Notice2021-15159
2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 16, 2021
Issuing agencies
Management and Budget Office
Abstract
This Notice announces the adoption of 2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The 2020 standards, which reflect modest revisions to the 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, supersede the 2010 standards. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION in this Notice provides background information on the standards (Section A), a brief synopsis of the public comments OMB received in response to the January 19, 2021 Federal Register notice describing the recommendations of the Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards Review Committee (Section B), the statement of the Standards Review Committee in response to public comment (Section C), and OMB's decisions on the recommendations of the Standards Review Committee (Section D). The 2020 standards appear at the end of this Notice (Section E).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 134 (Friday, July 16, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 134 (Friday, July 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37770-37778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15159]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas
AGENCY: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President.
ACTION: Notice of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice announces the adoption of 2020 Standards for
Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). The 2020 standards, which reflect modest revisions to
the 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Areas, supersede the 2010 standards. The SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION in this Notice provides background information on the
standards (Section A), a brief synopsis of the public comments OMB
received in response to the January 19, 2021 Federal Register notice
describing the recommendations of the Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Area Standards Review Committee (Section B), the statement
of the Standards Review Committee in response to public comment
(Section C), and OMB's decisions on the recommendations of the
Standards Review Committee (Section D). The 2020 standards appear at
the end of this Notice (Section E).
DATES: This Notice is effective immediately. OMB plans to publish
delineations of areas based on the 2020 standards and 2020 Census data
in 2023. Federal agencies should begin to use the new area delineations
to tabulate and publish statistics when the delineations are published.
ADDRESSES: Please send correspondence about OMB's decision to Dominic
Mancini, Acting Chief Statistician and Deputy Administrator, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
Room 9264, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, or
email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0257515d416a6b67645d517663766b71766b616b636c426d6f602c676d722c656d74"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="affafcf0ecc7c6cac9f0fcdbcedbc6dcdbc6ccc6cec1efc0c2cd81cac0df81c8c0d9">[email protected]</span></a> with the subject ``2020 Metro
Areas.''
Electronic Availability: This notice is available on the internet
from the OMB website at <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Sivinski, Senior Statistician,
Office of Management and Budget, telephone (202) 395-1205; or email:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b8ebccd9ccd1cbccd1dbd9d4e7fcd1cadddbccd1ceddcbf8d7d5da96ddd7c896dfd7ce"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fba88f9a8f92888f92989a97a4bf92899e988f928d9e88bb949699d59e948bd59c948d">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 37771]]
Outline of Notice
A. Background and Review Process
B. Summary of Comments Received in Response to the Recommendations
of the Standards Review Committee
C. Standards Review Committee Response to Comments
D. OMB's Decisions Regarding Changes to the 2010 Standards for
Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas
E. 2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas, and
Key Terms
A. Background and Review Process
1. Background
In its role as coordinator of the Federal statistical system under
the Budget and Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 (31 U.S.C. 1104(d))
and the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3504(e)), OMB is
required to ensure the system's efficiency and effectiveness. A key
method used by OMB to achieve this responsibility is the promulgation,
maintenance, and oversight of Government-wide principles, policies,
standards, and guidance concerning the development, presentation, and
dissemination of Federal statistical products. OMB's Office of
Statistical and Science Policy, within the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, relies on public comment and subject matter
expertise across the Federal government to help OMB identify policies
or guidance that may be out of date, lacking clarity, or inefficient.
One of the long-standing statistical standards maintained by OMB is
the core based statistical areas program. This program, under various
names, has provided standard statistical area delineations for
approximately 70 years. In the 1940s, it became clear that the value of
statistics produced by Federal agencies would be greatly enhanced if
statistical agencies used a single set of geographic delineations for
the Nation's largest centers of population and activity. OMB's
predecessor, the Bureau of the Budget, led the effort to develop what
were then called ``standard metropolitan areas'' in time for their use
in 1950 census publications. Since then, comparable data products for
metropolitan areas have been available.
The general concept of a core based statistical area (CBSA) is that
of an area containing a large population nucleus, or urban area, and
adjacent communities that have a high degree of integration with that
nucleus. There are two types of CBSAs: Metropolitan statistical areas
(MSAs) and micropolitan statistical areas ([micro]SAs). Metropolitan
and micropolitan statistical areas are conceptually similar to each
other, but a micropolitan area features a smaller nucleus.
Both metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas are composed
of entire counties. ``Central counties'' are those that contain the
population nucleus mentioned above. These nuclei are identified by a
separate geographic statistical program, the urban areas program at the
Census Bureau. ``Outlying counties'' qualify to join a central county
based on demonstrating sufficient commuting with the central county or
counties of the area. Counties that do not fall within metropolitan or
micropolitan statistical areas are ``outside of a CBSA. ''
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16JY21.001
The purpose of these statistical areas is unchanged from when
standard metropolitan areas were first delineated: The classification
provides a nationally consistent set of delineations for collecting,
tabulating, and publishing Federal statistics for geographic areas.
OMB establishes and maintains these areas solely for statistical
purposes. In reviewing and revising these areas, OMB does not take into
account, or attempt to anticipate, any public or private sector
nonstatistical uses of the delineations. While the use of these areas
in nonstatistical programs is
[[Page 37772]]
relatively common, and will be discussed in more detail below as those
potential impacts were the subject of the vast majority of public
comments OMB received on the proposed standards, these areas are not
designed for the purpose of serving as a general-purpose geographic
framework applicable for use in program administration or funding
formulas. If these areas are used for program administration, OMB
recommends structuring the use in a way that prevents any unintended
disruption that may be caused by OMB's regular review and revision of
the standards.
Furthermore, the MSA and [micro]SA delineations do not produce an
urban-rural classification, and confusion of these concepts has the
potential to affect the ability of a program to effectively target
either urban or rural areas, if that is the program goal. Counties
included in metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas may contain
both urban and rural territory and population. For instance, programs
that seek to strengthen rural economies by focusing solely on counties
located outside MSAs could ignore a predominantly rural county that is
included in an MSA because a high percentage of the county's residents
commute to urban centers for work. OMB urges agencies, organizations,
and policy makers to review carefully the goals of nonstatistical
programs and policies to ensure that appropriate geographic entities
are used to determine the allocation of Federal funds.
2. Review Process
Periodic review of the standards is necessary to ensure their
continued usefulness and relevance. Every decade OMB reviews the
statistical area standards and, if warranted, revises them prior to
their application to new decennial census data. The current review of
the CBSA standards is the seventh such review. In 2018, OMB charged the
Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards Review
Committee (Standards Review Committee) with examining the 2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical
Areas (available at: <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2010/06/28/2010-15605/2010-standards-for-delineating-metropolitan-and-micropolitan-statistical-areas">https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2010/06/28/2010-15605/2010-standards-for-delineating-metropolitan-and-micropolitan-statistical-areas</a>) and providing recommendations for how
to improve the standards. The Standards Review Committee is a standing
committee composed of subject matter experts at the agencies that rely
on the statistical areas to produce official statistics. Agencies
represented on the review committee include the U.S. Census Bureau
(Chair), Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
Economic Research Service, National Center for Health Statistics,
Statistics of Income, and ex officio, OMB. The Census Bureau provided
research support to the committee.
OMB published the Review Committee's recommendations for revisions
to the 2010 standards in a Federal Register Notice (FRN) on January 19,
2021: ``Recommendations From the Metropolitan and Micropolitan
Statistical Area Standards Review Committee to the Office of Management
and Budget Concerning Changes to the 2010 Standards for Delineating
Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas'' (86 FR 5263). The
notice described six recommendations from the Standards Review
Committee. The Standards Review Committee recommended that:
(1) The minimum urban area population to qualify an MSA be
increased from 50,000 to 100,000;
(2) The delineation of New England city and town areas (NECTAs),
NECTA divisions, and combined NECTAs be discontinued;
(3) Research be undertaken on an additional, territorially
exhaustive classification that covers all of the United States and
Puerto Rico;
(4) The first annual delineation update of the coming decade be
combined with the decennial-based delineations;
(5) OMB should make publicly available a schedule for updates to
the core based statistical areas (see proposed update schedule below);
and
(6) OMB continue use of American Community Survey commuting data in
measurement of intercounty connectivity, though changing societal and
economic trends may warrant considering changes in the 2030 standards.
After the public comment period closed, OMB reconvened the
Standards Review Committee to analyze and respond to the resulting
comments. After taking into consideration public comment and the
position of the Standards Review Committee, OMB is publishing this FRN
to announce final decisions and the content of the 2020 Standards for
Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas. The 2020 standards replace
and supersede OMB's 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and
Micropolitan Statistical Areas.
B. Summary of Public Comments Received in Response to the Review
Committee's Recommendations
After removing duplicate submissions from the same senders, OMB
received 848 comments in response to the Standards Review Committee's
recommendations.
Recommendation 1: Raise the minimum MSA core population threshold
from 50,000 to 100,000.
Seven hundred thirty-four comments remarked on Recommendation 1,
increasing the minimum population threshold of an urban area to qualify
an MSA from 50,000 to 100,000, with 21 in favor (5 of which
conditionally agreed with additional suggestions regarding population
thresholds) and 712 opposed. In addition, there was one comment that
was neutral toward Recommendation 1.
Many of the comments opposing Recommendation 1 did not provide a
rationale for their opposition. Of the commenters who did cite a
rationale for their opposition, almost all cited a nonstatistical
rationale, such as concerns about loss of federal or other funding;
concerns about other programmatic consequences; and concerns about
economic development for individual areas that would be reclassified
from metropolitan to micropolitan. Some comments cited both
nonstatistical and statistical rationales, such as concerns about
potential loss of data for individual areas that would be reclassified
from a metropolitan to a micropolitan statistical area; concerns about
long term data analysis and longitudinal analysis if such a change led
to a break in data series or the type of statistics collected and
produced at this level of geographic area; concern that the recommended
change was too modest to justify making any change; failure to consider
another approach (such as adding a top size class using some definition
of the ``largest'' areas); and perceived failure on behalf of the
Standards Review Committee to show a sufficient rationale for doubling
the current threshold. A few of the comments presented a purely
statistical rationale.
Twenty-one comments were in favor of raising the minimum population
threshold of an urban area to qualify an MSA from 50,000 to 100,000.
Five of these comments offered additional suggestions, such as
modifying the minimum population to qualify a [micro]SA.
Recommendation 2: Discontinue Updates to the New England City and
Town Areas, New England City and
[[Page 37773]]
Town Area Divisions, and Combined New England City and Town Areas.
Ten comments remarked on Recommendation 2, the discontinuation of
New England City and Town Area delineations, with three in favor, two
neutral, and five opposed to the recommendation.
Among points cited by those opposed to Recommendation 2 were the
relative prominence of cities and towns (as opposed to counties) in the
six New England states, and concerns about impact of the recommendation
on data availability and longitudinal data analysis.
An argument in favor of the recommendation advocated against
providing special treatment to one region of the country.
Recommendation 3: Launch a research effort into delineating
territorially exhaustive areas.
Seven comments remarked on Recommendation 3 concerning research
into developing a set of territorially exhaustive areas. All seven
comments were in favor of the recommendation, with one of the comments
also in favor of delineation of areas in United States Island Areas, in
addition to the United States and Puerto Rico. Comments offered
technical suggestions on different means of delineating the territory
of the United States and Puerto Rico, such as the use of Bureau of
Economic Analysis (BEA) Economic Areas, United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) commuting zones, USDA data, regional
intergovernmental organizations, and substate districts.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate the results of the decade's first
annual update review into the results of the decade's decennial census-
based update.
Eight comments remarked on Recommendation 4 concerning combining
the publication of the first annual delineation update with the
decennial-based redelineation, with three in favor (with one comment
not wanting any updates during the decade except this one). An argument
in favor was to minimize statistical area churn in the inventory.
Five comments expressed general concerns about OMB conducting
updates during the decade, but did not provide a specific opinion on
this particular recommendation to combine the annual and decennial
updates.
Recommendation 5: Establish a Publicly Available Update Schedule.
Two comments remarked on Recommendation 5, which involved
establishing and publishing a public schedule for the release of
delineations and updates. The two comments were both in favor of
publishing an update schedule. An argument in favor was increased
transparency and predictability.
Recommendation 6: Continue use of American Community Survey
commuting data to measure intercounty connectivity.
There was a total of 45 comments on Recommendation 6, concerning
the continued use of American Community Survey (ACS) commuting data for
the 2023 delineations.
Forty-one comments discussed Recommendation 6, while simultaneously
arguing for an outcome for a specific area or set of areas. Suggestions
for additional or alternative datasets included the commodity flow
survey (Bureau of Transportation Statistics), shopping and transaction
data, the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (Census Bureau), new
modes of transportation, and geographic proximity between cities.
Two of the four remaining comments offered support for the
recommendation (with one suggesting that other data may be needed to
determine if areas should change during the mid-decade update), and two
provided suggestions for other datasets, such as primary care service
areas and other measures of economic activity.
A few comments not included in this count suggested specific
changes to how the ACS commuting data are used in the standards, such
as modifying commuting thresholds, without discussing whether the ACS
data should continue to be used or what other sources of data might
replace or supplement it.
Other Comments
The remaining comments mostly raised issues outside of the scope of
the request, in that they were directed at specific applications of the
standards, and did not offer recommendations that were relevant to the
potential modification of the standards themselves. Several comments
expressed concern about the current configuration of one or more
metropolitan areas and requested changes. For example, forty-two
comments requested modification to the components of the Evansville,
IN-KY metropolitan area; two comments requested modification to the
components of the Idaho Falls, ID metropolitan area, and one comment
requested modification to the components of the Sioux City, IA-NE-SD
metropolitan area. Five comments requested using subcounty units to
possibly identify a separate area within the current Riverside-San
Bernardino-Ontario, CA metropolitan area. Other comments requested
different arrangements of multiple metropolitan areas, including three
comments concerning merging the Raleigh-Cary, NC and Durham-Chapel
Hill, NC metropolitan areas, and one comment concerning merging the
Greenville-Anderson, SC and Spartanburg, SC metropolitan areas.
C. Standards Review Committee Response to Comments
After the close of the public comment period, OMB reconvened the
Standards Review Committee and asked them to provide a statement on
their earlier recommendations, taking into account the public comments
received and potential impacts of the coronavirus pandemic. The
Standards Review Committee statement reads, in its entirety:
``The Committee subscribes without reservation to the view that
federal statistical standards require regular review and sometimes
revision to stay abreast of the phenomena they describe. Over the
course of nearly ten months, the Committee reviewed the ``2010
Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical
Areas,'' and, in the end, it recommended six revisions to OMB. Now, the
Committee also has examined public comment received on those
recommendations.''
``Each of the recommendations followed from thoughtful
consideration and discussion, both within the Committee and with a
panel of external experts. In addition, nearly all of the topics
addressed in the recommendations were familiar from Committee
discussions in previous reviews of the standards.''
``Having reviewed the public comment, the Committee stands by five
of its six recommendations but now recommends that action on the first
of those recommendations--regarding the minimum population core size
for metropolitan statistical areas--be delayed pending completion of
additional research on the topic.''
``Reviewing the public comment. Public comment received on
Recommendations 2 through 6 generally was supportive or offered no
counter-arguments that the Committee found sufficiently compelling to
change its earlier views. In general, these recommendations generated
modest amounts of comment. Implementing these recommendations will
improve the performance of the program in the near term, lay the
foundation for improved data availability in the future, and increase
transparency and usability.''
[[Page 37774]]
``Recommendation 1, on the other hand, received substantial
comment, and that comment raised a number of concerns of potential
importance to the federal statistical system. One such concern focused
on a possible reduction in federal statistical data available for areas
that would change status from metropolitan statistical areas to
micropolitan statistical areas as a result of an increased core
population requirement. Another concern was with discontinuities in
longitudinal federal statistical data series that could come with a
changed population requirement.''
``A third identified statistical issue relative to Recommendation 1
focused on the size of the recommended core population requirement
increase (from 50,000 to 100,000). For some, that increase--if needed
at all--was viewed as too large; on the other side, there were
indications of dissatisfaction that the Committee did not consider
alternative or larger changes to address the wide range of core
populations currently covered within the category of ``metropolitan.''
Finally, public comment challenged the Committee to justify more
clearly its Recommendation 1 with documented research results.''
``Next steps. The Committee now recommends OMB's delaying action on
Recommendation 1 in order to complete further analysis and research. A
side benefit of this work is that it might help to reassure data users
that appropriate consideration has been invested in a key change to the
standards.''
``With assistance from the statistical agencies, OMB could, with
medium level of effort, address two of the concerns raised about
Recommendation 1:
<bullet> Provide a thorough assessment of the anticipated effects
of a changed minimum core population size on federal statistical data
availability, reviewing possible effects in individual data programs
across the full set of statistical agencies.
<bullet> Conduct an analysis of changes in thresholds in other
statistical programs over the years to provide guidance on mitigating
discontinuities in time series data. Programs change requirements with
different frequencies and using different approaches. The fact that
this program has held the minimum metropolitan statistical area core
population size constant in the name of stability for an extended
period should not permanently preclude adjustments to fit changed
circumstances.''
``Robust examination of the appropriate size for an increase in
required core population for metropolitan statistical areas as well as
associated, derived area classification issues will require a more
extensive effort. Experience suggests these tasks would be addressed
most effectively by a combination of statistical agency research and
two to three external research projects. Those projects would analyze
evolving U.S. central place hierarchies and economic agglomeration
thresholds during the period 1940-2020. Also, consideration should be
given to including within the scope of these research projects an
examination of changed commuting patterns (pertinent to Recommendation
6, in light of changes in commuting behavior associated with the COVID-
19 pandemic that occurred after the Committee had submitted its
recommendations). This work would best take place between late 2023
(once new statistical areas are delineated based on 2020 data) and the
end of 2025 so results would be available to OMB and the Committee in
early 2026. By 2023, the lasting effects of the pandemic on journey to
work should have started becoming clearer.''
``(In the interest of smoothing resource demands for research over
the decade, conducting the groundwork on approaches to preparing
territorially exhaustive statistical areas (Recommendation 3) can
follow and benefit from the work on core size and commuting data and
should be scheduled to start in 2026 and conclude in 2028.)''
``Final thought. In view of the considerable volume of public
comment addressing issues extraneous to the purpose of the metropolitan
and micropolitan statistical areas program, the Committee urges OMB to
assume a more assertive posture in reiterating through various
available channels the value and role of this federal statistical
standard. Part of that effort will require continued efforts to educate
nonstatistical program users of the limitations of these statistical
areas to meet their programs' needs; the other side of the effort will
be to ensure that federal statistical agencies and programs are taking
full advantage of the areas to disseminate data for the benefit of data
users. The success of the program depends in part on the continued
demonstration of its usefulness across the federal statistical
system.''
--Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area Standards Review
Committee
D. OMB's Decisions Regarding Changes to the 2010 Standards for
Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas
This section of the Notice presents the decisions OMB made on the
Standards Review Committee's recommendations. In arriving at these
decisions, we considered the Standards Review Committee's
recommendations, the public comments we received on those the Standards
Review Committee's recommendations, and the Standards Review
Committee's subsequent statement in Section C.
OMB also benefited from the continued and thorough deliberations of
the statistical experts that constitute the Standards Review Committee,
as well as the research and analytic support provided by the Census
Bureau. As in past reviews of the standards, we relied upon the
technical and subject-matter expertise, insight, and dedication of the
Standards Review Committee members. We sincerely appreciate these
contributions to the rigor, objectivity, and usefulness of the CBSA
program, and offer special thanks to the invaluable support of the
Population Division at the Census Bureau.
OMB's decisions on each of the Review Committee's recommendations
are discussed below. OMB did not make any substantive changes to the
2010 standards beyond the revisions discussed in this section.
Recommendation 1: Raise the minimum MSA core population threshold
from 50,000 to 100,000.
OMB Decision: OMB does not accept the initial recommendation to
raise the MSA core population threshold in the 2020 standards, and has
decided to leave the current threshold of 50,000 in place. A change to
the fundamental criteria that determine whether an area is considered
metropolitan would cause disruption to statistical programs and
products, and would be difficult for the statistical agencies to
implement. OMB decided that there is insufficient justification at this
time to raise the threshold to 100,000 and that further research is
necessary before deciding whether to change the criteria that determine
whether an area is considered metropolitan. Finally, we also note the
Standard Review Committee's subsequent modification of their initial
recommendation recognizing the value of additional research before
modifying the threshold.
We acknowledge the Standards Review Committee's concern that the
MSA thresholds have not kept pace with population growth, which affects
the ability of the CBSA program to meet
[[Page 37775]]
its intended purpose of identifying the primary centers of population
and economic activity in the United States for use in official
statistics. OMB commits to working with the Standards Review Committee
to conduct research and stakeholder outreach over the next four years
to closely examine the utility of the current requirements for an area
to qualify as an MSA, and for outlying counties to join an MSA (See
Recommendation 6). This research will be guided by the MSA program's
primary goal of identifying the major centers of population and
economic activity of the United States, and will include exploring
different frameworks and data sources for classifying metropolitan
areas, including alternate core population thresholds, features and
amenities of areas, evolving U.S. central place hierarchies, potential
economic thresholds, and other topics identified by the Standards
Review Committee or outside experts. The Standards Review Committee
will advise OMB on the impact of any potential revisions on the
statistical products released by their agencies.
Recommendation 2: Discontinue Updates to the NECTAs, NECTA
Divisions, and Combined NECTAs.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation, and the conclusion
of the Committee that the significant complexity generated by
maintaining these areas is not justified by their use in Federal
statistical products and programs.
We recognize that NECTAs are more granular than county-based CBSAs,
and more closely reflect the functional local government structure in
New England. However, Federal statistical programs often do not release
two sets of data for both NECTAs and MSAs in the New England states,
because doing so would create unacceptable risk of disclosure or
reidentification. As a result, several statistical programs currently
release data by NECTAs in New England and by county-based CBSAs for the
rest of the country. This practice is contrary to the intent of the
standards to provide a nationally consistent geographic framework.
After consulting with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is the
primary user of these areas, OMB is confident that BLS programs can
continue to release high quality and useful statistics across the
country. This decision will not affect the release of BLS products at
finer geographic scales, such as the release of Local Area Unemployment
Statistics data by minor civil division.
Recommendation 3: Launch a research effort into delineating
territorially exhaustive areas.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation. The CBSA program
currently does not delineate a large portion of U.S. territory. A
territorially exhaustive delineation would increase the utility of the
CBSA program and improve coordination of Federal statistics. OMB
commits to working with the Review Committee on the plans for the
research necessary to provide a robust, exhaustive delineation of the
United States and Puerto Rico.
Recommendation 4: Incorporate the results of the decade's first
annual update review into the results of the decade's decennial census-
based update.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation. As background, on an
annual basis and according to the standards, OMB makes small changes,
generally to just a few MSAs, based on annual updates to the Census
population data used to determine a county's CBSA status. In the past a
small number of counties experienced change in delineation status
between the comprehensive, decennial delineations issued in the third
year after the Decennial Census and in the subsequent annual update
that follows, due in part to the different geographic units used in the
decennial update and annual updates. The Committee believes this has
led to unnecessary uncertainty and instability in the program.
Implementing this recommendation will improve the consistency of the
areas with negligible impact on timing or resources.
Recommendation 5: Establish a Publicly Available Update Schedule.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation. To increase
transparency and consistency, we have provide a high level, preliminary
schedule below, and will publish and maintain a schedule of upcoming
CBSA delineations and updates on our Statistical Policies and Programs
web page (<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/</a>). Because the timing of OMB
updates depends in part on the timing of delivery of the inputs by the
Census Bureau, we also intend to include the input dates into this
schedule. If OMB is unable to meet the public update schedule, we will
notify the public as soon as feasible through the web page.
As described in the final 2020 standards in Section E, OMB will
release three different types of updates. (1) Annual Updates--These
updates would address qualification of new metropolitan and
micropolitan statistical areas and typically would affect a small
number of counties. (In some years, there may be no updates warranted
by the data.) (2) Five-Year (``mid-decade'') Update--This broader
update would include: Qualification of metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas, qualification of outlying counties, merging of
adjacent metropolitan or micropolitan statistical areas, qualification
of principal cities, categorization of metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas, qualification of metropolitan divisions,
qualification of combined statistical areas, and titling of
metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas, metropolitan
divisions, and combined statistical areas. (3) Decennial Delineation--
The initial re-delineation following adoption of revised standards
would include all of the changes listed for the five-year update, plus
the qualification of central counties.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update type Release date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decennial Delineation..................... June 2023.
Annual Update............................. December 2024.
Annual Update............................. December 2025.
Annual Update............................. December 2026.
Annual Update............................. December 2027.
Five-Year Update.......................... December 2028.
Annual Update............................. December 2029.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendation 6: Continue use of American Community Survey
commuting data to measure intercounty connectivity.
OMB Decision: OMB accepts this recommendation for the 2020
standards. We note that changes in commuting behavior as a result of
the pandemic could result in a reduction in the five-year average ACS
estimates of commuting which will contribute to the planned CBSA update
in 2028. This anticipated reduction could result, if no other
adjustments are made, in a large number of outlying counties getting
dropped from their CBSAs, at least until the next time commuting data
is updated in 2033.
OMB recognizes that the pandemic's impact on commuting patterns may
create an acute challenge for the 2028 mid-decade update, as well as a
longer-term challenge for the continued use of ACS commuting data as
the sole measure of intercounty connectivity and economic integration.
We especially recognize the importance of additional research in this
area in light of the changing nature of work patterns, which the
pandemic may have accelerated, and other ways in which geography and
economic activity interact.
To that end, OMB will reconvene the Standards Review Committee to
conduct a full review of intercounty connectivity measures before 2028,
and to advise OMB on whether pandemic-
[[Page 37776]]
related changes in commuting patterns warrant any adjustments to the
standards prior to the mid-decade update in 2028 to minimize the risk
of unintended and potentially temporary pandemic-related changes to the
CBSAs in 2028. In addition, we expect that the scope of this research
will also encompass whether other measures of economic activity may be
useful in the identification of CBSAs, and position OMB to ensure that
the standards for including outlying counties in CBSAs are robust and
meaningful.
E. 2020 Standards for Delineating Core Based Statistical Areas, and Key
Terms
A Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) is a geographic entity
associated with at least one core of 10,000 or more population, plus
adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic
integration with the core as measured by commuting ties. The standards
delineate two categories of CBSAs: Metropolitan statistical areas
(MSAs) and micropolitan statistical areas ([micro]SAs). CBSAs consist
of counties and equivalent entities throughout the United States and
Puerto Rico. Throughout these standards, the term ``county'' is used to
refer to counties and county-equivalents.
The purpose of the CBSA standards is to provide nationally
consistent delineations for collecting, tabulating, and publishing
Federal statistics for a set of geographic areas. The Office of
Management and Budget establishes and maintains these areas solely for
statistical purposes as part of their statutory responsibilities to
coordinate and ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of the Federal
statistical system.
CBSAs are not designed as a geographic framework for nonstatistical
activities or for use in program funding formulas. The CBSA
classification is not an urban-rural classification; MSAs, [micro]SAs,
and many counties outside CBSAs contain both urban and rural
populations.
The following criteria apply to all CBSAs nationwide. Commuting and
employment estimates are derived from the Census Bureau's American
Community Survey. Whenever American Community Survey commuting and
employment data are referred to below, the criteria use point estimates
and do not incorporate a measure of sampling variability of the
estimates.
Section 1. Population Size Requirements for Qualification of Core Based
Statistical Areas
Each CBSA must have a Census Bureau-delineated Urban Area of at
least 10,000 population.
Section 2. Central Counties
The central county or counties of a CBSA are those counties that:
(a) Have at least 50 percent of their population in Urban Areas of
at least 10,000 population; or
(b) Have within their boundaries a population of at least 5,000
located in a single Urban Area of at least 10,000 population.
A central county is associated with the Urban Area that accounts
for the largest portion of the county's population. The central
counties associated with a particular Urban Area are grouped to form a
single cluster of central counties for purposes of measuring commuting
to and from potentially qualifying outlying counties.
Section 3. Outlying Counties
A county qualifies as an outlying county of a CBSA if it meets the
following commuting requirements:
(a) At least 25 percent of the workers living in the county work in
the central county or counties of the CBSA; or
(b) At least 25 percent of the employment in the county is
accounted for by workers who reside in the central county or counties
of the CBSA.
A county may be included in only one CBSA. If a county qualifies as
a central county of one CBSA and as outlying in another, it falls
within the CBSA in which it is a central county. A county that
qualifies as outlying to multiple CBSAs falls within the CBSA with
which it has the strongest commuting tie, as measured by either 3(a) or
3(b) above. The counties included in a CBSA must be contiguous; if a
county is not contiguous with other counties in the CBSA, it will not
fall within the CBSA.
Section 4. Merging of Adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas
Two adjacent CBSAs will merge to form one CBSA if the central
county or counties (as a group) of one CBSA qualify as outlying to the
central county or counties (as a group) of the other CBSA using the
measures and thresholds stated in 3(a) and 3(b) above.
Section 5. Identification of Principal Cities
The principal city (or cities) of a CBSA will include:
(a) The largest incorporated place with a 2020 Census population of
at least 10,000 in the CBSA or, if no incorporated place of at least
10,000 population is present in the CBSA, the largest incorporated
place or census designated place in the CBSA; and
(b) Any additional incorporated place or census designated place
with a 2020 Census population of at least 250,000 or in which 100,000
or more persons work; and
(c) Any additional incorporated place or census designated place
with a 2020 Census population of at least 50,000, but less than
250,000, and in which the number of workers working in the place meets
or exceeds the number of workers living in the place; and
(d) Any additional incorporated place or census designated place
with a 2020 Census population of at least 10,000, but less than 50,000,
and at least one-third the population size of the largest place, and in
which the number of workers working in the place meets or exceeds the
number of workers living in the place.
Section 6. Categories and Terminology
A CBSA is categorized based on the population of the largest Urban
Area within the CBSA. Categories of CBSAs are: Metropolitan statistical
areas, based on Urban Areas of 50,000 or more population, and
micropolitan statistical areas, based on Urban Areas of at least 10,000
population but less than 50,000 population. Counties that do not fall
within CBSAs will represent ``outside core based statistical areas.''
Section 7. Divisions of Metropolitan Statistical Areas
An MSA containing a single Urban Area with a population of at least
2.5 million may be subdivided to form smaller groupings of counties
referred to as metropolitan divisions. A county qualifies as a ``main
county'' of a metropolitan division if 65 percent or more of workers
living in the county also work within the county and the ratio of the
number of workers working in the county to the number of workers living
in the county is at least 0.75. A county qualifies as a ``secondary
county'' if 50 percent or more, but less than 65 percent, of workers
living in the county also work within the county and the ratio of the
number of workers working in the county to the number of workers living
in the county is at least 0.75.
A main county automatically serves as the basis for a metropolitan
division. For a secondary county to qualify as the basis for forming a
metropolitan division, it must join with either a contiguous secondary
county or a contiguous main county with which it has the highest
employment interchange
[[Page 37777]]
measure of 15 or more (where the employment interchange measure is the
sum of the percentage of workers living in the smaller entity who work
in the larger entity and the percentage of employment in the smaller
entity that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger
entity). After all main counties and secondary counties are identified
and grouped (if appropriate), each additional county that already has
qualified for inclusion in the MSA falls within the metropolitan
division associated with the main/secondary county or counties with
which the county at issue has the highest employment interchange
measure. Counties in a metropolitan division must be contiguous.
Section 8. Combining Adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas
(a) Any two adjacent CBSAs will form a combined statistical area if
the employment interchange measure between the two areas is at least
15.
(b) The CBSAs thus combined will also continue to be recognized as
individual CBSAs within the combined statistical area.
Section 9. Titles of Core Based Statistical Areas, Metropolitan
Divisions, and Combined Statistical Areas
(a) The title of a CBSA will include the name of its principal city
with the largest 2020 Census population. If there are multiple
principle cities, the names of the second-largest and (if present)
third-largest principle cities will appear in the title in order of
descending population size. If the principal city with the largest 2020
Census population is a census designated place, the name of the largest
incorporated place of at least 10,000 population that also is a
principal city will appear first in the title followed by the name of
the census designated place. If the principal city with the largest
2020 Census population is a census designated place, and there is no
incorporated place of at least 10,000 population that also is a
principal city, the name of that census designated place principal city
will appear first in the title.
(b) The title of a metropolitan division will include the name of
the principal city with the largest 2020 Census population located in
the metropolitan division. If there are multiple principle cities, the
names of the second-largest and (if present) third-largest principle
cities will appear in the title in order of descending population size.
If there are no principle cities located in the metropolitan division,
the title of the metropolitan division will use the names of up to
three counties in order of descending 2020 Census population size.
(c) The title of a combined statistical area will include the names
of the two largest principle cities in the combination and the name of
the third-largest principal city, if present. If the combined
statistical area title duplicates that of one of its component CBSAs,
the name of the third-most-populous principal city will be dropped from
the title of the Combined Statistical Area.
(d) Titles also will include the names of any State in which the
area is located.
Section 10. Updating Schedule
(a) The Office of Management and Budget will delineate CBSAs in
2023 based on 2020 Census data and 2016-2020 American Community Survey
five-year estimates. Release of these delineations will take place
during June 2023.
(b) In the 2023 delineations and in subsequent years, the Office of
Management and Budget will designate a new [micro]SA if:
(1) A city that is outside any existing CBSA has a Census Bureau
special census count of 10,000 to 49,999 population, or a population
estimate of 10,000 to 49,999 for two consecutive years from the Census
Bureau's Population Estimates Program, or
(2) A Census Bureau special census results in the delineation of an
Urban Area of 10,000 to 49,999 population that is outside of any
existing CBSA.
(c) Also in the 2023 delineations and in subsequent years, the
Office of Management and Budget will designate a new MSA if:
(1) A city that is outside any existing MSA has a Census Bureau
special census count of 50,000 or more population, or a population
estimate of 50,000 or more for two consecutive years from the Census
Bureau's Population Estimates Program, or
(2) A Census Bureau special census results in the delineation of an
Urban Area of 50,000 or more population that is outside of any existing
MSA.
(d) Outlying counties of CBSAs that qualify in this section will
qualify according to the criteria in Section 3 above, on the basis of
American Community Survey five-year commuting estimates.
(e) OMB will review the delineations of all existing CBSAs and
related statistical areas in 2028 using 2021-2025 five-year commuting
and employment estimates from the Census Bureau's American Community
Survey. The Urban Areas used in these delineations will be those based
on 2020 Census data or subsequent special censuses for which Urban
Areas are created. The central counties of CBSAs identified on the
basis of a 2020 Census population count, or on the basis of population
estimates from the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program or a
special census count in the case of postcensally delineated areas, will
constitute the central counties for purposes of these area
delineations. New CBSAs will be designated in 2028 on the basis of
Census Bureau special census counts or population estimates as
described above in Sections 10(b) and 10(c); outlying county
qualification will be based on five-year commuting estimates from the
American Community Survey.
(f) Other aspects of the CBSA delineations are not subject to
change between decennial censuses.
(g) OMB will issue delineation updates (one per year in those years
when there is an update) in years other than 2023 during December.
(h) OMB will maintain a publicly available release schedule for
these updates on its statistical programs and standards web page
(<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/statistical-programs-standards/</a>). Any delays will be announced on the
website as soon as possible, along with an updated release date.
Section 11. Definitions of Key Terms
Census designated place--A statistical geographic entity that is
analogous to an incorporated place, delineated for the decennial census
and consisting of a locally recognized, unincorporated concentration of
population that is identified by name.
Central county--The county or counties of a Core Based Statistical
Area containing a substantial portion of an Urban Area, and to and from
which commuting is measured to determine qualification of outlying
counties.
Combined Statistical Area--A geographic entity consisting of two or
more adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas with employment interchange
measures of at least 15.
Core--A densely settled concentration of population, comprising an
Urban Area (of 10,000 or more population) delineated by the Census
Bureau, around which a Core Based Statistical Area is delineated.
Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA)--A statistical geographic entity
consisting of the county or counties associated with at least one core
(Urban Area) of at least 10,000 population, plus adjacent counties
having a high degree of social and economic integration with the core
as measured through commuting ties
[[Page 37778]]
with the counties containing the core. Metropolitan and micropolitan
statistical areas are the two categories of core based statistical
areas.
Delineation--The establishment of the boundary of a statistical
area, or the boundary that results.
Employment interchange measure--A measure of ties between two
adjacent entities. The employment interchange measure is the sum of the
percentage of workers living in the smaller entity who work in the
larger entity and the percentage of employment in the smaller entity
that is accounted for by workers who reside in the larger entity.
Geographic building block--The geographic unit, such as a county,
that constitutes the basic geographic component of a statistical area.
Main county--A county that acts as an employment center within a
CBSA that has a core with a population of at least 2.5 million. A main
county serves as the basis for delineating a metropolitan division.
Metropolitan Division--A county or group of counties within a CBSA
that contains an Urban Area with a population of at least 2.5 million.
A metropolitan division consists of one or more main/secondary counties
that represent an employment center or centers, plus adjacent counties
associated with the main/secondary county or counties through commuting
ties.
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)--A Core Based Statistical Area
associated with at least one Urban Area that has a population of at
least 50,000. The MSA comprises the central county or counties
containing the core, plus adjacent outlying counties having a high
degree of social and economic integration with the central county or
counties as measured through commuting.
Micropolitan Statistical Area ([micro]SA)--A Core Based Statistical
Area associated with at least one Urban Area that has a population of
at least 10,000, but less than 50,000. The [micro]SA comprises the
central county or counties containing the core, plus adjacent outlying
counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with
the central county or counties as measured through commuting.
Outlying county--A county that qualifies for inclusion in CBSA on
the basis of commuting ties with the CBSA's central county or counties.
Outside Core Based Statistical Areas--Counties that do not qualify
for inclusion in a CBSA.
Principal City--The largest city of a CBSA, plus additional cities
that meet specified statistical criteria.
Secondary county--A county that acts as an employment center in
combination with a main county or another secondary county within a
CBSA that has a core with a population of at least 2.5 million. A
secondary county may serve as the basis for delineating a metropolitan
division, but only when combined with a main county or another
secondary county.
Urban Area-- A statistical geographic entity delineated by the
Census Bureau, which represents densely developed territory, and
encompasses residential, commercial, and other non-residential urban
land uses. For purposes of delineating MSAs, at least one Urban Area of
50,000 or more population is required; for purposes of delineating
[micro]SAs, at least one Urban Area of 10,000 to 49,999 population is
required.
Sharon Block,
Acting Administrator, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2021-15159 Filed 7-13-21; 5:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 16, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.