental unit has a sufficiently meritorious 
reason for not filing in a timely manner, the Census Bureau has the 
discretion to accept the late request.


Sec.  90.7  Where to file a challenge.

    A request for a population estimate challenge must be prepared in 
writing by the governmental unit and filed with the Chief, Population 
Division, Census Bureau by sending the request via email to 
census.gov">POP.challenge@census.gov or to a physical address that the Census 
Bureau will specify in the updated ``Population Estimates Challenge 
Program Review Guide'' to be posted in the census.gov website. The 
governmental unit must designate a contact person who can be reached by 
telephone or email during normal business hours should questions arise 
with regard to the submitted materials.


Sec.  90.8  Evidence required.

    (a) The governmental unit shall provide whatever evidence it has 
relevant to the request at the time of filing. The Census Bureau may 
request further evidence when necessary. The evidence submitted must be 
consistent with the criteria, standards, and regular processes the 
Census Bureau employs to generate the population estimate. Currently, 
the Census Bureau challenge process cannot accept estimates developed 
from methods different from those used by the Census Bureau. The Census 
Bureau will only accept a challenge when the evidence provided 
indicates the use of incorrect data, processes, or calculations in the 
estimates.
    (b) For counties and statistical equivalents, the Census Bureau 
uses a cohort-component of change method to produce population 
estimates. Each year, the components of change are updated. These 
components include births, deaths, migration, and change in the group 
quarters population. The Census Bureau will consider a challenge based 
on additional information on one or more of the components of change or 
about the group quarters population in a locality.

[[Page 17706]]

    (c) For minor civil divisions and incorporated places, the Census 
Bureau uses a housing unit method to distribute a county population to 
places within its legal boundaries. The components in this method 
include housing units estimates, average household population per 
housing unit, and an estimate of the population in group quarters. The 
estimation formula was simplified to increase the accuracy of the 
estimates following the application of differential privacy as per the 
Census Bureau's new disclosure avoidance framework. As a result, the 
persons per household (PPH) and occupancy rate components were replaced 
with the average household population per housing unit. Additionally, 
the Census Bureau will consider a challenge based on data related to 
changes in an area's housing stock, such as data on demolitions, 
condemned units, uninhabitable units, building permits, or mobile home 
placements or other housing inventory-based data deemed comparable by 
the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau will also consider a challenge 
based on additional information about the group quarters population in 
a locality.
    (d) The Census Bureau will also provide a guide on its website as a 
reference for governmental units to use in developing their data as 
evidence to support a challenge to the population estimate. In 
addition, a governmental unit may address any additional questions by 
contacting the Census Bureau at 301-763-2461 or by sending emails to 
census.gov">POP.challenge@census.gov or by delivering mail to a physical address 
that the Census Bureau will specify in the updated version of the 
``Population Estimates Challenge Program Review Guide'' to be posted in 
the census.gov website.


Sec.  90.9  Review of challenge.

    The Chief, Population Division, Census Bureau, or the Chief's 
designee shall review the evidence provided with the request for the 
population estimate challenge, shall work with the governmental unit to 
verify the data provided by the governmental unit, and evaluate the 
data to resolve the issues raised by the governmental unit. 
Furthermore, the designated FSCPE agencies are encouraged to serve as 
conduits with local governments in the review of pre-release estimates, 
to the extent that this is possible given data confidentiality 
requirements for pre-release data. Thereafter, the Census Bureau shall 
respond in writing with a decision to accept or deny the challenge. In 
the event that the Census Bureau finds that the population estimate 
should be updated, it will also post the revised estimate on the Census 
Bureau's website (www.census.gov).

    Dated: March 20, 2023.
Shannon Wink,
Program Analyst, Policy Coordination Office, U.S. Census Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2023-06064 Filed 3-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P