Part A - NRBS OMB Justification 2014 - r3 (2)

The U.S. Coast Guard’s National Recreational Boating Safety (RBS) program objective is to ensure the public has a safe, secure, and enjoyable recreational boating experience by implementing programs that minimize loss of life, personal injury, and property damage while cooperating with environmental and national security efforts. The National Recreational Boating Survey information collection project enables the Coast Guard to better identify safety priorities, coordinate and focus research efforts, and encourage consistency in the information that is collected as well as the applied analysis methods.

A National RBS program requirement as set forth in Title 46, United States Code, § 13101, is to “encourage greater State participation and uniformity in boating safety efforts, and particularly to permit the States to assume the greater share of boating safety education, assistance, and enforcement activities”. As coordinator of the National RBS program, the Coast Guard provides support for safety initiatives in every jurisdiction (States and Territories) by making available timely, relevant information on boating activities that occur in each respective jurisdiction. Working in partnership with State Boating Law Administrators (BLAs), the boating information provided by the Coast Guard enables each State agency to tailor and implement safety initiatives that address the needs of boaters in each respective jurisdiction.

Due to differing State policies about boat operation as well as the unique waterways in each State where boating takes place, reporting individual State-level estimates of boating activity and operation rather than grouping similar States is required so that safety advocates can better address the diverse needs of boaters in each respective State. Thus, a primary objective of the information collection effort is to capture sufficient data for each State in order to yield precise State-level estimates of boat use, operator age, boating safety instruction levels, and safety measures taken; this information is critical to State program direction and policy development.

Personally Identifiable Information (PII)

The study will produce a measure of boating exposure that is reliable at both national and state levels and measure incidence of participation, incidence of boat ownership, boating safety awareness and behavior, economic impact of recreational boating, incidence of negative events and risk, and general boating statistics.

The National Recreational Boating Survey (NRBS) will collect general boating information (e.g. type of boat used, frequency of use, duration of a boating trip, boating safety courses completed, years of experience operating a boat, usage of safety equipment, type of boating activity engaged in, etc.) from individuals who participate in recreational boating activities as well as the boats used by the population. During the Boat Survey, we will also collect names, street addresses, phone numbers, email addresses from those individuals who volunteer for the panel and agree to be contacted for the Trip Survey. This contact information will be used maintain contact with panel participants (all modes), and to collect survey data (via Web and/or telephone). During the Trip Survey, panelist may be asked to confirm or update their contact information, including mailing address, email address, and phone number.

Information will be collected directly from recreational boating participants via mail, telephone or web-form. Prior to the collection, recreational boating participants will be provided a privacy statement and advised on how information will be collected, maintained, and disseminated and given the option to decline participation without reprisal. The Coast Guard will use the collected data to produce state and national summary statistics. The Coast Guard will neither use nor share personal data with any organization or entity. Only individual data pertaining to boats and boating activities will be shared with the Coast Guard boating partners in the industry and academia. The shared data items do not include any names, street addresses, email addresses, telephone numbers or any other PII data collected during interviews.

All survey administrators must complete training and sign a Confidentiality agreement, as well as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Non-Disclosure Agreement before the beginning of the data collection phase. Safeguards will be implemented to mitigate unauthorized access, disclosure, or breach of PII. Moreover, PII will only be collected and maintained for the NRBS survey and only aggregate data may be shared with boating partners from industry and academia.

Overview of the Data Collection System

It is anticipated that the NRBS will be used to gather information on boating activity for the year 2014. The data collection system has been designed to gather information at three distinct analysis levels:

Boat Survey: Vessels owned in the United States on January 1, 2014 that are either not used at all or used at least 50 percent of the time for recreational purposes. This survey will be conducted in the third quarter of the year 2013.
Trip Survey: Recreational boat trips involving the use of a recreational boat where the boat either does not leave the launch site at all or launches from the United States. This is a panel survey of recreational boats that will be conducted on a monthly basis throughout the year 2014.
Participant Survey: Someone in a household who has participated in any activity on any privately-owned recreational or rented boat during the reference period, whether the boat was docked or not. This survey will be conducted in January 2015, and will collect boating participation data pertaining to the 2014 boating season.

There are three core sources of sample for the NRBS:

A generated Random Digit Dial (RDD) list of landline telephone numbers will be the basis for obtaining information regarding participants, including boat ownership, exposure to boating activities on rented vessels, safety awareness, behaviors, and demographics.
Recognizing the impact of mobile phone adoption on telephone survey coverage, lists of mobile telephone numbers will be purchased for a complementary telephone effort which is critical for ensuring representation of key demographic groups.
State vessel registry lists are available for most States, making it possible for the Coast Guard to sample boats for a mail study to determine the economic impact of boating as well as gather boat statistics. For unregistered boats not listed on the States’ boat registries, this data will be obtained during telephone interviews with boat owners.

The data collection effort utilizes a multi-stage structure illustrated in Figure 1. A national Boating Survey, conducted by RDD phone and mail, will collect information about owned boats and recruit boats to a panel. A multi-mode Trips Survey of boats will collect information about individual trips. A national Participant Survey will be conducted by RDD phone to collect information from all boating participants.

For the Boat Survey, it is expected that approximately 15,000 mail surveys and 20,000 telephone surveys will be conducted to profile the incidence of boats. This level of effort should result in data from 35,000 boat owners based on information provided by InfoLink, a commercial sample provider specializing in lists of boat owners. The geographic distribution of interviews targets +/-4% precision for boat-level statistics within most states. Mail surveys will be the basis for sampling where lists of registered boat owners are available. Telephone surveys will be used to ensure coverage, to address the inadequacy or unavailability of state-level boat frames. At least 200 interviews are targeted within each geographic stratum.

For the Participant Survey, it is expected that approximately 17,000 telephone surveys will be conducted in January 2015 to gauge boating participation. This will provide approximately 327 interviews in each of the 52 geographic regions covered by the survey (50 states, Washington DC, and Puerto Rico). We anticipate this will measure the incidence of boating participants within +/-5% for each geographic stratum.

For the Trip Survey, it is expected that there will be a panel of about 20,000 boats. This assumes that 57% of the 35,000 boat owners will agree to be on the panel, consistent with the 2011 experience.

It is expected that close to 40,000 trips will be profiled each year using this panel of boats. On average, each panelist will be invited to participate in the study once every three months during their region’s boating season. We assume a 45% participation rate for each effort.

It is estimated that 35% to 40% of data regarding trips will be provided by panelists via a web-based reporting option. Currently, about 70% of American households have home internet access (http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/computer/2009/tab01.xls). It is assumed that this figure holds for the boat panelists, the number of households with access will continue to rise over the next several years (http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/computer/2009/Appendix-TableA.xls), and half of the panelists will respond via web. The other half of respondents to the Trip Survey is expected to respond via telephone.

Figure 1 - Overview of the Data Collection System

Survey	Mode(s)	Sample source(s)	Universe		Respondent	Analytic Goals
Boat Survey	Phone	RDD	Privately owned recreational boats	Unregistered recreational boats	Member of boat-owning household	2-Ownership and participation 4-Economic impact of boating 6-Boat statistics
				Registered recreational boats in all states	Member of boat-owning household
	Mail	Registry Lists	Privately owned recreational boats	Registered recreational boats in states sharing lists	Registered boat owner
Trip Survey	Web, Phone	Panel	Privately owned recreational boats		Boat owner panelist	1-Exposure
						3-Safety awareness and behaviors
						4-Economic impact of boating
						5-Negative events
Participant Survey	Phone	RDD	Boating participants	U.S. households	Any adult household member	2- Ownership and participation 3- Safety awareness and behaviors
				U.S. child (<16) boating population	Any adult household member (proxy)
				U.S. adult boating population	Adult boater
			Rented boats		Adult boater: rented boat	1-Exposure
						3-Safety awareness and behaviors
						4-Economic impact of boating
						5-Negative events

Items of Information to be Collected

The NRBS will capture information at four levels:

Boat level,

Boat trip level, and

Recreational boating participant level.

Personal level

Questions have been formed to address the six purposes of the NRBS:

Boat and boater exposure (as measured in hours),

Boating participation and boat ownership,

Boating safety awareness and behaviors,

Economic impact of recreational boating,

Negative event incidence and risk, and

Boat statistics including the type and size of the vessel.

To elucidate each area, questions are formed around the following:

Boat and boater hours on the water,

Boat hours in docked recreation,

Total annual participation overall,

Total annual participation by boat type,

Total boat ownership,

Lifejacket use,

Motivations for participating in recreational boating activities,

Alcohol use and boat operation,

Money spent to own and maintain a boat,

Money spent in communities on boat trips,

Actual and reported accidents that cause injury and boat damage, and

Features of boats such as hull material and propulsion systems.

Identification of Website(s) and Website Content Directed at Children Under 13 Years of Age

Once boats are identified during the Boat Survey, selected owners will be re-contacted each month to provide information regarding recent trips aboard the vessels. When an e-mail address for a boat owner is available, an invitation will be sent to complete the survey via the Internet. A keyed link will permit the recipient to access collection forms directly via a secure server. Information regarding the identified vessel, such as its type, may be identified in the survey script but identifying information regarding the owner will not be displayed.

It is presumed that minors will not be listed as boat owners. While a minor may inadvertently gain access to the Web survey, questions regarding recent trip activity are considered to be minimally sensitive.

Purpose and Use of Information Collected

Purpose of Information Collection

The purposes of the NRBS, in order of priority, are to measure:

Exposure,

Boat and boater hours on the water,

Boat hours in docked recreation,

Boating participation and boat ownership,

Total annual participation overall,

Total annual participation by boat type,

Total boat ownership,

Boating safety awareness and behaviors,

Lifejacket use,

Motivations for participating in recreational boating activities,

Alcohol use and boat operation,

Economic impact of recreational boating,

Money spent to own and maintain a boat,

Money spent in communities on boat trips,

Negative Event Incidence and Risk,

Actual and reported accidents that cause injury and boat damage,

Boat statistics including the type and size of the vessel, and

Features of boats such as hull material and propulsion systems.

Anticipated Uses of Results by the Coast Guard

This information collection supports the following strategic goal of the Coast Guard’s NRBS program:

Safety: To reduce the number of deaths, the number and severity of injuries, and the amount of property damage associated with the use of recreational boats.

Recreational boating is important from many different perspectives, including being a very popular recreational pursuit that also represents a major source of economic stimulus and community development. Boating experienced dramatic increases in participation and facility development from the 1960s thru the 1990s. However, recreational boating agencies, organizations, and different industry sectors are confronting a wide array of complex issues and challenges. These include:

Changing demographics that are influencing recreational boating participation levels, behaviors, and expectations;

Recruiting new boaters who represent the changing diversity of the U.S. population;

Assessing boating needs and forecasting boating participation;

Developing new boating products, facilities, and services in response to changing preferences of existing and potential boaters;

Developing policies and regulations that enhance both the quality (e.g., safety, environmental protection) and sustainability of boating; and

The need to focus and coordinate the investments and combined efforts (e.g. recruitment, boater safety, service enhancement) of different recreational boating agencies, organizations, and businesses.

The majority of these challenges and issues require reliable, valid information. Information that is continuously required for policy investment/budgeting, educational and evaluation decisions includes:

Numbers and characteristics of boating participants (i.e., boat owners and non-owners);

Perceptions of boaters;

Participation rates (i.e., boating trips, “boat days”) and behaviors;

Boater preferences;

Numbers and types of boats (i.e., registered, documented, unregistered); and

The effectiveness of boating information, education, safety, and enforcement programs.

In summary, the information collection is critical because it:

(1) Gathers reliable, consistent data to develop valid safety performance measures;

(2) Collects information about the changing demographics of boaters, the numbers of boats, and type of boating activity essential for NRBS program direction and policy; and

(3) Provides the data necessary to better define and measure the effectiveness of State program activities aimed at reducing the number of boating fatalities. This in turn will support States in their efforts to reach specific performance goals and objectives.

Anticipated Uses of Results by Other Federal Agencies and Departments

NRBS survey statistical data may be shared with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), US Arm y Corps of Engineers (USACE), the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service.

Use of Results by Those Outside Federal Agencies

The National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA), the National Association of States Boating Law Administrators (NASBLA), West Marine, US Sailing Association, Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation, Boat US, American Canoe Association, Department if Natural Resources and more, have expressed interest in the NRBS Survey results in their ongoing efforts to improve their understanding of the boating community.

Personal Identifiable Information

Please see section 1, b. Personal Identifiable Information on page Error: Reference source not found.

Use of Improved Information Technology and Burden Reduction

The NRBS system includes five questionnaires combined in various ways to collect information at three levels: boat level, boat trip level, and recreational boating participant level. These five questionnaires include a telephone phone and mail version of a Boat Survey, a telephone and web version of the Trip Survey, and a telephone version of the Participant Survey.

The most efficient method for sampling boats is by utilizing State registry information. It is anticipated that over three-quarters of the nation’s registered vessels can be sampled using these databases. However, the coverage for this proposed approach is affected by issues such as local registration requirements and access to the lists themselves. Supplemental telephone studies will ensure the probability of selection for boat owners not listed in the obtained registries. Boat owners agreeing to participate in follow-up surveys will be asked for their e-mail addresses.

In order to build exposure measures, a subsample of boat owners will be re-contacted every month to detail recent boat trip activity. The selection algorithm will ensure that any owner who has agreed to participate in the follow-up effort is selected no more than four times to provide trip information about a particular boat. Invitations to complete Web-enabled Internet forms will be provided when e-mail addresses are available (Web non-responders and all others will be contacted by telephone). Web surveys will be programmed using specialized software that will ensure accurate capture of data in a secure environment.

Information regarding boating participation will be collected via telephone only. As with other telephone efforts, the survey will be conducted using Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) software. CATI software will allow for quality checks to be built into the programming, providing virtually error-free data collection. It is anticipated that up 40% of telephone interviews nationwide will be conducted specifically among cell phone users. This stratum attempts to include the growing population of households that are cell phone-only and may be missed in traditional RDD landline surveys. Recent studies indicate that close to 36 percent of U.S. households are cell phone-only and disproportionately represent younger households and low SES/poverty^¹ individuals, characteristics which may be correlated to distinct boating behavior. By including cell phone numbers as part of the frame, the growing use of information technology beyond the traditional bounds of RDD surveys will be addressed.

Efforts to Identify Duplication and Use of Similar Information

The Coast Guard did an extensive search of available information on boats, boaters, and boating activities to determine if the critical need for recent boating information could be met. No comprehensive national boating data source was identified. Our most recent information collection (which will end in February 2013) will be the only comprehensive source of boating data. No other information collections have been conducted by another agency from which the Coast Guard could obtain reliable up-to-date estimates on the number of recreational boats, boating households, boaters, and activities at the national and State levels.

Impact on Small Business or Other Small Entities

The NRBS is a social survey primarily designed to collect data from individual recreational boating participants. Because the study focuses on the residential population, the data collection effort will not place an undue response burden on small businesses or similar entities. Additionally, this survey is voluntary, and only those who express the desire to participate will be contacted.

Consequences of Collecting the Information Less Frequency

If reliable boating data are not collected, the Coast Guard will be unable to perform the following:

Measure the effectiveness of various boating safety programs;

Identify and satisfy recreational boater needs;

Improve the effectiveness of the boating safety programs by setting well-defined goals and developing targeted strategies in support of those goals; and

Make prudent resource allocation decisions and provide program oversight using the most meaningful performance measures.

Special Circumstances Relating to the Guidelines of 5 CFR 1320.5

The information collection activities discussed in this ICR comply with all Paperwork Reduction Act regulatory guidelines. No special circumstances are anticipated in this collection of information.

Comments in Response to the Federal Register Notice and Efforts to Consult Outside the Agency

Federal Register Announcement

A 60-day Notice was published in the Federal Register to obtain public comment on this collection (12/17/2012; 77 FR 74686). Additionally, a 30-day Notice will be published in the Federal Register to obtain public comment on this collection (05/30/2013; 78 FR 32408). The Notice elicited three public comments.

Consultations

The NRBS has evolved from the National Recreational Boating Safety Survey which involved 25,547 interviews with recreational boaters who operated boats between September 2001 and September 2002. A Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC), and a Collaboration of Partners (COP) have facilitated the incorporation of feedback from data users, stakeholders, and industry leaders during the development of the current protocol.

Current and former SAC members include:

Pr. Edward Mahoney (MSU), Pr. Dan Stynes (MSU), Dr. Steven Heeringa (Survey Research Center, University of Michigan), Dr. Karol Krotki (RTI International)

Current and former COP members include:

Nancy M. Gogle (Representing Ohio DNR), Captain Richard Moore (Representing Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, NASBLA), William C. Naumann (Representing National Marine Manufacturers Association), Julie M. McQuade (Representing Ohio Department of Natural Resources),

L. Daniel Maxim (Representing Coast Guard Auxiliary), Robert Burgess (Representing West Marine and Recreation Boating Retailers), James Patrick Muldoon (Representing U.S. Sailing Association),

Marla Hetzel (Representing the Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation), Nancy S. Michelman (Representing BOATUS), Pamela S. Dillon (Representing American Canoe Association and National Safe Boating Council), Dr. Deborah Gona (Representing NASBLA), Van Snider (Representing Michigan Boating Industries Association, National Marine Trades Council and Marine Retailers Association of America),

David Ray (Representing Marine Industries Association of Florida and Marine Retailers Association of America), Jerry Mona (Representing National Marine Manufacturers Association and Grow Boating Campaign)

Explanation of Any Payment or Gift to Respondents

Panel Incentives

We will offer $5 as an incentive to panelists for each trip-level survey they complete. This incentive will minimize panel and survey attrition and promote prompt survey response. Prompt survey response is important because accurate recall of hours on the water is critical to achieving accurate exposure estimates. Respondents who have sold their boats and are ineligible will not receive the incentive because they will not complete a survey. Respondents on the panel will be incentivized regardless of recent boating activity levels. This will help minimize panel attrition while maintaining unbiased responses.

The motivation for using incentives for the boat owner panel survey is to improve panel recruitment and retention and ultimately improve data quality. Boat owners who participate in the boat survey will be recruited to participate in a longitudinal study (rotating panel). Incentives will encourage panel participants to respond to the trip survey during subsequent waves of data collection. The use of incentives for the boat owner panel is justified for a number of reasons:

Repeated measures design: The research design is based on repeated measures of the same subject to increase the reliability of the survey estimates (e.g. Cochran, pp 348-355). The reliability of the survey estimates is greatest when we are able to measure change (such as change in boat exposure) on an individual subject basis. The use of incentives will increase the number of individuals who provide responses at multiple time points.

Reducing survey costs: The cost to contact a boat owner panel participant for the second (and third and so on) time is less expensive than contacting a boat owner panel participant for the first time. Offering an incentive will increase repeat participation and lessen reliance on newly recruited boat owners.

Participant burden: The burden for each panel participant is the boat survey and up to four additional trip surveys. Panelists will recount up to two boating trips during each trip survey. Our use of incentives will recognize their effort with positive reinforcement and encourage future participation.

Cell phone Incentives

The AAPOR Cell Phone Task Force Report issued in 2010 recommends some form of remuneration for expenses incurred by the respondent. However, given the relatively new emergence of cell phone interviewing, no one best practice for remuneration has emerged. The AAPOR Cell Phone Task Force Report states:

“Much more experimentation with the use of remuneration and incentives in cell phone surveys will be needed before researchers can be confident of the effects these may have on response rates, data quality, and/or nonresponse bias. This research should include factorial designs in which some of the conditions use both remuneration and a contingent incentive. The experimentation also should include varying the manner in which the purpose of the remuneration and/or incentive is explained (i.e., characterized) to the respondent.” (AAPOR Cell Phone Task Force Report, pp 91)

We conducted an experiment in the 2011 Boat Survey to test the benefit of offering remuneration using a case/control design where a random sample of respondents was offered an incentive. However, results show that remuneration provided no response benefits; therefore we propose to eliminate the use of incentives for the cell phone survey.

Assurance of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents

Individuals contacted will be assured of the confidentiality of their responses under 5 U.S.C. 552a (Privacy Act of 1974) applied to the National Recreational Boating Survey. This survey is covered by an existing SORN: DHS/ALL-002-Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Mailing and Other Lists System November 25, 2008, 73 FR 71659.

During telephone interviews, respondents are read a privacy statement and told during the initial screening that the information they provide will be kept confidential. Verbal consent will be elicited from participants. A call-back telephone number will be provided to anyone who wishes to speak with a supervisor or the client. As part of interviewer training, prior to commencement of data collection, the project director will review all IRB-approved procedures for the protection of human subjects. The training will include procedures for reporting respondent complaints and unanticipated problems. Also, all interviewers will be required to sign a statement of confidentiality and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Non-Disclosure Agreement on the date of hire, and concepts related to confidentially will be reinforced at training. In addition, interviewers will be instructed to discontinue a call if they feel someone is listening on another line. Such discontinued calls will result in an unscheduled call-back at a later date.

Mail survey items will display OMB approval numbers and statements assuring confidentiality, and contact information will be provided so that a respondent’s questions can be answered by a knowledgeable member of the project team. A returned form will imply consent.

Precautions also are taken in how the data are handled to prevent a breach of confidentiality. Survey data and all identifying information about respondents will be handled in ways that prevent unauthorized access at any point during the study. To maintain confidentiality, telephone numbers associated with each completed call is not included in the final data, so a respondent's answers cannot be connected to a specific person or telephone number. Data will be housed on a secure server. Access to mail information will be limited and on a need-to-know basis. If reports or tabular data are submitted, the data will be reviewed to determine if the subject(s) can be identified when small cell counts occur. If there is the potential for the identification of these subject(s), the data in these cells will be removed.

For personal identifiable information, please see section 1, b. “Personal Identifiable Information.”

Justification for Sensitive Questions

No sensitive information will be collected.

Estimates of Annualized Burden Hours

The NRBS is a survey of boating activity and participation. State-supplied boat registration data will be used as the sampling frame for selecting boating households. However, the content of State boat registration databases is limited to recreational vessels that owners are required by law to register, which are typically power boats or boats of a certain size. It is also anticipated that State confidentiality laws will prevent some States from providing their registration data to the Coast Guard. Consequently, we will need to select a RDD sample of boating households to cover the portion of the boating population not included in the State’s boat registration databases. In States that provide boat registration data, only households that do not own any registered or documented recreational vessel will be eligible for inclusion in the RDD sample. In States for which boat registration data are not available, all boating households will be eligible for selection in the sample.

While the State’s boat registration databases will allow for the targeting of specific boats in order to obtain precise boat statistics, the RDD sample will allow for the collection of data on unregistered recreational vessels and their owners, operators, or passengers. In States not providing boat registration data, statistics specific to registered boats will still be produced, although their precision will be inferior to that of mail survey statistics.

Table 1 shows different estimates of burden hours and other costs associated with the 2015 NRBS, and how they are calculated. A cost estimate of $25.15 per respondent hour was calculated by dividing the median U.S. household income of $50,303^² by 2,000 annual labor hours

Table 1: Burden Hours of the Surveys

Cost Element	BOAT Mail	BOAT Telephone	TRIP Phone, Web	PARTICIPANT Telephone	ALL SURVEYS
Initial Contacts	41,667	227,273	111,111	42,500
Response Rate	40%	40%	40%	40%
Completed Surveys	16,667	90,909	44,444	17,000
Eligibility Rate	90%	22%	90%	100%
Number Eligible	15,000	20,000	40,000	17,000
Survey Duration (min)	12.6	9.0	7.8	6.0
Annual Burden (hrs)	3,150	3,000	5,200	1,700	13,050
Survey Duration (min)	12.6	9.0	7.8	6.0
Annual Burden (hrs)	3,150	3,000	5,200	1,700	13,050
Cost/hr	$25.15	$25.15	$25.15	$25.15
Total Annual Cost	$79,223	$75,450	$130,780	$42,755	$328,208

Overall, survey participants will spend about 13,050 hours filling out the different questionnaires for the 2014 NRBS, represented as an estimated cost burden of $328,208. Note that Table 1 is based upon the assumption that all States will make their boat registration databases available to the Coast Guard.

Estimates of Annualized Cost Burden

There is no cost burden to respondents other than the costs discussed in question #13.

Estimates of Annualized Cost Burden

Under section 13106(c) of title 46 U.S.C., funding is made available for payment of expenses of the Coast Guard for activities directly related to coordinating and carrying out national recreational boating safety programs. The annual cost of the 2015 survey will range from 4 to 5 million dollars. Table 2 shows the different cost elements taken into consideration.

Table 2: Survey Cost Elements

Category	Rate	Hours	Total Amount
Executive Officer	$227.42	20	$4,548.40
Technical Director	$144.18	1300	$187,434.00
Senior Project Manager	$122.46	1,200.00	$146,952.00
Task Manager	$92.72	4,200.00	$389,424.00
Associated	$70.48	1500	$105,720.00
Administrative Support	$55.28	450	$24,876.00
Telephone Interviewers	$25.61	92,000.00	$2,356,120.00
Telephone Supervisors	$33.78	15,500.00	$523,590.00
Other Data Collection Staff	$29.52	3,500.00	$103,320.00

Other Direct Costs (ODC)
Travel & subsistence			$4,010.00
Photocopying/printing			$71,420.00
Postage/delivery services			$78,931.00
Incentives			$16,455.00
Total			$4,012,800.40

Explanation for Program Changes or Adjustments

There will be no change for the next round of data collection for the National Recreational Boating Survey. There may be some minor variations regarding the sample sizes in the different states. The past Notice of Action allowed the CG to do the 2012 Boat Survey in the third quarter of 2011 (see Exhibit 1 on the next page), and will allow for the 2012 trip and 2013 participation surveys. Note that, exceptionally a subsample of the boat survey was used to collect 2011 participation data. The current information collection request is for the 2014 boat Survey (to be done in the third quarter of 2013), the 2014 trip survey, and the 2014 participant survey (to be done in January of 2015), which are all components of what is known as the 2014 National Recreational Boating Survey.

Plans for Tabulations and Publications and Project Time Schedules

Tabulation Plans

The grant recipient selected to conduct the survey will use advanced statistical software such as SAS or SPSS to generate frequencies of responses, cross-tabulations on key variables using weighted data. Fundamental measures for observation include:

Numbers and characteristics of boating participants (i.e., boat owners and non-owners);

Perceptions of boaters;

Participation rates (i.e., boating trips, “boat days”) and behaviors;

Boater preferences;

Numbers and types of boats (i.e., registered, documented, unregistered); and

The effectiveness of boating information, education, safety, and enforcement programs.

Publication Plans

National, Coast Guard regional, and statewide estimates of recreational boats, boating households, boaters, boating exposures, practices, and activities during the boating season will be published in a report and disseminated to boating safety officials.

Time Schedule for the Project

Exhibit 1 shows the schedule of data collection. The NRBS is a biannual survey designed to collect data about boating participation and boat activities for 2012, 2014, and beyond.

Exhibit 1: Survey program schedule

		Boat Survey	Trips Survey	Participant Survey
2011	Q1
	Q2
	Q3
	Q4	X
2012	Q1		X
	Q2		X
	Q3		X
	Q4		X
2013	Q1			X
	Q2
	Q3
	Q4	X
2014	Q1		X
	Q2		X
	Q3		X
	Q4		X
2015	Q1			X

The Boat Survey collects information about how many and what kinds of boats are owned as well as some information about how much boat owners spend on their boats. The survey will be conducted in the fourth quarter of the year preceding the target year. This staggered data collection schedule will ensure that the panel of boats to participate in the Trips Survey is established before the target year begins.

The Trips Survey will proceed monthly during the survey year. This survey samples individual trips that boats have taken and collects information about what happened on those trips: how long they lasted, what safety events occurred, and what money was spent. The sample for the Trips Survey will be boats that have responded to the Boat Survey.

The Participant Survey collects information about who has spent time boating during the year. We will conduct this survey in the first quarter of the year following the target year. Reason(s) Display of OMB Expiration Date is Inappropriate

We are not seeking such approval. The OMB number will appear in appropriate Paperwork Reduction Act disclosure information.

Exceptions to Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.

Appendices

Authorizing Legislation

Title 46, Subtitle II, Part I, Chapter 131, §13102:State recreational boating safety programs

(a) To encourage greater State participation and uniformity in boating safety efforts, and particularly to permit the States to assume the greater share of boating safety education, assistance, and enforcement activities, the Secretary shall carry out a national recreational boating safety program. Under this program, the Secretary shall make contracts with, and allocate and distribute amounts to, eligible States to assist them in developing, carrying out, and financing State recreational boating safety programs.

(b) The Secretary shall establish guidelines and standards for the program. In doing so, the Secretary—

(1) shall consider, among other things, factors affecting recreational boating safety by contributing to overcrowding and congestion of waterways, such as the increasing number of recreational vessels operating on those waterways and their geographic distribution, the availability and geographic distribution of recreational boating facilities in and among applying States, and State marine casualty and fatality statistics for recreational vessels;

(2) shall consult with the Secretary of the Interior to minimize duplication with the purposes and expenditures of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l–4—460l–11) the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950 (16 U.S.C. 777–777k), and with the guidelines developed under those Acts; and

(3) shall maintain environmental standards consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1451–1464) and other laws and policies of the United States intended to safeguard the ecological and esthetic quality of the waters and wetlands of the United States.

(c) A State whose recreational boating safety program has been approved by the Secretary is eligible for allocation and distribution of amounts under this chapter to assist that State in developing, carrying out, and financing its program. Matching amounts shall be allocated and distributed among eligible States by the Secretary as provided by section 13104 of this title.

30-Day Federal Register Notice

60-Day Federal Register Notice Comments

Mapping of Survey Sections with Survey Goals

Boat Survey

Section	Data Use	Public Release
1. Boat enumeration	b) Boating participation and boat ownership	Yes
2. Registration information	i) Boat statistics	Yes
3. Kind of boat	i) Boat statistics	Yes
4. Boat usage	b) Boating participation and boat ownership	Yes
5. 2010 Exposure Module, for administration in the 2011 survey (q4 2010) only	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
6. Boat details	i) Boat statistics	Yes
7. Boat operation	i) Boat statistics	Yes
8. Economic Impact of Recreational Boating		Yes
8.1. Module—boat expenditures corollary questions	g) Economic impact of recreational boating	Yes
8.2. Boat expenditures	g) Economic impact of recreational boating	Yes
9. Recruit for Boat Panel	Maintain survey structure	Yes

Trip survey

Section	Data Use	Public Release
1. Identify water recreation days	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
2. First water day		Yes
2.1. Obtain qualified respondent	Maintain survey structure	Yes
2.1.1. Trip report hand-off module	Maintain survey structure	Yes
2.2. Trip Exposure		Yes
2.2.1. States where boated	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
2.2.2. People on the boat	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
2.2.3. Boat Hours	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
2.2.4. Types of water	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
2.3. Boating safety awareness and behaviors		Yes
2.3.1. Boat operation	c) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
2.3.2. Alcohol	f) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
2.3.3. Life jackets	d) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
2.3.4. Module: Reasons for Lifejacket Use	d) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
2.3.5. Other safety equipment	c) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
2.4. Negative event incidence and risk		Yes
2.4.1. Negative Events	h) Negative event Incidence and risk	Yes
2.4.2. Damage to people and vessels	h) Negative event Incidence and risk	Yes
2.5. Economic impact of recreational boating		Yes
2.5.1. Module: boat expenditure corollary questions	g) Economic impact of recreational boating	Yes
2.5.2. Trip expenditures	g) Economic impact of recreational boating	Yes
3. Second water day		Yes
Structure similar to first day. Two days are collected to increase statistical power.		Yes
4. Identify Docked recreation days	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
5. First docked day		Yes
5.1. Trip Exposure		Yes
5.1.1. States where boated	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
5.1.2. People on the boat	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
5.1.3. Boat Hours	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
6. Second docked day		Yes
Structure similar to first day. Two days are collected to increase statistical power.

Participant Survey

Section	Data Use	Public Release
1. Household Participation	b) Boating participation and boat ownership	Yes
2. Household Participant enumeration
2.1. Demographics	b) Boating participation and boat ownership	Names, street addresses, telephone numbers, and emai addresses are not released to the public. Only State of residence and states visited on a boating trip are released to the public.
2.2. Participation	b) Boating participation and boat ownership	Yes
2.3. Module: Lifetime participation	e) Boating participation and boat ownership	Yes
3. Boating safety awareness and behaviors		Yes
3.1. Lifejackets in the household	d) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
3.2. Safety behaviors of a boating child	c) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
4. 2010 exposure estimation—administered in 2011 only		Yes
4.1. Kind of boat	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
4.2. Boat usage	a) Exposure: boating hours	Yes
5. Survey of an individual participant		Yes
5.1. Activities	b) Boating participation and boat ownership	Yes
5.2. Boating safety awareness and behaviors	c) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
5.3. Alcohol	c) Boating safety awareness and behaviors	Yes
5.4. Module: Rented Boats		Yes
5.4.1. Trip Report—for administration 2011 forward	Same structure as in Trip Survey (Goals 1, 3, 4, 5)	Yes
6. Closing

Confidentiality Agreement Signed by Interviewers

Statement of Policy

ICF MACRO is firmly committed to the principle that the confidentiality of individual data obtained through ICF MACRO surveys must be protected. This principal holds whether or not any specific guarantee of confidentiality was given at the time of interview (or self-response), or whether or not there are specific contractual obligations regarding confidentiality have been entered into, they may impose additional requirements which are to be adhered to strictly.

Procedures for maintaining Confidentiality

All ICF MACRO employees and field workers shall sign this assurance of confidentiality. This assurance may be suspended by another assurance for a particular project.
Field workers shall keep completely confidential the names of respondents, all information or opinions collected in the course of interviews, and any information about respondents learned incidentally during fieldwork. Field workers shall exercise reasonable caution to prevent access by other to survey data in their possession.
Unless specifically instructed otherwise for a particular project, an employee or files worker, upon encountering a respondent or information pertaining to a respondent that s/he knows personally, shall immediately terminate the activity and contact her/his supervisor for instructions.
Survey data containing personal identifiers in ICF MACRO offices shall be kept in a locked container or a locked room when not being used each working day in routine survey activities. Reasonable caution shall be exercised in limiting access to survey data to only those persons who are working on the specific project and who have instructed in the application confidentiality requirements for that project. Where survey data has been determined to be particularly sensitive by the Corporate Officer in charge of the project or the President of ICF MACRO, such survey data shall be kept in locked containers or in a locked room except when actually being used and attended by a staff member who has singed this pledge.
Ordinarily, serial numbers shall be assigned to respondents prior to creating a machine-processible record and identifiers such as name, address, and social security number shall not, ordinarily, be a part of the machine record. When identifies are part of the machine data record, ICF MACRO’S Manager of Data Processing shall be responsible for determining adequate confidentiality measures in consultation with the project director. When a separate file is set up containing identifiers or linkage information, which could be used to identify data records, this separate file, shall be kept locked up when not actually being used each day in routine survey activities.
When records with identifies are to be transmitted to another party, such as for keypunching or key taping, the other party shall be information of these procedures and shall sign an Assurance of Confidentiality form.
Each project director shall be responsible for ensuring that all personnel and contractors involved in handling survey data on a project are instructed in these procedures, have signed this pledge and comply with these procedures throughout the period of survey performance. When there are specific contractual obligations to the client regarding confidentiality, the project director shall develop additional procedures to comply with the project in these additional procedures. At the end of the period of survey performance, the project director shall arrange for proper storage or disposal of survey data including any particular contractual requirements for storage or disposition. When required to turn over survey data to our clients, we must provide proper safeguards to ensure confidentiality up to the time of delivery.
Project directors shall ensure that survey practices adhere to the provisions of the US Privacy Act o f1974 with regards to surveys of individuals for the Federal Governments. Project directors must ensure that procedures are established in each survey to inform each respondent of the authority for the survey, the purpose and use of the survey, the voluntary nature of the (where applicable) and the effects of the respondents if any, of not responding.

PLEDGE

I herby certify that I have carefully read and understand the aforementioned policies and procedures and will cooperate fully with them. I will keep completely confidential all information arising from surveys concerning individual respondents to which I gain access. I will not discuss, disclose, disseminate, or provide access to survey data and identifiers except as authorized by ICF MACRO. In addition, I will comply with any additional procedures established by ICF MACRO for a particular contract. I will devote my best efforts to ensure that there is compliance with the required procedures established by ICF MACRO for a particular contract. I understand that violation of the privacy rights of individuals through such unauthorized discussion, disclosure, dissemination, or access may make me subject to criminal or civil penalties. I give my personal pledge that I shall abide by this assurance of confidentiality.

______________________________________

Print Name (Clearly Please)

______________________________________ ____/____/2012

Signature Date

______________________________________ ____/____/2012

Witness Signature Date

Please return this form to your supervisor after reviewing and signing.

Response Rates Achieved on the 2012 Boat & 2011 Participant Surveys

The response rates for the boat and participant surveys are based on AAPOR RR3 for the telephone and AAPOR RR1 for the mail survey. We calculated the response rate according the American Association of Public Opinion Research’s (AAPOR’s) standards and guidelines.^³

RR1 = I/(N-X)

RR3 = I/(I+E+e(U)),

where,

I = Complete interview

E = Eligible

U = Unknown eligibility

X = Ineligible

N = Total records

e = (I+E)/(I+E+X), the proportion of eligible records.

Response Rates of the 2012 Mail Boat Survey

		Surveys sent (N)	Surveys Returned
		Surveys sent (N)	Complete surveys (I)	Ineligible (X)	RR1
		35670	13404	1427	39.0%
01	AL	1022	343	26	34.4%
02	AK	344	162	17	49.5%
04	AZ	646	147	143	29.2%
05	AR	860	232	49	28.6%
06	CA*
08	CO	437	133	30	32.7%
09	CT	654	304	17	47.7%
10	DE	225	97	20	47.3%
11	DC	147	60	6	42.6%
12	FL	1979	655	70	34.3%
13	GA	1261	422	30	34.3%
15	HI	147	53	11	39.0%
16	ID*
17	IL	1365	593	26	44.3%
18	IN*
19	IA	884	292	42	34.7%
20	KS	588	232	14	40.4%
21	KY	875	282	21	33.0%
22	LA*
23	ME	581	261	29	47.3%
24	MD	898	273	10	30.7%
25	MA	913	397	40	45.5%
26	MI	1595	697	49	45.1%
27	MN*
28	MS	836	309	25	38.1%
29	MO	1131	394	26	35.7%
30	MT*
31	NE	438	140	21	33.6%
32	NV	216	55	16	27.5%
33	NH*
34	NJ	840	260	125	36.4%
35	NM	138	36	38	36.0%
36	NY	1469	609	36	42.5%
37	NC	1275	481	33	38.7%
38	ND	430	167	8	39.6%
39	OH	1369	580	24	43.1%
40	OK	876	260	27	30.6%
41	OR	869	464	29	55.2%
42	PA	1290	576	29	45.7%
44	RI	143	71	4	51.1%
45	SC	1143	387	32	34.8%
46	SD	423	161	12	39.2%
47	TN	1060	412	20	39.6%
48	TX	1679	490	61	30.3%
49	UT	359	131	10	37.5%
50	VT	144	65	5	46.8%
51	VA	1095	493	32	46.4%
53	WA	1094	520	50	49.8%
54	WV	218	53	13	25.9%
55	WI	1402	582	33	42.5%
56	WY	146	53	6	37.9%
72	PR	166	20	62	19.2%

*State did not agree to provide registration database.

Response Rates of the 2012 Telephone Boat Survey

		Landline						Cell Phone
FIPS	State	Completes (I)	Eligible, non- interview (E)	Unresolved (U)	Ineligible (X)	e1	RR3	Completes (I)	Eligible, non-interview (E)	Unresolved (U)	Ineligible (X)	e1	RR3
		15697	6995	296622	951415	2.3%	53.0%	3851	2125	217133	161775	3.6%	28.1%
01	AL	323	188	6238	19751	2.5%	48.3%	64	36	3682	3667	2.7%	32.4%
02	AK	304	106	1255	5285	7.2%	60.8%	40	17	550	1143	4.8%	48.1%
04	AZ	182	77	6285	18056	1.4%	52.3%	37	30	3583	2450	2.7%	22.8%
05	AR	305	164	4285	15945	2.9%	51.6%	78	53	3154	3664	3.5%	32.5%
06	CA	542	217	17179	34262	2.2%	47.9%	114	72	10564	6503	2.8%	23.8%
08	CO	219	79	5044	16558	1.8%	56.6%	44	20	2454	1832	3.4%	30.0%
09	CT	257	70	3401	8372	3.8%	56.5%	43	20	2649	1488	4.1%	25.2%
10	DE	185	84	3882	8299	3.1%	47.3%	47	23	2262	1268	5.2%	25.0%
11	DC	151	51	12412	43331	0.5%	58.2%	37	22	4610	2731	2.1%	23.6%
12	FL	536	254	11555	32155	2.4%	50.2%	138	75	6647	4940	4.1%	28.3%
13	GA	262	161	7477	23350	1.8%	47.1%	66	44	5774	4716	2.3%	27.3%
15	HI	188	87	3890	14585	1.9%	54.2%	60	44	2841	1705	5.8%	22.4%
16	ID	306	109	3292	13743	2.9%	59.8%	88	34	1775	1303	8.6%	32.1%
17	IL	281	127	7091	25151	1.6%	53.9%	55	43	5150	4045	2.4%	25.0%
18	IN	394	178	7675	24653	2.3%	52.8%	112	63	5511	3964	4.2%	27.5%
19	IA	342	168	6002	26338	1.9%	54.8%	80	33	3144	2343	4.6%	31.1%
20	KS	199	107	4667	18827	1.6%	52.3%	56	23	3041	3380	2.3%	37.7%
21	KY	208	107	4980	16305	1.9%	50.8%	47	33	3162	2308	3.4%	25.3%
22	LA	524	282	9830	31464	2.5%	49.8%	131	80	6832	6124	3.3%	29.9%
23	ME	299	83	1469	5449	6.6%	62.5%	87	31	1414	818	12.6%	29.4%
24	MD	227	83	3340	8900	3.4%	53.7%	72	29	5374	2425	4.0%	22.8%
25	MA	330	114	4726	8980	4.7%	49.5%	52	24	3003	1671	4.4%	25.2%
26	MI	616	258	6122	22304	3.8%	55.8%	140	77	6535	5348	3.9%	29.7%
27	MN	1078	486	9376	33206	4.5%	54.3%	290	167	7515	5528	7.6%	28.1%
28	MS	273	193	7156	24628	1.9%	45.6%	63	35	2833	3019	3.1%	33.7%
29	MO	319	216	6571	22194	2.4%	46.3%	82	53	4229	3136	4.1%	26.5%
30	MT	370	121	2693	12816	3.7%	62.7%	87	26	1749	2888	3.8%	48.6%
31	NE	169	65	3621	15095	1.5%	58.4%	35	21	2304	1740	3.1%	27.4%
32	NV	193	73	5209	12975	2.0%	52.1%	50	35	4087	2437	3.4%	22.5%
33	NH	296	105	3135	8714	4.4%	54.9%	68	25	1686	1021	8.4%	29.1%
34	NJ	200	92	5240	13068	2.2%	49.2%	39	26	3871	2264	2.8%	22.5%
35	NM	160	68	5258	19114	1.2%	55.2%	58	36	5091	5060	1.8%	31.0%
36	NY	294	117	4206	12433	3.2%	53.9%	59	39	5093	3107	3.1%	23.3%
37	NC	303	140	5628	16079	2.7%	51.0%	72	41	3816	3129	3.5%	29.3%
38	ND	210	105	2279	11306	2.7%	55.7%	44	34	1417	2755	2.8%	37.6%
39	OH	328	138	7779	28055	1.6%	55.3%	74	39	4336	2801	3.9%	26.3%
40	OK	223	134	6134	18659	1.9%	47.2%	66	37	3756	3985	2.5%	33.4%
41	OR	281	75	2337	10007	3.4%	64.4%	71	34	1402	943	10.0%	28.9%
42	PA	249	96	4602	11453	2.9%	51.9%	63	38	4295	2554	3.8%	23.8%
44	RI	226	84	2962	6928	4.3%	51.7%	56	42	2994	1508	6.1%	20.0%
45	SC	474	221	9418	26387	2.6%	50.6%	101	60	4300	3789	4.1%	30.0%
46	SD	210	86	2762	15291	1.9%	60.3%	42	30	1482	2246	3.1%	35.6%
47	TN	251	161	5816	18922	2.1%	46.8%	70	29	2696	2107	4.5%	31.8%
48	TX	287	168	8635	27910	1.6%	48.4%	71	44	5541	4600	2.4%	28.4%
49	UT	214	71	3179	11586	2.4%	59.2%	50	22	2449	1624	4.3%	28.4%
50	VT	303	78	2016	6853	5.3%	62.2%	53	18	1350	890	7.4%	31.0%
51	VA	226	107	4691	11876	2.7%	49.0%	67	36	4869	2777	3.6%	24.2%
53	WA	272	126	3144	10308	3.7%	52.8%	72	33	2272	1512	6.5%	28.5%
54	WV	217	122	5165	11694	2.8%	44.8%	33	29	2304	1527	3.9%	21.7%
55	WI	576	267	5870	17637	4.6%	51.9%	179	87	5927	4907	5.1%	31.4%
56	WY	183	70	2507	10390	2.4%	58.5%	52	18	1432	3698	1.9%	53.8%
72	PR	132	56	17136	63768	0.3%	55.4%	96	65	28326	14387	1.1%	20.2%

Response Rates of the 2011 Telephone Participant Survey

		Landline						Cell Phone
FIPS	State	Completes (I)	Eligible, non- interview (E)	Unresolved (U)	Ineligible (X)	e1	RR3	Completes (I)	Eligible, non-interview (E)	Unresolved (U)	Ineligible (X)	e1	RR3
		16507	11275	83542	248962	10.0%	45.6%	4832	1903	58142	36181	15.7%	30.5%
01	AL	254	198	1435	4029	10.1%	42.6%	70	36	952	904	10.5%	34.0%
02	AK	271	135	615	2319	14.9%	54.5%	49	16	290	519	11.1%	50.4%
04	AZ	260	146	1622	4188	8.8%	47.3%	62	24	556	398	17.8%	33.6%
05	AR	255	197	1204	4221	9.7%	44.9%	66	25	540	669	12.0%	42.4%
06	CA	1436	939	9469	16676	12.5%	40.4%	479	179	6135	2895	18.5%	26.7%
08	CO	310	195	1796	5263	8.8%	46.8%	65	21	778	430	16.7%	30.1%
09	CT	245	180	1517	2626	13.9%	38.5%	75	43	970	430	21.5%	22.9%
10	DE	246	181	1387	2479	14.7%	39.0%	76	35	746	328	25.3%	25.4%
11	DC	235	138	1808	6157	5.7%	49.3%	126	52	1332	582	23.4%	25.7%
12	FL	258	205	1614	4071	10.2%	41.1%	65	28	856	518	15.2%	29.1%
13	GA	262	179	1617	4874	8.3%	45.6%	58	24	655	437	15.8%	31.3%
15	HI	243	143	907	3225	10.7%	50.3%	82	45	483	227	35.9%	27.3%
16	ID	268	178	1154	4329	9.3%	48.4%	60	42	606	355	22.3%	25.3%
17	IL	289	229	1756	5672	8.4%	43.5%	95	30	1224	753	14.2%	31.8%
18	IN	807	466	1106	12165	9.5%	58.6%	68	21	623	369	19.4%	32.4%
19	IA	310	248	1295	5105	9.9%	45.2%	86	40	843	550	18.6%	30.4%
20	KS	241	195	1365	4109	9.6%	42.5%	81	23	628	634	14.1%	42.1%
21	KY	258	178	1204	3357	11.5%	44.9%	78	20	800	474	17.1%	33.2%
22	LA	934	639	5605	16569	8.7%	45.4%	267	126	3696	2926	11.8%	32.1%
23	ME	244	141	646	2143	15.2%	50.5%	76	26	622	292	25.9%	28.9%
24	MD	230	154	1303	2919	11.6%	43.0%	91	33	1041	358	25.7%	23.2%
25	MA	274	196	1576	2477	16.0%	38.0%	69	30	948	394	20.1%	23.8%
26	MI	255	176	1145	3774	10.3%	46.5%	103	30	1270	878	13.2%	34.3%
27	MN	270	218	1201	3987	10.9%	43.6%	91	43	1048	652	17.1%	29.1%
28	MS	259	204	1306	4747	8.9%	44.7%	66	35	704	681	12.9%	34.4%
29	MO	256	201	1222	3656	11.1%	43.2%	83	30	868	499	18.5%	30.4%
30	MT	280	172	937	3934	10.3%	51.0%	81	20	534	817	11.0%	50.7%
31	NE	253	196	1152	4139	9.8%	45.0%	68	17	673	380	18.3%	32.7%
32	NV	256	163	1510	3614	10.4%	44.5%	71	35	667	410	20.5%	29.2%
33	NH	329	275	1725	4304	12.3%	40.3%	64	25	655	343	20.6%	28.6%
34	NJ	311	223	1989	4195	11.3%	41.0%	64	33	1089	436	18.2%	21.7%
35	NM	221	157	1474	5106	6.9%	46.1%	99	24	583	646	16.0%	45.8%
36	NY	249	181	1238	3100	12.2%	42.9%	74	60	1099	538	19.9%	21.0%
37	NC	267	176	1256	3155	12.3%	44.7%	56	22	472	418	15.7%	36.8%
38	ND	275	167	881	3766	10.5%	51.5%	52	26	403	782	9.1%	45.4%
39	OH	248	203	1181	3940	10.3%	43.3%	92	28	924	489	19.7%	30.5%
40	OK	263	207	1582	4309	9.8%	42.0%	72	20	618	589	13.5%	41.0%
41	OR	253	184	814	2987	12.8%	46.8%	79	32	505	283	28.2%	31.2%
42	PA	236	132	1013	1998	15.6%	44.9%	85	37	901	453	21.2%	27.1%
44	RI	245	178	1291	2511	14.4%	40.2%	87	33	1024	445	21.2%	25.8%
45	SC	254	208	1348	3985	10.4%	42.2%	67	23	580	450	16.7%	35.9%
46	SD	274	217	1117	5653	8.0%	47.2%	69	31	638	911	9.9%	42.3%
47	TN	267	190	1346	4196	9.8%	45.3%	53	18	543	353	16.8%	32.7%
48	TX	267	229	1750	5665	8.1%	41.9%	64	19	663	516	13.9%	36.6%
49	UT	251	135	1150	3527	9.9%	50.3%	70	29	702	360	21.6%	28.0%
50	VT	249	147	982	2874	12.1%	48.4%	71	23	732	376	20.0%	29.5%
51	VA	244	191	1366	3202	12.0%	40.8%	77	15	752	373	19.8%	32.0%
53	WA	251	184	1189	3426	11.3%	44.1%	82	37	673	380	23.9%	29.3%
54	WV	268	178	1169	2315	16.2%	42.2%	57	29	866	463	15.7%	25.7%
55	WI	248	191	1228	3286	11.8%	42.5%	93	33	1006	710	15.1%	33.5%
56	WY	268	172	1182	4359	9.2%	48.9%	75	24	483	1143	8.0%	54.6%
72	PR	810	360	4797	20279	5.5%	56.6%	423	153	11143	4965	10.4%	24.4%

Combine Landline and Cell Phone Samples

To combine the landline and cell phone samples, we classified each respondent based on their phone status. The cell phone survey asked, “In addition to your cell phone, is there at least one telephone inside your home that is currently working and is not a cell phone? Do not include telephones only used for business or telephones only used for computers or fax machines.” Those who responded ‘yes’ were classified as cell and landline adults, while those who responded ‘no’ were classified as cell-only adults. The landline survey also asked, “In addition to your residential landline telephone, do you also use one or more cell phone numbers?” Those who answered ‘yes’ were classified as cell and landline, while those who responded ‘no’ were classified as landline-only.

Population	Dual Frame Samples
Population	Landline (1)	Cell phone (2)
Landline only (A)	a₁
Dual-user (B)	b₁	b₂
Cell-only (C)		c₂

After determining the telephone groups, each is independently weighted to benchmarks for the population they are meant to represent. This is done for two reasons: 1) dual-users are overrepresented since they are eligible in both samples, and 2) there are differential response rates between dual-users and cell-only respondents in the cell phone sample. For the United States, the benchmark for the phone groups is regional estimates from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). The NHIS is an in-person household survey that collects information about cell phone and landline availability. It provides national estimates of the cell-only population, the landline-only population, and the dual-user population. For the dual-user ratio adjustment, we post-stratified into three categories: receive most calls on cell phone (b₁₁), receive most calls on landline (b₁₃), and receive calls on both regularly (b₁₂).

For Puerto Rico, the phone groups are estimated from the mail survey conducted with a sample of boat owners selected from the boat registrations.

Participant Nonresponse Adjustment

We adjusted for participant non-response for child and adult participants within each census region. The non-response adjustment cells were based on gender, household boat ownership, and whether the selected participant was on the phone or whether someone else in the household was selected.

1 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless201306.pdf

2 http://www.census.gov/prod/2009pubs/p60-236.pdf

3 Documentation for these response rates are available at http://www.aapor.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Standard_Definitions2&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=3156

File Type	application/msword
Author	Seth H. Muzzy
Last Modified By	tyrone.huff
File Modified	2014-06-24
File Created	2014-06-24

Part A - NRBS OMB Justification 2014 - r3 (2)