Data For Decision Requirements For National Transportation Policy Making
Click HERE for graphic.
1991 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Chairman: C. MICHAEL WALTON, Bess Harris Jones Centennial Professor of
Natural Resource Policy Studies and Chairman, Department of Civil
Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin
Vice Chairman: WILLIAM W. MILLAR, Executive Director, Port Authority of
Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Executive Director: THOMAS B. DEEN, Transportation Research Board
_______________________________________________________
GILBERT E. CARMICHAEL, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio)
BRIAN W. CLYMER, Administrator, Urban Mass Transportation
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio)
JERRY R. CURRY, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, U .S. Department of Transportation (ex officio)
TRAVIS P. DUNGAN, Administrator, Research and Special Programs
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio)
FRANCIS B. FRANCOIS, Executive Director, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. (ex officio)
JOHN GRAY, President, National Asphalt Pavement Association, Lanham,
Maryland (ex officio)
THOMAS H. HANNA, President and CEO, Motor Vehicle Manufacturers
Association of the United States, Inc., Detroit, Michigan (ex officio)
BARRY L. HARRIS, Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation (ex officio)
LT. GEN. HENRY J. HATCH, Chief of Engineers and Commander, U .S. Army,
Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C. (ex officio)
THOMAS D. LARSON, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation (ex officio)
CAPT. WARREN G. LEBACK, Administrator. Maritime Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation (ex officio)
GEORGE H. WAY, JR., Vice President, Research and Test Department,
Association of American Railroads, Washington, D.C. (ex officio)
ROBERT J. AARONSON, President, Air Transport Association of America,
Washington, D.C.
JAMES M. BEGGS, Chairman, SPACEHAB, Inc. (former Administrator,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration), Washington, D.C.
J. RON BRINSON, President and CEO, Board of Commissioners of the Port
of New Orleans, Louisiana
L. GARY BYRD, Consultant, Alexandria, Virginia
A. RAY CHAMBERLAIN, Executive Director, Colorado Department of
Transportation. Denver
L. STANLEY CRANE, (former Chairman and CEO, Consolidated Rail
Corporation), Gladwyne, Pennsylvania
JAMES C. DELONG, Director of Aviation, Philadelphia International
Airport, Pennsylvania
RANDY DOI, Vice President and Director, IVHS Strategic Business Unit,
Motorola Inc., Northbrook, Illinois
S. EARL DOVE, President, Earl Dove Company (former Chairman, AAA
Cooper Transportation), Dothart, Alabama
LOUIS J. GAMBACCINI, General Manager, Southeastern Pennsylvania
Transportation Authority (SEPTA), Philadelphia (Past Chairman, 1989)
THOMAS J. HARRELSON, Secretary, North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Raleigh
KERMIT H. JUSTICE, Secretary, State of Delaware Department of
Transportation, Dover
LESTER P. LAMM, President, Highway Users Federation, Washington, D.C.
DENMAN K. MCNEAR, Vice Chairman, Rio Grande Industries, San Francisco,
California
ADOLF D. MAY, JR., Professor and Vice-Chair, University of California
Institute of Transportation Studies, Berkeley
WAYNE MURI, Chief Engineer, Missouri Highway and Transportation
Department, Jefferson City (Past Chairman, 1990)
ARNOLD W. OLIVER, Executive Director, CEO, Texas Department of
Transportation, Austin, Texas
JOHN H. RILEY, Chief of Staff, Governor's Office, St. Paul, Minnesota
DELLA M. ROY, Professor of Materials Science, Pennsylvania State
University, University Park
JOSEPH M. SUSSMAN, J. R, East Professor of Engineering, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge
JOHN R. TABB, Director, Mississippi State Highway Department, Jackson
FRANKLIN E. WHITE, Commissioner, New York State Department of
Transportation. Albany
JULIAN WOLPERT, Henry G. Bryant Professor of Geography, Public Affairs
and Urban Planning, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International
Affairs, Princeton University, New Jersey
Special Report 234
Data
for
Decisions
Requirements for
National
Transportation
Policy Making
Transportation Research Board
National Research Council
Washington, D.C. 1992
Transportation Research Board Special Report 234
Subscriber Category
IA planning and administration
Transportation Research Board publications are available by ordering
directly from TRB. They may also be obtained on a regular basis through
organizational or individual affiliation with TRB; affiliates or library
subscribers are eligible for substantial discounts. For further
information, write to the Transportation Research Board, National Research
Council, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20418.
Printed in the United States of America
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the
Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn
from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy
of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee
responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and
with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors
according to the procedures approved by a Report Review Committee
consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National
Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
This report was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration of the
U.S. Department of Transportation.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Data for decisions: requirements for national transportation policy making.
p. cm. -- (Special report; 234)
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 0-309-05 156-8
1. Transportation--United States--Information services. 2.
Transportation--United States--Planning--Decision making. 3.
Transportation and state--United States. 4. United States. Dept.
of Transportation. I. National Research Council (U .S .).
Transportation Research Board. II. Series: Special report
(National Research Council (U.S.). Transportation Research
Board); 234.
HE206.2.D38 1992
388' .068--dc20 91-44560
CIP
Cover design: Diane L. Ross
Committee for the Study of Strategic
Transportation Data Needs
LILLIAN C. LIBURDI, Chair, The Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey, New York, New York
BRIAN J. L. BERRY, The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson
JOSEPH W. DUNCAN, The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation, New York, New York
GARY R. FAUTH, Charles River Associates, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts
DOUGLAS C. FRECHTUNG, Consultant, Bethesda, Maryland
RICHARD S. GOLASZEWSKI, Gellman Research Associates, Inc., Jenkintown,
Pennsylvania
GEORGE E. HALL, Base Line Data Corporation, Washington, D.C.
WILLIAM B. JOHNSTON, Hudson Institute, Washington, D.C.
RONALD E KIRBY, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments,
Washington, D.C.
EDITH B. PAGE, Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress
OLGA J. PENDLETON, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station
HENRY L. PEYREBRUNE, New York State Department of Transportation,
Albany
THEODORE H. POISTER, Georgia State University, Atlanta
JENIFER WISHART, Hickling Corporation, Silver Spring, Maryland
Liaison Representatives
T.D. COLLINSWORTH, Military Traffic Management Command, U .S.
Department of Defense
VIRGINIA DE WOLF, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
ARLENE L. DIETZ, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of
Defense
RICHARD R. JOHN, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center,
Research and Special Programs Administration, U .S . Department of
Transportation
ROLE R. SCHMITT, Project Manager, National Transportation Policy
Team, U.S. Department of Transportation
CHARLES A. WAITE, U.S. Bureau of the Census
GEORGE F. WIGGERS, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of
Transportation
Transportation Research Board Staff
ROBERT E. SKINNER, JR., Director for Special Projects
NANCY P. HUMPHREY, Project Manager
JAMES A. SCOTT, Division A Liaison
NANCY A. ACKERMAN, Director of Publications
LUANNE CRAYTON, Assistant Editor
Consultant
ALAN E. PISARSKI
Preface
Data provide critical input for informed decision making, but they rarely
have a champion. Because they are viewed as support for other essential
activities, data are often not accorded high visibility or priority in
budget allocations. Transportation data are no exception. When U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Samuel Skinner launched a
strategic planning process in 1989 to assess the future direction of
transportation activities, he found significant deficiencies in the data
needed to characterize the use and performance of the nation's
transportation system.
Fortunately, momentum for change is building. Since this report was
completed, the U.S. Congress passed legislation reauthorizing surface
transportation programs. The bill provides for creation of a new Bureau of
Transportation Statistics within DOT with a mandate to improve the quality
and comparability of transportation data. Secretary Skinner has already
committed to the development of a permanent strategic planning capability
at DOT and has taken initial steps to strengthen the department's data
programs to support his role as chief advisor on national transportation
policies.
As part of this initiative, the secretary requested and funded this
study to provide an independent assessment of the data needed for national
transportation decision making and the institutional changes required
within the department to ensure that a permanent data capability is
established. To carry out these tasks, the Transportation Research Board of
the National Research Council formed a study committee under the leadership
of Lillian C. Liburdi, Director of the Port Department of The Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey. The committee included 14 experts on
transportation policy and impacts, data management and statistics, and
information technology; committee members represented major providers and
users of transportation data in state and local government and the private
sector. The findings and recommendations of the committee's study are pre-
sented here.
Nancy Humphrey managed the study, and with the assistance and advice
of Alan Pisarski, consultant to the project, drafted the final report under
the guidance of the committee and supervision of Robert E. Skinner, Jr.,
Director for Special Projects. Valuable information about existing
transportation data programs and methods of organizing transportation
statistics was provided to the committee by the agency
v
liaisons and the following special representatives of the DOT operating
administrations and Statistics Canada: Jane H. Bachner, Federal Railroad
Administration; Patricia S. Beardsley, Federal Aviation Administration;
David Dodds, Statistics Canada; William B. Ebersold, Maritime
Administration; Santo J. LaTores, Research and Special Programs
Administration; David R. McElhaney, Federal Highway Administration; Sherry
A. Richardson, U.S. Coast Guard; William H. Walsh, Jr., National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration; and Samuel L. Zimmerman, Urban Mass
Transportation Administration.
Additional input on transportation-related data programs was provided
by the Bureau of the Census, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Bureau
of Economic Analysis, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Interviews with
the staff of selected federal statistical agencies, including the National
Center for Education Statistics, the Energy Information Administration, and
the proposed Center for Environmental Statistics, also provided valuable
insight on how the data programs of other federal agencies are organized.
Special appreciation is expressed to Marguerite Schneider and Frances
Holland for assistance in typing drafts of the manuscript.
vi
Contents
Executive Summary 1
1 The Role of Data 13
Scope of Study, 13
Overview, 14
Role of Dam in the Policy Process, 19
Organization of Report, 22
2 Data Requirements: A National Transportation Performance Monitoring
System 25
Strategic Planning Context, 26
Elements of NTPMS, 29
Biennial Performance Report, 40
Findings and Recommendations, 41
3 Meeting Data Needs 45
Major Sources of National Transportation Dam, 45
Data Deficiencies, 48
Private Provision of Data: Issues and Opportunities, 63
New Technology, 66
Findings and Recommendations, 68
4 Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 77
Overview, 77
Federal Statistical Agencies--A Model for DOT, 82
Concept of a Transportation Data Center, 84
Functions of TDC, 85
Operation of TDC, 88
Findings and Recommendations, 91
5 Next Steps 97
Immediate Steps, 97
Short-Term Steps, 98
Long-Term Steps, 99
Conclusion, 100
Appendix A Summaries of Major National Transportation Data
Programs 103
Appendix B New Technologies for Transportation Data Collection and
Analysis: Opportunities and Applications 153
Study Committee Biographical Information 163
Executive Summary
The safe and efficient performance of the U.S. transportation system is
critical to economic growth, national security, and the mobility of all
citizens. As steward of the nation's transportation system, the Secretary
of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for
developing policies and programs that improve system performance and
anticipate future needs.
In 1989 the DOT Secretary initiated a strategic planning process in
order to take stock of the state of the nation's transportation system--the
first such national assessment in more than a decade. The process revealed
significant deficiencies in data on the use and performance of the
transportation system, prompting the department to request an independent
study by the Transportation Research Board of the data requirements to
support strategic transportation policy making and the institutional
changes necessary to make these data available on a permanent basis.
The special committee that was appointed to carry out the study
concurred with the secretary's assessment that the data to inform national
transportation policy making are seriously inadequate and concluded that
the organization of data activities in the department is not conducive to
providing them. The decentralized, modally focused data programs of DOT,
although appropriate to the missions of the operating administrations, are
not well structured to address the strategic, cross-cutting, systemwide
issues that face the department today. To ensure that the secretary,
Congress, and the transportation community have a more solid knowledge base
to support investment and regula-tory decisions, which involve billions of
dollars, the committee recommends the following:
- Immediate establishment of a transportation data center (TDC) within
DOT, preferably by legislative mandate, to provide a focal
1
2 DATA FOR DECISIONS
point for the compilation and integration of systemwide transportation
data;
- Development of a national transportation performance monitoring system
(NTPMS) by the center to track key indicators of the nation's
transportation system and its environment from the viewpoint of mar-
kets and users;
- Preparation of a biennial report by TDC on the state of the nation's
transportation system, containing a summary and analysis of trends in
system performance and impacts; and
- Annual funding of $20 million initially to support a qualified
director, full-time professional staff, and start-up for the
activities of TDC, including national surveys of passenger and freight
flows; and sustained long-term funding to ensure continuity of data
for monitoring and policy analysis.
The committee urges that the department move quickly on these
recommendations. The breadth and complexity of the issues facing the
department today in a rapidly changing environment demand strengthening of
the resources committed to data collection and analysis, enabling policy to
be founded on informed decision making.
ROLE OF DATA IN NATIONAL POLICY MAKING
The 1966 legislation that established DOT (Pub.L. 89-670) gave the
secretary a broad mandate to develop and coordinate transportation policies
and programs that provide for the safe and efficient movement of goods and
people, support economic growth, serve the national defense, provide for
the general welfare, and contribute to such other national goals as
resource conservation. Most of the major modes of transportation--highways,
rail, public transit, air, water, pipeline, and even emerging modes, such
as commercial space transport--are represented under the DOT umbrella. The
department, however, evolved as a decentralized modally oriented group of
operating administrations, reflecting the modal structure of DOT at its
founding, the modal orientation of the transportation regulatory process,
the initial focus of the department on the construction and expansion of
the major modal transportation networks, and, not least, the modal
orientation of the congressional committees that oversee the department's
programs.
Globalization of the economy, deregulation of the major transportation
industries, and technological change have dramatically changed
Executive Summary 3
the context in which the department operates today. Passenger and freight
travel are becoming increasingly intermodal as travelers and shippers
search for the safest, most efficient and reliable combination of transport
modes. Strategic issues revolve around how well the U .S. transportation
system performs and the modes interact to contribute to economic growth and
competitiveness in word markets and the safety and mobility of personal
travel. Transportation policies are also being shaped by other national
objectives--environmental quality, energy efficiency, and national
security--making it important to understand how transportation contributes
to or detracts from these other national goals.
The data programs of the department have not kept pace with this
changing policy environment. Cross-cutting data programs, which involve
multiple modes and provide basic information about the use of the system,
such as national surveys of passenger and freight movements, were curtailed
or eliminated during the 1980s. The data programs of the operating
administrations, which constitute the majority of the department's
statistical programs, lack common frameworks, definitions, and assumptions,
making it virtually impossible to look across individual modes at
systemwide performance. National assessments of the status of the
transportation system are conducted sporadically; the recent strategic plan
was the first comprehensive look at the entire system since 1979. Finally,
in contrast with many other federal agencies, the department lacks a
permanent entity that is responsible for ensuring that the data and
analyses to inform decision makers on national policy issues are available
on a consistent, reliable, and continuing basis.
Deficiencies in the availability, coverage, and quality of data for
national transportation policy making hamper the ability of the secretary
to analyze and address fundamental questions that affect a wide range of
regulatory and investment policies. As many of the following examples show,
however, data alone may prove insufficient to address the full complexity
of these issues without complementary special analyses and research.
- Safety is one of the department's top priorities, yet the secretary
and Congress cannot assess the safety concerns at the heart of the
current controversy between two major freight carriers. The trucking
industry is seeking further relaxation of federal truck size and
weight regulations to improve productivity. The rail industry claims
that further increases in truck size and weight would not only divert
substan-
4 DATA FOR DECISIONS
tial rail traffic, but would also degrade the safety of highway
travel. The information needed to evaluate these positions--trend data
on the safety of track travel by track type and road class--are simply
not available.
- Transportation is a vital sector of the economy, accounting for 17
percent, or about $940 billion annually (in 1990 dollars), of total
U.S. expenditures on goods and services. A major reason for making
transportation investments is their contribution to economic growth,
yet the link between spending for new transportation infrastructure
and regional or national growth is poorly understood. Moreover,
current measures of the productivity of the transportation sector do
not reflect the full value of transportation services to the economy
and long-term growth. Thus, the department cannot assess the ways and
the extent to which alternative levels or types of investment can
contribute to economic growth and international competitiveness.
- The transportation system must accommodate commercial and defense
needs, as was demonstrated in the Persian Gulf War. However,
systematic data on the use of the system, and the constraints created
by the special requirements of military equipment, are not routinely
collected. Thus, the secretary is unable to identify investment
strategies that would have the greatest payoffs in improved military
deployment capability or assess the consequences of military
requirements on commercial transportation facilities and general eco-
nomic performance.
- The Clean Air Act of 1990 requires that transportation projects
conform with and contribute to plans for improving air quality in the
nation's urban areas, requirements that could revolutionize the way
that travel needs are met in large cities. However, the data to
estimate emissions levels, such as information on vehicle travel and
speeds, are inadequate, and the models used to forecast travel growth
consistently underestimate demand, omitting key variables that affect
propensity to travel. Without consistently gathered summary data on
emissions for major urban areas, neither the Secretary of DOT nor the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency can assess the
air quality impacts of alternative transportation investments or
alternative levels of investment to meet federal reporting
requirements.
- New technologies, such as high-speed rail, magnetically levitated
(maglev) trains, and vertical take-off and landing aircraft, are being
proposed as alternatives to airport and highway expansion in heavily
traveled intercity corridors. However, with limited data on intercity
surface passenger travel, the factors that influence modal trip
choices,
Executive Summary 5
and the costs of alternative modal investments, the department cannot
evaluate the merits of alternative ways of meeting intercity travel
demand or the implications for federal investment policies.
- Congestion has become a major concern of city and suburban dwellers in
most large urban areas. However, without data on commuting delays or
freight delivery times summarized and reported in a consistent manner
across major urban areas, the department's ability to monitor demand
across modes and determine whether solutions lie with new highways,
more transit investment, demand management measures, or other
alternatives is limited.
- Deregulation has resulted in loss of air, rail, and bus services for
many rural communities. More complete data on the extent, frequency,
and cost of providing transportation services in rural areas would
strengthen the department's capacity to analyze rural service delivery
alternatives and develop effective rural development strategies.
Providing an improved data capability to address these issues, even if
all the information could be gathered, will not provide answers to all of
these questions or guarantee better policies. In fact, more data may
lengthen and increase the complexity of the decision process, but without
good data, decisions will be arbitrary, options overlooked, and solutions
reactive.
DATA SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
The committee recommends that the department establish a national
transportation performance monitoring system to track key indicators of the
nation's transportation system and its environment. The system should be
organized from the perspective of markets and users instead of individual
transportation modes. NTPMS would provide a continuing source of trend data
for monitoring the impacts of past policy decisions, an early alert system
to anticipate problems and opportunities as they emerge, and a framework
for more in-depth analyses of policy options and programmatic responses.
The source data for NTPMS should be organized according to the major
attributes of the transportation system, which fall into four broad
categories: (a) supply and (b) demand, which comprise basic information
about the extent and capacity of the transportation system, activity levels
and flows of passengers and freight, and characteristics of users;
6 DATA FOR DECISIONS
(c) performance, which includes information on the value of the system to
users, including its safety; accessibility; level, efficiency, and quality
of service; and cost; and (d) impacts, by which the contributions of the
system to other national goals, such as economic growth, national security,
environmental quality, and energy conservation, are measured.
Analysis provides the means through which data are translated into
useful information. Special studies to analyze key explanatory factors
underlying trends, analytic models (e.g., for forecasting travel demand),
and analytic tools, such as geographic information systems (GIS), which
allow graphical display and analysis of spatially oriented modal data to
enhance intermodal comparisons, must also be part of NTPMS.
The principal findings of NTPMS should be summarized in a
congressionally mandated biennial report on the state of the nation's
transportation system. This report would provide a regular assessment of
the status of the transportation system, drawing on benchmark data from
selected performance indicators organized by transportation markets.
Obtaining the data required for NTPMS would not involve supplanting
existing modal data programs or amassing the detailed information on
individuals and firms needed for economic regulation. Rather, it would draw
on existing data or initiate data gathering that would complement existing
data.
MEETING DATA REQUIREMENTS
Developing the data for NTPMS cannot be accomplished simply by combining
existing modal data programs. It requires (a) collecting missing multimodal
data and (b) linking extensive existing transportation data programs and
supplementing them to improve data comparability for systemwide analysis.
The biggest current data gap from a multimodal perspective is pas-
senger and freight flow data. These data not only provide basic system
information on who and what is moving, by what mode, and from what origin
to what destination, they are also critical input to other key system
indicators of interest. Flow data provide the exposure measures to
calculate accident rates per passenger-mile or ton-mile. Flow data are also
critical inputs to forecasts of vehicle activity, which affects the level
of congestion, vehicle emissions, and energy use. National surveys of
passenger and freight flows should be the primary new data
Executive Summary 7
collection activity for NTPMS. Although national level data will not
provide the detailed information for some safety, environmental, and energy
analyses, additional sampling in major transportation corridors and urban
areas should provide adequate detail for national monitoring and analysis
purposes.
Improving the comparability of existing data for analysis of system
performance and impacts will require a long-term cooperative effort with
existing data providers. Data on performance of the transportation system--
the level of safety it offers, the extent of access it provides, and the
service it delivers--are available for some modes. However, the coverage
and comparability of these data are inadequate for making comparisons among
the modes or drawing conclusions about the system as a whole.
Safety data warrant special attention because of the high priority the
public and the department place on safety. Better exposure data, more
consistent accident reporting thresholds, and more complete and consistent
data on injuries for all modes are needed; obtaining these data will
require a long-term cooperative effort among the DOT operating
administrations and the states and other providers of accident data.
Personal mobility is a fundamental goal of transportation, but data on
the availability, frequency, and cost of transportation services in rural
areas and for low-income, elderly, and disabled populations are scattered
among many agencies or are unavailable. Improving these data will require a
joint effort among DOT, other federal agencies (e.g., the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services), and non-profit organizations (e.g.,
Community Transportation Association of America) to integrate and amplify
them.
Users are also concerned with the level. of service provided by the
transportation system. Several of the operating administrations (e.g., the
Federal Highway Administration, Urban Mass Transportation Administration,
Federal Aviation Administration) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
prepare reports on the condition and performance of modal systems, yet
together, they do not provide an understandable and reliable basis for
intermodal comparisons of the efficiency or quality of service or for
assessing the performance of the system as a whole. Coverage should be
expanded where possible to include more of the modes; more common measures
of service quality and other indicators of performance should be introduced
for each mode so that modal comparisons are possible; and measures of
performance at inter-modal connections should be devised.
8 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Gathering data on how the transportation system affects other national
policy objectives will require joint action with other federal agencies
and, in some cases, other levels of government. Priority areas are those
for which DOT has primary mission responsibility: measures for calculating
the contribution of the transportation sector to economic growth (DOT,
Bureau of Economic Analysis, and Bureau of Labor Statistics); condition and
capacity of transportation networks essential to meeting national security
needs (DOT and U.S. Department of Defense); impacts of transportation
activity--vehicle emissions, wet-lands intrusion, noise, oil spills--on
environmental quality [DOT, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), states];
and measures of energy efficiency to calculate the impact of the
transportation sector on national energy dependency and global warming
(DOT, EPA, and the U.S. Department of Energy). For many of these areas,
measuring impacts is a first step; understanding what effect these impacts
have on the economy or the environment is a far more difficult and poorly
understood task.
The private sector has become an increasingly important source of
transportation data with the decline in economic regulatory reporting
requirements. DOT should purchase data from the private sector, or
franchise data collection to private vendors, when such acquisition is more
cost-effective, will not compromise the real or perceived credibility of
the resulting information, and will not restrict public access to the final
dam products. Opportunities for cooperative public-private dam-gathering
efforts should also be examined.
Advances in data-gathering and information-processing technologies
have the potential to reduce costs and reporting burdens while improving
the speed and reliability of data collection and analysis. DOT should
examine the areas of greatest opportunity for application in the
development of NTPMS, such as automated surveying methods, electronic
linking of records through electronic data interchange, automated vehicle
and traffic monitoring through intelligent vehicle-high-way system
technologies, and integration of data into GIS for analysis.
ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES
If the data and analytic capability for informed decision making on
policies that are national in significance and systemwide in focus are to
be available on a continuing basis, DOT must establish a permanent
institutional structure within the department--a transportation data
Executive Summary 9
center -- to take responsibility for these tasks. The primary role of TDC
would be to provide a focal point for the compilation and integration of
systemwide transportation data and a key link among the operating
administrations, other federal agencies and levels of government, and the
private sector to ensure that these data are made available on a
consistent, reliable, and continuing basis. Specifically, TDC would be
responsible for developing NTPMS, managing the department's multi-modal
surveys, and preparing the biennial state of the system report.
Many federal agencies have developed and sustained broad data programs
to support agency mission objectives by establishing central statistical
offices, such as the National Center for Education Statistics, the National
Center for Health Statistics, and the Energy Information Administration.
Organization of TDC should be modeled on the best elements of other federal
statistical agencies. These statistical agencies function as separate
offices with permanent staff and separate budgets, command a strong measure
of independence within their agencies to ensure the impartiality and
credibility of the data they produce, and have a commitment to quality and
professional standards.
Like many other federal statistical agencies, TDC would limit its new
data collection activities to broad, cross-cutting data, such as the
multimodal passenger and commodity flow surveys. Collection of data for
operating and administrative purposes and mode-specific data acquisition
should remain with the relevant operating administrations.
The specific functions of TDC should include identification of the
data needed to develop NTPMS; data compilation, including electronically
accessing summary data from existing modal data bases, supplementing modal
data to improve comparability where necessary, and acquiring multimodal
data (e.g., national surveys of passenger and freight flows); standard
setting to improve the quality, consistency, and comparability of source
data and quality assurance of its own data products; synthesis and
interpretation of the data in a form useful for policy analysis; and
dissemination of the data to the secretary, Congress, and the
transportation user community.
Coordination and cooperation with numerous existing organizations are
essential to the success of TDC. For example, development of NTPMS will
require close cooperation with the operating administrations; the DOT
Transportation Data Coordinating Committee could help examine ways to
improve the linkages among existing modal data programs. The Offices of the
Assistant Secretary for Policy and International Affairs and the new Office
of Strategic Planning under the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs
could assist in defining
10 DATA FOR DECISIONS
the long-term strategic issues that are likely to shape the data collection
requirements of TDC. The Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
(VNTSC) of the Research and Special Programs Administration could assist in
structuring the NTPMS; VNTSC has managed many of the department's modal
data bases and currently has the primary responsibility for the limited
multimodal data collection efforts of the department. In turn, TDC could
provide support for many of these groups. With a permanent central data
institution in place, the department should be better able to articulate
its data deficiencies and build the case for obtaining the necessary
resources to improve them.
Links also need to be forged outside DOT. The data responsibilities of
TDC could help focus the agenda of the recently formed Federal Interagency
Transportation Statistics Committee. The U.S. Bureau of the Census could
assist with such activities as developing a TDC policy on confidentiality
and data access, designing a user outreach and data dissemination program,
and jointly sponsoring data collection programs. Finally, the private
sector could help TDC define data requirements from a user perspective and
become involved in collaborative data-gathering efforts.
NEXT STEPS
The immediate priority of the department should be establishment of TDC.
This can be accomplished by executive action of the secretary; permanent
authorization through legislation, however, should be achieved as soon as
feasible. The first activity of TDC would be to assume responsibility for
the national passenger and freight flow surveys, partial funding for which
is included in DOT's fiscal year 1992 budget. TDC should ensure that
continuing and adequate support of these surveys is provided. The committee
recommends initial annual funding for TDC of about $20 million to support a
director and core staff, the two national surveys, and start-up efforts to
integrate existing transportation data and develop analytic tools.
In the short term, TDC should begin development of NTPMS, establishing
an advisory committee of public and private users and providers of
transportation data to ensure that the data requirements are structured
from a user perspective. TDC should publish its first report on the state
of the transportation system no more than a year after the center is
established. Gaps in data should be highlighted and areas for strengthening
data comparability pinpointed in the report preparation
Executive Summary, 11
process, providing a blueprint for future data gathering and analysis
activities.
Over the longer term, TDC should broaden its activities: establish
common definitions and survey standards to improve the consistency and
comparability of existing data programs, working closely with the operating
administrations and a technical advisory committee of experts in
transportation statistics and analysis; develop memoranda of understanding
with other federal agencies to set interagency data collection priorities
and responsibilities; enter into joint ventures with the private sector in
data collection efforts; promote the use of new information technologies;
and develop a data dissemination program. These efforts will require
sustained funding at a higher annual level than the initial $20 million.
DOT has an opportunity to bring together a broad constituent group
through TDC to reverse long-standing criticisms of the inadequacies of
transportation statistics. The timing is good. The Secretary of DOT has
committed to developing a permanent strategic planning capability and has
taken some initial steps to strengthen the department's data programs to
support this effort. Congress has identified transportation data as an
issue in the pending reauthorization of surface transportation legislation;
the Senate bill would require establishment of a new Bureau of
Transportation Statistics within DOT. The department must take advantage of
these initiatives to create and sustain an institution dedicated to
developing the knowledge base to inform policy makers about the strategic
choices that will shape the transportation system of the future.
REFERENCE
Pub. L. 89-670. 1966. Department of Transportation Act. 80 Star., pp. 931-
950.
1
The Role of Data
In 1989 the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) embarked on a major
strategic assessment of the U.S. transportation system to determine how
best to meet the nation's future transportation needs (DOT 1989, foreword).
The strategic planning process revealed significant deficiencies in the
data needed to characterize the use and performance of the nation's
transportation systems and support the evaluation of alternative policies
and investment scenarios. The authors of the final policy document--A
Statement of National Transportation Policy (NTP) -- noted that multimodal
assessments of the entire transportation system to support strategic
planning "have not been regularly produced in a decade" (DOT 1990, 111,
112).
To remedy these deficiencies, the NTP called for action in two areas
to improve the "coverage, quality, and availability of data" to support
informed national transportation policy making: (a) a comprehensive
assessment of data needs and priorities and (b) more effective and per-
manent institutional mechanisms within the department to improve coor-
dination and management of these data (DOT 1990, 124). Implicit in these
recommendations is the recognition that building a permanent departmental
planning capability that emphasizes strategic assessment, policy
evaluation, and system monitoring is beyond the present capability of the
transportation data system to deliver.
SCOPE OF STUDY
To assist in the implementation of these recommendations, DOT requested
that the Transportation Research Board (TRB) undertake a 15-month study of
the availability and quality of national transportation data to support
DOT's continuing strategic decision-making requirements. The study
committee convened for this task
13
14 DATA FOR DECISIONS
- Identified the data requirements and key elements of a data system to
support national transportation policy making;
- Determined how these requirements could be met by modifying existing
data programs, supplying missing data, collaborating with the private
sector in data collection, and taking advantage of advances in
information systems technologies to reduce the cost and burden of data
collection;
- Examined institutional changes that are needed within DOT to improve
the coordination and management of data collection to inform policy;
and
- Recommended an implementation strategy.
The primary audience for the study is DOT; the main focus is data for
national policy making. However, the department's mission is broad. The
1966 legislation through which the department was established (Pub. L. 89-
670, 931) stressed its lead role "in the identification and solution of
transportation problems... with full and appropriate consideration of the
needs of the public, users, carriers, industry, labor, and the national
defense." Moreover, the department depends on other federal agencies, state
and local governments, and the private sector to collect and report much of
the data. In addition, international exchanges of data are becoming
increasingly important to addressing transportation problems in a global
economy. Thus, developing data programs that will inform national policy
making must involve all of these parties and should contribute to many of
their policy needs.
OVERVIEW
Transportation affects our daily lives. It brings us goods and services,
provides our means of getting to work, and meets our leisure travel needs.
Each year the U.S. transportation system handles about 3.5 trillion
passenger-miles and moves about 3.4 trillion ton-miles of freight.1 (DOT
1989, 1). During wartime, the system must also accommodate the rapid
deployment of military personnel and equipment, as was demonstrated in the
Persian Gulf War.
Transportation is a major sector of the economy, vital to economic
growth. About 1 of every 6 dollars -- $941 billion annually (in 1990
dollars), or 17 percent of the gross national product -- is spent on
purchases of transportation goods and services (Smith 1991, 6). These
The Role of Data 15
purchases support slightly more than 10 percent of the U.S. work force in
transportation or transportation-related jobs.
The mission of DOT is to develop and coordinate national transpor-
tation policies and programs that provide for the safe and efficient
movement of goods and people, support economic growth, serve the national
defense, provide for the general welfare, and contribute to such other
national goals as resource conservation (Pub. L. 89-670). Most of the major
modes of transport--highways, rail, public transit, air, water, pipeline,
as well as emerging modes like commercial space transport--are represented
under the DOT umbrella..2 However, many of the issues that have a major
influence on transportation policy today -- national security and
environmental, energy, and social concerns -- require the department to
interact with other national policy makers in the U.S. Department of
Defense, the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of
Energy, and other federal agencies.
The Changing Transportation Policy Context
As the transportation system has grown and matured over the years, the
policy issues facing DOT and related data needs have changed accordingly.
The 1960s through the early 1970s was a period of building and expansion
for many transportation modes. During this time, the majority of the
Interstate highway system was constructed, major airports were built or
expanded, and transit systems were rejuvenated and expanded with federal
assistance. Not surprisingly, federal policies and related data programs
were keyed to modal investment needs and financing requirements. The
National Policy Studies of this period--the National Transportation Reports
of 1972 and 1974--at-tempted to define public investment requirements for
each transportation mode based on extensive surveys of the plans and
priorities of state and local governments (DOT 1975, 3)..3 The last of its
kind, the final report of the National Transportation Policy Study
Commission published in 1979, attempted to forecast long-range passenger
and freight travel and related modal capital investment requirements for
two time periods and three growth scenarios (National Transportation Policy
Study Commission 1979).
Near completion of large investment programs and the energy shocks of
the mid- to late 1970s, which caused travel growth to slow, shifted policy
concerns from system expansion to more efficient use of
16 DATA FOR DECISIONS
the existing system and related strategies for system preservation and
rehabilitation. Another major policy initiative at this time was
deregulation of the aviation, interstate tracking, rail, maritime, and
intercity bus industries. As the federal government shed responsibilities
for economic regulation during the 1980s, related reporting requirements
for carriers were also reduced. At the same time, such major data programs
as the National Travel and the Commodity Transportation Surveys--the
principal sources of information on intercity passenger and freight travel,
respectively--were curtailed or discontinued, reflecting the prevailing
political philosophy of a smaller government role in a deregulated
environment.
Global markets and international trade grew rapidly during the 1980s,
supported by corporations that plan, produce, and market on a global scale;
containerization of cargo; and advanced communications technologies that
are used to track and coordinate freight movements. The shift toward a
borderless economy has had major implications for the way that
transportation is conceived and used. Shipments have become increasingly
intermodal as international brokers search for the most efficient
combination of modes to move goods worldwide, from factory floor to
distribution centers to final markets (Anderson 1990, 25; TRB 1992).
Increasing competition for global markets has also made firms more
cost conscious. Firms are replacing costly large inventories with just-in-
time delivery systems that rely on direct transport of production materials
and finished products to manufacturers and distributors, respectively
(Anderson 1990, 25). These changing patterns have put a premium on shipment
reliability and timeliness and increased the costs to firms of congestion
and delays in the transportation process (Johnston 1989, 26).
Finally, the shift from a predominately manufacturing to a service
economy in the United States has placed new demands on the transportation
system. Service businesses often require swift and reliable delivery of
high-value products that need safe handling. The modes that provide these
services, such as air freight, are favored despite their higher costs
(Johnston 1989, 18). In essence, a two-tiered freight system has emerged in
which large commodity shipments move on lower-cost bulk carriers, whereas
high-value goods move on higher cost, demand-responsive air freight-track
combinations (Pisarski 1988, 31).
Globalization of the economy has also affected passenger transport. In
1989 receipts from foreign visitors to the United States exceeded
The Role of Data 17
expenditures of U.S. travelers abroad for the first time (Frechtling 1990,
A-13). Foreign airlines seek entry to U.S. domestic markets, and U.S.
airlines seek reciprocal arrangements in foreign markets. Like shippers,
passengers often base their travel choices on the most efficient
combination of modes to minimize door-to-door travel time. As most
travelers are well aware, it is total trip time, including the trip to and
from the terminal and the time involved in transferring between modes, as
well as the line-haul portion of the trip, that matters (Hopkins 1990, 16).
Developing transportation policies in this changing environment re-
quires a clear vision of the role of transportation. Policy makers must be
able to articulate the value of transportation to economic growth and
society at large. At the same time, they must weigh other national
objectives. Safety must not be compromised in the effort to meet ever-
growing passenger and freight demand. The effect of expanding trans-
portation capacity on urban air quality and reducing dependence on foreign
oil must be considered. Policy makers must balance these objectives in
developing investment policies and exploring alternative ways of
accommodating users in adapting the system to changing needs.
Implications for Data
The changing transportation environment has important implications for
data. The supply-oriented perspective and mode-based data programs that
dominated the earlier construction era were appropriate for the modal
investment and financing policy issues of that time. A strictly modal
approach is insufficient to address the issues that face the transportation
system of the 1990s and beyond; issues that involve trade-offs among the
modes, intermodal linkages, or broader national objectives are at the heart
of most strategic policy choices facing the department. Today's more
market-focused environment requires a demand-oriented perspective and data
programs that provide policy makers with information about the performance
of the system and its contribution to other national goals.
The organization of data activities at DOT is not conducive to
providing this kind of information. The data programs in the department
have been developed largely to serve the missions and policies of the
operating administrations and the related concerns of mode-oriented
audiences, such as congressional oversight commit-
18 DATA FOR DECISIONS
tees. In this decentralized environment, the data are not structured to
address broad policy questions that cut across specific modes. A good case
in point is the reports provided by many of the operating administrations
on the condition and performance of individual modes. Because these reports
are tailored for different audiences with different interests and produced
at different times, they share little in the way of common frameworks or
assumptions about travel demand and economic forecasts or definitions of
need and performance. Thus, the data they provide are difficult to use in
any consistent way to compare the modes and assess the performance of the
system as a whole.
Not only are transportation data decentralized and modally oriented,
but modal responsibilities and missions vary widely, affecting the breadth
of the data collected. Responsibilities range from those of the Federal
Aviation Administration, which owns and operates a major sector of the
aviation infrastructure, the air traffic control system, to those of the
Federal Railroad Administration, which is responsible for regulating the
safety of the rail system, whose ownership and operation reside largely in
the private sector. Deregulation has further narrowed federal
responsibilities and shifted regulatory authority from economic to safety
and environmental areas. However, because departmental regulatory and
investment policies continue to affect the ability of private carriers to
provide service, DOT policy makers need summary data on the quality and
efficiency of service offered by major modal service providers to monitor
the impacts of federal policies on performance of the transportation
system. In sum, with differing responsibilities for operating and
regulating transportation modes, individual operating administrations have
differing needs for and access to data that result in a less-than-complete
national picture of the transportation system.
Recreating the data collection programs of a regulated transportation
environment, however, is not the answer. The detailed reporting
requirements that supported industry economic regulation would not only be
costly to collect and burdensome to data providers, but would be
inappropriate for the broad strategic policy needs of the secretary.
Although some multimodal data are missing, a wealth of information about
transportation modes and services is available. What is lacking is a
systemwide framework and capacity to integrate and compare data on a more
consistent basis over time to track system performance and determine where
the transportation system is headed.
ROLE OF DATA IN THE POLICY PROCESS
In today's complex, rapidly changing environment, the Secretary of
Transportation, as chief adviser to the President and advocate before the
Congress on national transportation policies, must have the capability to
anticipate problems and devise policies to shape the transportation system
of the future. This role requires strategic thinking, data to track
performance, and analysis to convert data to information useful for policy.
Corporate managers of many large U.S. companies have developed the
strategic planning capability as well as the dam and analytic support
systems to assess the business environment and devise appropriate
strategies to maintain their competitive edge (Bryson 1989, 1,2). The
manager of a $30 billion public agency (Executive Office of the President
1991, Part Four, 144), whose decisions affect one-sixth or total U.S.
expenditures on goods and services, should have the same capability.
Many strategic issues face the secretary today, yet the ability to
address them is limited by lack of data or data that are poorly formulated
to inform policy choices. Data alone cannot guarantee good policy, but
informed policy choices are not possible without good data, as the
following examples illustrate.
- Safety was identified in the NTP as a top departmental priority (DOT
1990, 7), yet the secretary cannot address the safety concerns that
are at the heart of the controversy between the trucking and rail
industries. The trucking industry is seeking further relaxation of
federal size and weight regulations, which it claims will improve
productivity without adversely affecting highway safety. The rail
industry has challenged this position, arguing that allowing longer
and heavier trucks would not only lead to disinvestment and even
abandonment of rail infrastructure, but would also degrade the safety
of highway travel; thus, trucking productivity gains would be achieved
at a great cost to the traveling public. The information needed to
evaluate these positions-trend data on the safety of truck travel by
truck type and road class--are simply not available (TRB 1990, 2).
- A major reason for transportation investments is their contribution to
economic growth, yet the link between spending for new transportation
infrastructure and regional or national economic growth is poorly
understood. Without detailed information on the availability, cost,
and quality of transportation services and how they affect
productivity and long-term growth, it is difficult to quantify how new
transportation
20 DATA FOR DECISIONS
facilities can contribute to economic growth and international
competitiveness, or to compare the impacts of alternative investments.
- The transportation system must accommodate both commercial and defense
needs. Fortunately, when the system was tested by the Persian Gulf
War, defense transportation needs could be accommodated from the slack
in commercial demand from an economy in recession without major
disruption to economic activity. Systematic data on the use of the
system, including transfer points, and the constraints created by the
special requirements of defense equipment, however, are not routinely
collected. Thus, the secretary is unable to identify where added
investment in facilities would have the greatest payoffs in improved
military deployment capability or assess the consequences of military
requirements on commercial transportation facilities and economic
performance.
- The Clean Air Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-549) stipulates that trans-
portation investments conform with and contribute to measures to
improve air quality--a requirement that could revolutionize the way
that travel needs are met in the nation's urban areas. Compliance with
the act requires assessments of projected emissions from proposed
transportation improvements in heavily polluted areas. However, nei-
ther the Secretary of Transportation nor the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency has sufficient data on the factors
that affect emissions levels, such as vehicle travel and speeds in
urban areas, to estimate likely emissions impacts from alternative
levels of investment, nor are the factors affecting travel demand
sufficiently well understood to develop adequate models and forecasts
of likely growth in travel.
- New technologies are being proposed to alleviate congestion in heavily
traveled intercity corridors. High-speed rail or magnetically
levitated (maglev) trains, vertical take-off and landing aircraft, and
other systems have been suggested as alternatives to sometimes unpop-
ular and frequently prohibitively expensive airport expansions and
road-building programs. However, limited information on intercity
surface passenger travel, factors that influence modal trip choices,
and costs of alternative modal investments hamper departmental ability
to evaluate the relative merits of alternative ways of meeting
intercity travel demand and the implications for federal investment
policies.
- The proliferation of automobiles in large urban areas has created
severe congestion near suburban as well as inner city job concentra-
The Role of Data 21
tions. However, comprehensive data on commuting delays or freight
delivery times, consistently collected, summarized, and reported for
major urban areas, are lacking. Without data on travel patterns, it is
difficult to monitor demand across modes and determine with any
certainty whether solutions lie with new highways, more transit
investment, demand management measures, or other alternatives.
- Deregulation has resulted in reduced access to transportation fa-
cilities for many travelers from rural communities because of loss of
air, rail, or bus services. Data on the extent, frequency, and cost of
transportation services in rural areas are scattered among many
sources or are unavailable. More complete data would strengthen the
department's capacity to analyze rural service delivery options and
devise appropriate rural investment policies.
As these examples illustrate, the secretary lacks information to an-
alyze and address fundamental questions on the costs, benefits, and impacts
of alternative transportation policies that affect a wide range of
regulatory and investment decisions. Not all of these data can be gathered
or questions answered, but a more sustained effort to develop the knowledge
base is warranted, given the broad impact of transportation decisions.
In recent years, the department has chosen to organize its data
collection and analysis activities to support national policy making on an
ad hoc basis, conducting periodic or one-time national transportation
studies or simply not conducting any national assessments. Periodic studies
can provide a snapshot of the critical issues facing the transportation
system at a particular point in time. However, relying on periodic studies
alone to provide data for policy making is costly and shortsighted; one-
time studies frequently require special surveys and development of analytic
tools whose useful life only extends for the duration of the study. In
addition, they provide little in the way of trend data to suggest how well
the system is performing over time. These data are critical for determining
how well current policies are working, providing an early alert of changes
in the environment and emerging problems that may require modifications in
policies or new policies altogether and for assessing how well the system
reacts to shocks, such as the energy crises of the 1970s or the Persian
Gulf War. Finally, the lead time involved in producing a major national
study and the lag between studies mean that data are often not available
when they are
22 DATA FOR DECISIONS
needed, that is, when a policy issue arises and a response is required.
This arrangement is a major liability in a rapidly changing environment. An
on-going data capability to support national transportation policy making
is needed.
ORGANIZATION OF REPORT
Examined in the remainder of the report is how this on-going data
capability can be developed within DOT. The key elements of a data support
system are identified in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 is focused on how these
requirements can be met by improving existing data bases and supplying
missing data; opportunities for public-private collaboration in data
collection are considered, and applications of new technologies for
reducing the cost and burden of data collection are explored. The
institutional changes needed to develop a more effective and permanent data
and analytic capability to support strategic decision making within the
department are discussed in Chapter 4, and a new organization is
recommended. The steps required to put such a capability in place are
outlined in Chapter 5.
The time to move forward on these recommendations is now. Recent DOT
strategic planning provided opportunities for operating administrators to
exchange ideas on issues that transcend modal boundaries. The Secretary of
Transportation has committed to establishing an ongoing strategic planning
capability (DOT 1990, 11) and has taken steps to formalize
interdepartmental and interagency linkages. In addition, Congress has
focused on transportation data in pending surface transportation
legislation. These initiatives, which are described in more detail in the
following chapters, should provide the support to develop a more policy
responsive transportation data system and analytic capability.
NOTES
1. Passenger-miles are a measure of the volume of people carried
multiplied by the distance they are carded. Similarly, ton-miles are a
measure of the volume of product carded multiplied by the distance it
is carried.
2. Exceptions are ports and inland waterways, for which the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers is responsible.
3. The report, National Transportation: Trends and Choices, DOT's first
multi-modal national transportation planning effort, which was
published in 1977, attempted to take more of a systems' perspective,
examining likely transpor-
The Role of Data 23
tation service trends under then current policies and highlighting the
choices likely to face national policy makers (DOT 1977, iv, v) .
REFERENCES
ABBREVIATIONS
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
TRB Transportation Research Board
Anderson, D. L. 1990. Freight Transportation Data Needs, Resources,
and Issues. In Transportation Research Record 1253, TRB, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C. , pp. 25-40.
Bryson, J. M. 1989. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit
Organizations. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, Calif.
Executive Office of the President. 1991. Budget of the United States
Government, Fiscal Year 1992. U.S. Government Printing Office.
DOT. 1975. 1974 National Transportation Report: Performance and Future
Prospects. July, 689 pp.
DOT. 1977. National Transportation: Trends and Choices. Jan. 12,412 pp.
DOT. 1989. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities: Volume
I: Building the National Transportation Policy. July, 35 pp.
DOT. 1990. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities: A
Statement of National Transportation Policy Strategies for Action. Feb.,
129 pp.
Frechtling, D.C. 1990. The 1989-90 Economic Review of Travel in
America. U.S. Travel Data Center, Washington, D.C., Aug.
Hopkins, J. B. 1990. Overview of Intercity Passenger Travel. In
Passenger Transportation in High-Density Corridors. Report SPA-90-1. Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Mass., Nov., 17 pp.
Johnston, W. B. 1989. Transportation for the Next Century. In Moving
America: A Look Ahead to the 21st Century, U .S. Department of
Transportation, July 24, pp. 15-30.
National Transportation Policy Study Commission. 1979. National
Transportation Policies Through the Year 2000. Washington, D.C., June, 527pp.
Pisarski, A. E. 1988. Conference Overview: Observers' Comments. In
Special Report 220: A Look Ahead: Year 2020, TRB, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 27-32.
Pub. L. 89-670. 1966. Department of Transportation Act. 80 Stat., pp.
931-950.
Pub. L. 101-549. 1990. Clean Air Act. 104 Stat., pp. 2,399-2,712.
Smith, F. A. 1991. Transportation in America. The Eno Foundation for
Transportation, Inc., Westport, Conn.
TRB. 1990. Special Report 228: Data Requirements for Monitoring Truck
Safety. National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 132 pp.
TRB. 1992 (forthcoming). Special Report 236: Intermodal Marine
Container Transportation: Impediments and Opportunities. National Research
Council, Washington, D.C.
2
Data Requirements: A
National Transportation
Performance Monitoring
System
The Statement of National Transportation Policy (NTP) represents the first
step in building a more forward-looking, strategically oriented, multimodal
approach to national transportation decision making at the U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT) (DOT 1990, 11). The broad policy goals and
directions that should guide future national transportation policy
decisions are outlined in the NTP. Currently, the department is engaged in
the second phase of the strategic planning process (Figure 2-1), which
involves implementing these broad policy goals through regulatory changes,
new legislation, and resource allocation.
In the long run, development of a continuing capability to take stock
of the performance of the transportation system--to assess how well the
department is performing its mission and to identify emerging issues--will
require ongoing monitoring and evaluation in order to analyze and adapt
policies to changing conditions. This, in turn, requires the collection,
organization, and analysis of data in a framework suitable for policy
analysis and decision making, which is currently not available. The
committee recommends that the department develop this capability by
creating a national transportation performance monitoring system (NTPMS) to
track key indicators of the nation's transportation system and its
environment over time (see shaded areas of Figure 2-1). NTPMS would be
organized by markets to monitor performance from the perspective of users
of the transportation system--passengers and shippers. The key elements of
NTPMS
25
26 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Click HERE for graphic.
are identified in this chapter. Although the immediate beneficiaries of
NTPMS would be policy makers, the recommended reorientation of national
data toward users and markets would also benefit researchers and others
seeking to understand how transportation markets work.
STRATEGIC PLANNING CONTEXT
Concerns about the adequacy of transportation data for national policy
purposes were raised during recent strategic planning at DOT. The strategic
planning process is used here as an organizing device for identifying data
requirements; however, the data requirements would be the same for any
general performance monitoring system to support national policy making.
Strategic planning has been defined as a "disciplined effort to pro-
duce fundamental decisions and actions that shape and guide what an
organization is, what it does, and why it does it" (Bryson 1989, 5). The
process is distinctive in its focus on issues, its emphasis on the context
or environment in which an organization operates, and its action
orientation (Bryson 1989, 7, 8)..1
Data Requirements 27
Suggested in the NTP are the types of policy issues that a performance
monitoring system should address. Strategic planning is geared to
identifying and resolving issues that are national in significance,
systemwide in focus, and long-term in view. Strategic issues imply major
changes in, or potential impacts on, the system, such as the following:
- Major changes in the environment (e.g., demographic changes), or in
policies that affect the environment (e.g., energy policy), in which
transportation operates;
- Fundamental shifts in transportation policy or DOT's role in the
transportation system (e.g., deregulation);
- Large investments or changes in the allocation of resources, which
have the potential for substantial improvement or degradation in
system performance (e.g., a major increase or reduction in federal
funding for surface transportation);
- Major changes that alter the structure and delivery of transportation
services (e.g., just-in-time delivery systems, double-stack container
trains, or electronic data interchange); and
- Major system impacts that extend beyond transportation and affect
other national interests (e.g., national security or environmental
quality).
The Clean Air Act of 1990, for example, may revolutionize the way that
travel needs are met in some urban areas, such as Los Angeles, where
complying with air quality standards may require that a significant share
of passenger trips be made by public transportation, high-occupancy
vehicles, and vehicles powered by alternative fuels. Such major changes in
the delivery of transportation services raise broad policy issues that
involve more than one mode and have potentially large impacts on the
economy and on the quality of life.
NTPMS would provide analysts and policy makers with input to address
fundamental questions, such as those presented in the accompanying text
box, on a continuing basis. It would not, however, ensure the answers to
these questions or the availability and collection of all of the data
needed to address them. The primary purpose of NTPMS would be to provide
policy makers with a monitoring capability. Baseline data would be
regularly available on a systematic basis to track the overall performance
of the transportation system, monitor the trends and forces in the external
environment that could affect the
28 DATA FOR DECISIONS
ILLUSTRATIVE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION
POLICY QUESTIONS
- What are the geographical and temporal patterns of transportation
demand?
- What kinds of goods are moved? How much is moved? What are their
origins and destinations? When and how are they moved?
- What types of people travel? How many travel? What are their
origins and destinations? When and how do they travel?
- How are changes in demographics, lifestyles, economic conditions, and
business activity likely to affect future geographical and temporal
patterns of transportation demand?
- Does the current transportation system have the capacity, coverage,
and flexibility to serve current patterns of transportation demand?
Who or what is left behind?
- Will the transportation system have the capacity, coverage, and
flexibility to accommodate anticipated changes in demand? Who or what
will be left behind?
- How safe, costly, timely, frequent, and reliable is the current
transportation system for travelers and shippers?
- How are anticipated changes in demand likely to affect the safety,
cost, efficiency, frequency, and reliability of transportation
services in the future?
- What is the responsiveness of demand to changes in the price,
reliability, or frequency of transportation services and what is the
responsiveness of supply to different increments of cost?
- How does the current transportation system support or degrade other
national objectives, such as environmental quality, energy self-
sufficiency, economic growth, national security, and social well-
being? How do these other objectives affect the transportation system?
- How are anticipated changes in the demand for transportation services
likely to affect the achievement of other national objectives in the
future, and what conflicts are likely in attempts to meet these goals
simultaneously (e.g., more fuel-efficient vehicles could mean reduced
highway safety; improved safety could be achieved through greater
restrictions on mobility)?
Data Requirements 29
system's ability to perform, and measure the impacts of the system on this
external environment.
Second, NTPMS would provide an early alert to problems and issues as
they emerge. It would help policy makers identify potential opportunities
for improving transportation system performance by confirming problems that
have been identified by special studies or by concerned carriers or
customers.
Finally, it would provide a framework and point of departure for those
engaged in formulating policy alternatives and evaluating the likely
consequences of policy responses to strategic issues. NTPMS would be policy
neutral. Its purpose would be to shape data in ways that are analytically
useful and provide a context for evaluating the effectiveness of specific
DOT policies and programs.
NTPMS would supplement but not supplant existing data programs. It
would draw heavily on these data where possible, integrating them to
provide an overview of the performance of the transportation system as a
whole from the viewpoint of markets and users and to illuminate intermodal
comparisons. Its focus would be on the performance of the transportation
system instead of the performance of individual modes or specific programs.
ELEMENTS OF NTPMS
An effective data support system has two essential components. First, the
data should be organized in a framework keyed to the broad subject areas of
interest. Second, analytic capability is critical to ensure that the data
are translated into information that is useful for policy analysis. The
latter is particularly important for understanding qualitative changes that
are not readily measured or, if they do appear in time series data, are
reflected too late for policy makers to take action (Drucker 1990, 78).
Data Organization
The time and cost of collecting and integrating data, as well as the need
for systematic and reliable monitoring over time, work against constant
modification of data bases. Thus, NTPMS is best structured not by issues,
which tend to be transient, but by major attributes of the transportation
system, which fall into four broad categories - supply, demand,
performance, and impacts (Figure 2-2).
30 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Click HERE for graphic.
These categories may be further defined by a set of descriptive elements
(see accompanying text box).
The supply and demand attributes include the basic descriptors of the
transportation infrastructure, its service providers, and its users. The
supply side contains information on system resources and outputs, including
the characteristics, coverage, physical condition, capacity, and fare or
fee structure of the transportation system and subsystems, along with the
characteristics and financial condition of the major transportation service
providers. The demand side is focused on system needs created by the
activity levels of passengers and freight, the distribution of these
activity levels, and the characteristics of passenger and freight users.
Information about who or what is moving or being moved, for what purpose,
and between what points in the system is basic input for nearly every
policy issue.
The performance and impacts attributes provide a description of how
the system functions and with what effect. The delivery of service by the
transportation system is the product of the interaction of requirements on
the system (i.e., demand elements) with system capacity and condition
(i.e., supply elements) (Figure 2-2). System performance is
Data Requirements 31
NTPMS DATA ATTRIBUTES AND DESCRIPTORS
Supply
System
- General characteristics,
- Coverage,
- Physical condition,
- Capacity,
- Fare or fee structure, and
- Elasticity of supply.
Providers
- General characteristics and
- Financial condition.
Demand
- User characteristics,
- Activity levels,
- Flows, and
- Elasticity of demand.
Performance
- Safety and personal security;
- Access and mobility;
- Service delivery:
- Level,
- Efficiency, and
- Quality; and
- Cost.
Impacts
- Economic growth,
- National security,
- Environmental quality and land use, and
- Energy use.
32 DATA FOR DECISIONS
measured by such factors as the safety of transportation services; the
access and mobility they provide; the level, efficiency, and quality of
service they offer; and their cost. The transportation system functions in
and affects a broader environment. Measures of the impact of transportation
on economic growth, national security, environmental quality and land use,
and energy use are also of interest, as well as the impacts of these
external forces on the demand for and nature of transportation services.
Benchmark data should be developed for each system attribute by
identifying and tracking key indicators for each data descriptor. In most
cases, a single indicator is not sufficient; portraying an accurate picture
of the trend would require several indicators. For example, information
about numbers of transportation fatalities or accidents can be misleading
if additional information is not provided on the level of activity or
exposure. Measures of the variability and the mean level of operation are
also important, particularly for service delivery characteristics; shippers
and travelers often care more about the predictability of transit time than
the absolute time in transit. Finally, comparisons with other industries
for selected benchmarks, such as safety levels, productivity growth, and
cost, and with general measures of economic activity should help provide
perspectives on the role of the transportation sector in the economy. In
some cases, the desired system attribute may be too complex to be captured
adequately even by several indicators. For example, although the design
capacity of a transportation facility can be measured, estimating its
operational capacity requires making assumptions about the availability of
alternative routes or modes, use of operational strategies (e.g.,
congestion pricing) to spread demand, and "acceptable" levels of
congestion--assumptions that cannot readily be captured in summary
indicators. Indicators that could be used to measure the basic data
attributes and descriptors of the transportation system are presented in
Table 2-1. The final selection of indicators is beyond the scope of this
report; however, this is an important task that must be undertaken as an
integral part of developing NTPMS.
Market Focus
Structuring data to provide useful information for national policy making
requires a decision about the appropriate organizing unit for data
collection. Traditionally, transportation and related data programs have
been divided into particular modes, such as highways, air, and
TABLE 2-1 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INDICATORS
Data Attribute
and Descriptor Indicators
Supply
System
General characteristics Inventory information (e.g., miles of system)
Coverage Unit of system per land area or population
Physical condition Index of condition (e.g., pavement
serviceability rating)
Age of facilities
Maintenance expenditures per unit of system
Capacity Vehicles/persons per hour, tons per hour
Fare or fee structure Range of prices, prices per passenger-
mile/ton-mile, price/service options
Elasticity of supply Percent change in supply relative to a one
percent change in cost
Providers
General characteristics Number and size of public providers/common
Financial condition carriers/private carriers and providers
Balance sheet and income statement data
Demand
User characteristics
Passenger National demographic and economic data (e.g.,
age, sex, income, etc.)
Freight Bulk, density, shipment sizes,
containerization, hazardous contents
Activity levels Traffic counts, volumes, arrivals/departures
Flows Origin-final destination volumes by trip
purpose, distance, mode, passenger and
freight
Elasticity of demand characteristics Percent change in demand
relative to a one percent change in price or
other measurable attributes of service
quality
Performance
Safety and personal
security Total number of accidents, deaths, and
injuries, by market
Number of accidents, deaths, and injuries per
mile and per capita, by market
Percent of accidents by severity level, by
market
Number and type of security incidents, by
service population, by mode
Access Share of population and households living
within defined distances and travel times
from airports and for scheduled surface
transportation
Percent of system facilities and services
handicapped accessible
TABLE 2-1 (continued on next page)
34 DATA FOR DECISIONS
TABLE 2-1 (continued)
Data Attribute
and Descriptor Indicators
Level Frequency (e.g., runs per hour/day), average
wait time, headways
Number of transfers per commuter or freight
shipment relative to average trip/shipment
length
Efficiency Load factors per unit of capacity available,
by market and mode
Quality Percent on-time performance, average delay
time, by market
Percent service interruptions and
cancellations, by market
Value of goods damaged in transit
Value of inventory in transit (average day)
Cost Cost per trip and unit of travel
Impacts
Economic growth Average days in inventory held by industry
Distribution costs as percent of domestic
retail prices/landed export prices
Tourism receipts, domestic and international
trips
National security Condition and capacity of commercial
transportation facilities and special
military transport requirements in defense-
essential corridors
Percent of defense-essential facilities above
capacity limits
Environmental quality/
land use Vehicle emissions levels in nonattainment
areas
Tons of greenhouse gas emissions from
transportation sector
Acres of wetlands affected by construction of
transportation facilities
Number of incidents and extent of spills from
transport carriage on waterways
Energy use Energy use by appropriate energy measure per
mile of travel, by market
rail. This view of the system has led policy makers to emphasize modal
solutions to problems (DOT 1989, 12) and focus on individual components of
the system instead of systemwide impacts.
Organizing NTPMS around markets should provide a more useful framework
for analyzing strategic issues, which cut across modes, and involve
intermodal comparisons. The primary emphasis would be on the transportation
needs of particular markets and on how well modes are serving these markets
instead of on the
Data Requirements 35
performance of individual modes. For example, by examining the
transportation needs of domestic intercity travel markets, policy makers
might find that performance could best be improved by up-grading weak links
between modes (e. g., improving highway or transit connections to airports)
or providing a new mode of transportation altogether (e.g., high-speed
rail). These solutions are unlikely to emerge from a traditional modal
approach, which would concentrate on the performance of intercity trips by
individual modes--air, automobile, bus, or rail.
An Illustration
An example serves to illustrate how a market-focused data system would work
to inform policy makers about strategic issues. A key concern of shippers
today is how to improve the efficiency of domestic intercity freight
transportation to compete effectively in word markets. As a major provider
of much of the infrastructure on which freight is carried (i.e., highways,
waterways, and airports and airways) and regulator of the safety of freight
transport, the public sector plays a major role in shaping the direction of
future freight activities.
DOT policy makers seek answers to the following questions. To what
extent have the reliability and timeliness of freight shipments been
adversely affected by growing highway congestion and the increasing
difficulty of expanding highway capacity? How do federal policies, such as
track size and weight regulations, affect modal choices and thus the
financial health and competitiveness of competing modes, such as railroads
or intermodal transport (e.g., trailer-on-flat-cars, double-stack container
trains)? What effects do these policies have on the overall safety of
freight transport, and what are their long-term impacts on national
security, the environment, and energy use?
These issues are better addressed by an approach that is market, not
mode, driven. The key question from a policy perspective is which
combination(s) of federal regulatory and investment strategies will provide
the greatest improvement in the efficiency of goods movement without
compromising safety or significantly degrading other national objectives,
such as environmental quality. What information could NTPMS bring to bear
on this question?
Comparative data could be gathered on the current performance of
freight transport by alternative modes and combinations of modes by regions
and major markets. With information on market access
36 DATA FOR DECISIONS
to different transportation modes, the safety of these modes, and the
quality of the service they provide, policy makers should be in a better
position to identify appropriate modal regulatory and investment options,
assess their likely consequences on modal shifts and demand for
transportation services generally, and examine their impacts on other
national objectives (e.g., national security implications of service
elimination or abandonment of substantial portions of existing network
facilities, degradation of urban air quality and increased energy use from
a significant expansion in freight traffic). Dam on the safety performance,
energy use, and pollution effects of individual transport modes have not
been brought together in a comparable way or at a level of geographic
detail that is useful to policy makers in assessing the trade-offs between
efficient goods movement and other national goals from shifts in traffic
among modes.
Data on freight flows and the condition and capacity of alternative
transport modes, organized by market area and intercity corridor, are
essential for these analyses. [These data could be drawn in part from
sample surveys of firms (i.e., flow data will be gathered in this manner
from the planned Commodity Flow Survey) and in part from existing surveys
of modal facilities (i.e., many of the operating administrations
currently report on the condition and capacity of modal facilities and
services).] Properly analyzed data on freight flows and the distribution of
these flows by mode between origin and final destination should help
identify heavily used intercity travel corridors and intermodal transfer
points as well as provide comparative data on the intensity of use for
different modes. When flow data are combined with supply-side data on modal
condition and capacity, policy makers should be able to pinpoint more
precisely where congestion is or is soon likely to become a problem and
what modal options are available and are likely to remain so in the
foreseeable future for accommodating growth in demand. Currently, freight
flow data by origin to final destination are not collected, nor are supply
data tracked by market area or corridor. Thus, little national information
exists on the location and severity of transportation capacity constraints,
types of shipments affected, modes involved, availability of alternative
modes, and appropriateness of these alternatives given the volume of
commercial freight or military shipments and their characteristics. These
data, summarized by major market areas and selected intercity corridors,
are essential to provide DOT with baseline information on the use and
condition of alternative transport modes for monitoring the impacts of
existing federal invest-
Data Requirements 37
ment and regulatory policies and evaluating the likely outcomes of proposed
policy changes.
Data Sources, Coverage, and Comprehensiveness
The primary sources for NTPMS are data collected directly from business
establishments and individuals [through surveys of company executives and
heads of households (i. e., the reporting units)] and data drawn from
administrative records and other surveys (e.g., traffic surveys). The data
can comprise a census (e.g., a count of all fatal highway crashes contained
in the Fatal Accident Reporting System of the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration) or they can represent a sample (e.g., of individuals
or firms, the sampling unit for surveys, or of records, such as rail
waybills, airline tickets, or other appropriate sampling units for
administrative data).
NTPMS should draw on both kinds of data. However, two issues are
likely to arise in determining how best to collect the data for national
monitoring purposes--the adequacy of sample versus census data and the
appropriate level of aggregation of the data.
In general, sample data, rather than the detailed reporting by
individuals and firms typical of regulatory data or complete enumeration of
administrative records, are likely to be adequate for monitoring purposes
(TRB 1990, 11). The difficulty is ensuring that the data are representative
and comparable, because they are frequently collected from multiple sources
that are aggregated for national summaries. In those areas for which DOT
has regulatory responsibility--safety, environmental impacts of
transportation investments, and fuel efficiency of motor vehicles, large
sample sizes may be necessary to provide the level of detail needed to
monitor the impacts of regulatory policies.
A related issue is the appropriate level of aggregation of the data
for monitoring and analysis of national policy issues. Given the proposed
market focus of NTPMS, data that are aggregated by regions, market areas,
and major corridors are likely to be more relevant than data summarized by
traditional jurisdictional boundaries. The level of aggregation will also
depend on the nature of the issue. For example, surface transportation
congestion and poor air quality are largely urban phenomena, the impacts of
which are best analyzed at the urban level, whereas data on passenger and
freight movements, which provide information about the use of the
transportation system,
38 DATA FOR DECISIONS
are probably adequately summarized at the regional and national level.
Finding an appropriate balance of data that are highly aggregated yet
sufficiently detailed for national monitoring and policy-making purposes is
an important challenge in the development of NTPMS.
Frequency of Data Collection
The data should be collected on a continuing basis to provide the time
series needed for long-term monitoring and problem identification. However,
not all of the data need to be collected annually. Data on passenger and
commodity flows and characteristics, which are expensive to collect and
unlikely to change dramatically from one year to the next, could be
collected periodically. Data on safety, energy use, and the environment,
however, which are important areas of regulatory concern for DOT, probably
should be collected more frequently.
Timely reporting of the data, particularly for data that are only
collected periodically, is crucial. The usefulness of NTPMS as an early
warning system for strategic analysis is only as good as the currency of
the data provided.
Data Analysis
Data collection alone would provide an inadequate information system for
national policy making. Analysis is needed at several levels to translate
data into useful information for policy makers.
At a minimum, a brief description of the data items, their sources,
and methods of collection should be provided. A summary of key trends and
changes in trends would also be appropriate, as would a discussion of the
quality and limits of the data. The rationale for the choice of indicators
should be made explicit and the findings summarized. Finally, important
topics, which are not amenable to measurement, should be identified and
discussed qualitatively.
Proper interpretation of trend data, however, requires special studies
to analyze the key explanatory factors underlying the trends. For example,
user surveys could supplement and help explain data on performance. Special
analyses of the main factors driving the growth in freight and passenger
demand could improve understanding of flow data. [A special Transportation
Research Board planning group on strategic issues in domestic freight
transportation ranked a study of the characteristics and growth of freight
demand as one of its top
Data Requirements 39
priorities (TRB 1991).] Periodic special studies may also affect the data
collection process itself by suggesting new topics that should be monitored
and others that may be discontinued.
Trend data are also likely to prove inadequate as a means of alerting
policy makers to emerging changes in the environment in which
transportation operates. Special studies may be required, drawing on data
primarily collected by others (e.g., Bureau of the Census, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, and industry associations) to assess the likely impact of
fundamental changes in demographics, regional growth, employment patterns,
technology, and logistics practices on the future demand for and use of
transportation services.
In addition, a common set of assumptions for forecasting trans-
portation activity levels is needed. Currently, the department does not
have a very cohesive view of the future; each of the operating
administrations does its own forecasting, often using different assumptions
about demographics, employment levels, labor force characteristics, and,
perhaps most important, economic growth rates and related assumptions about
inflation rates, interest rates, and growth in gross national product. At a
minimum, an appropriate set of common economic assumptions should be
defined (the Council of Economic Advisors, the Congressional Budget Office,
and private firms such as Data Resources, Inc. provide economic forecasting
data) for use by the operating administrations in developing modal
forecasts. Alternatively, baseline forecasts could be prepared centrally
for passenger and freight travel demand, which could then be used as input
by policy makers in examining the systemwide impacts of different modal
policy options.
Modeling capability should also be developed. For example, analytic
models could be prepared, on the basis of knowledge of the key factors
affecting travel demand, to assist policy makers in more sophisticated
analyses of "what if" propositions in projecting the likely impacts of
different assumptions about travel growth. Models could also be developed
to help analyze the impacts of projected changes in the demand or supply of
transportation services on systemwide performance.
Geographic information systems (GIS) offer another analytic tool for
integrating and manipulating data for intermodal comparisons and analyses
of system impacts, which should be further developed for transportation
policy applications..2 GIS are computer-based systems that organize and
display spatially oriented data by linking locational and attribute data
and overlaying them on a map
40 DATA FOR DECISIONS
(Dueker 1990, 20). Transportation facilities and flows, because of their
inherent geographic character, are particularly amenable to GIS
applications. Current applications include optimal routing of hazardous
materials and deployment of military equipment, analysis of highways for
inclusion in the proposed National Highway System, and determination of the
adequacy of transportation infrastructure and services in rural areas. DOT
is currently the lead agency for coordination of spatial transportation
data on the Federal Geographic Data Committee and supports development of a
national transportation network data base as the core of a multimodal GIS
capability..3 These efforts should be expedited as part of the development
of NTPMS.
BIENNIAL PERFORMANCE REPORT
A major product of NTPMS should be a mandated biennial report on the state
of the nation's transportation system. This report should provide an
overview of system performance and impacts, summarizing benchmark data from
selected indicators..4 It should provide a continuing source of baseline
information on the conditions and trends of the transportation sector for
policy makers, research analysts, and system users both within and outside
DOT. (Data could be provided to users in a machine-readable form.) It
should focus on the performance and contribution of transportation to the
economy and society and monitor how they are changing over time.
Preparation of this report would require a collaborative effort with
the operating administrations, other federal agencies, and the private
sector. The process of preparing the report should help define missing data
and areas in which comparative data from the modes need to be strengthened.
The potential visibility and wide distribution of this report could help
develop broad-based support for an enhanced transportation data collection
and analysis effort.
The closest approximations to such a report are the annual National
Transportation Statistics, prepared by the Volpe National Transportation
Systems Center of the Research and Special Programs Administration of DOT,
and Transportation in America, currently funded by the Eno Foundation for
Transportation. Compiled in the former report are inventory, financial,
performance, and safety data from a wide range of sources for all
transportation modes, as well as supplementary data on the transportation
sector's contribution to the economy and its con-
Data Requirements 41
sumption of energy resources. Budget constraints, however, limit the value
of the report as an adequate source of multimodal data for strategic policy
making..5 For example, performance data are focused on readily available
indicators, which do not include measures of service quality. No attempt is
made to examine the comparability of the data that are reported, point out
their limitations, or summarize the key facts that can be drawn from the
data. The latter report also draws trend data from a wide range of sources
to provide an overview of the transportation sector, but provides little
interpretation of the data or discussion of their limitations.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Development of a more strategically oriented, multimodal approach to
national policy making at DOT requires a strong data support system, which
does not currently exist. Trend data should be gathered at DOT on an
ongoing basis to track key indicators of the performance of the
transportation system, and the analytic capability to convert these data
into information useful for policy should be developed and sustained. The
committee recommends the development and implementation of a national
transportation performance monitoring system as the most appropriate
vehicle to meet this objective. It recognizes that this task will not be
easy nor will it guarantee better decisions, but without good data,
decisions will be arbitrary, options overlooked, and solutions reactive.
The data are best structured in a framework that mirrors the key
attributes - supply, demand, performance, and impacts - of the nation's
transportation system. The data should be organized by markets to monitor
performance from the perspective of system users. A market instead if a
modal perspective should provide a more relevant basis for analysis of
issues that cut across modes and involve comparisons among modes and among
broader national objectives that are at the heart of most current and
future strategic policy choices facing the department. Development of
analytic models and tools, such as GIS, should be part of a data system to
improve the department's capability to integrate and analyze data in making
national policy decisions.
42 DATA FOR DECISIONS
A major product of NTPMS should be a mandated biennial report on the
state of the nation's transportation system. This report, which would be
made available to policy makers, analysts, and researchers, both within and
outside DOT, should provide summary benchmark data from selected indicators
on the performance and impacts of the transportation system.
Although NTPMS is to be broad in scope, the intent is not to create
massive new data collection programs. The availability, coverage, and
quality of existing transportation data for multimodal analysis and
strategic policy making are discussed in the following chapter.
NOTES
1. In contrast, traditional long-range or comprehensive planning is more
goal and program oriented, and more focused on the internal
environment and a single scenario for the future (Bryson 1989, 7,8).
2. GIS technologies for national transportation policy analysis are also
discussed in Appendix B.
3. The committee recently reached consensus on a 1:1,000,000 scale U.S.
map, which will provide adequate links to enable use at the national
level. The underlying data base will be composed solely of geographic
data on links and nodes; data attributes will be organized as separate
modules. This decentralized approach will help keep the system current
(i. e., if all the attribute data are not in place or updated, the
system will still be operational) (personal communication with Arlene
Dietz, Director, Navigation Data Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
June 17, 1991).
4. A report similar in concept--The Condition of Education--provides key
indicators of the health of education and summarizes major trends. The
report, which is prepared annually by the National Center for
Education Statistics, is now mandated by Congress.
5. Appropriations to support this report dropped to zero in fiscal year
1991; the cost of preparing the report will most likely be paid by
users in the future.
REFERENCES
ABBREVIATIONS
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
TRB Transportation Research Board
Bryson, J. M. 1989. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit
Organizations. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, Calif.
Data Requirements 43
DOT. 1989. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities: Volume
1: Building the National Transportation Policy. July, 35 pp.
DOT. 1990. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities: A
Statement of National Transportation Policy Strategies for Action. Feb.,
129 pp.
Drucker, P. F. 1990. Viewpoint: What Executives Need to Learn. Prism,
Arthur D. Little, Cambridge, Mass., 4th Quarter, pp. 73-84.
Dueker, K. J. 1990. Impacts of Emerging Information Technology on Data
Collection and Availability. In Transportation Research Record 1253. TRB,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 17-24.
TRB. 1990. Transportation Research Circular 367: Proceedings of the
Special Conference on Freight Transportation Data: The Changing Federal
Role Since Deregulation. National Research Council, Washington, D.C., Dec.,
27 pp.
TRB. 1991. Scoping Study: Selected Strategic Issues in Domestic
Freight Transportation. Unpublished report. National Research Council,
Washington, D.C., June 11,42 pp.
3
Meeting Data Needs
Substantial data exist about the transportation system, but fall short of
providing the information needed to inform policy makers about the
strategic issues facing the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). In
this chapter key areas are defined in which multimodal data are missing or
additions to existing data are needed to enhance intermodal comparisons and
provide the basis for monitoring system performance and impacts. The range
of organizations that must cooperate jointly to make these data available
also is suggested.
Changes in the data environment of the 1980's have affected both the
availability and cost of data collection. Deregulation, the Paperwork
Reduction Act, competitive concerns of private providers, and cost are all
potential constraints on data collection. However, incentives exist for
public-private collaboration in data collection. Issues and opportunities
for private involvement in the provision of transportation data for
strategic policy making are discussed.
New information systems technologies, such as electronic data
interchange (EDI), are being developed and implemented, with the potential
to automate certain data functions and link together multiple data bases.
These systems provide opportunities for cost reduction as well as
improvements in the speed, reliability, and quantity of data collection and
analysis. Opportunities for harnessing these new technologies for linking
and aggregating data for national policy making are also explored in this
chapter.
MAJOR SOURCES OF NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION DATA
Transportation data are extensive but decentralized both within DOT and
outside the department (Table 3-1). The roots of this
45
46 DATA FOR DECISIONS
TABLE 3-1 MAJOR SOURCES OF NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION DATA
Organization Type/
Agency Data Focus
U.S. Department of Transportation/
Office of the Secretary International, aviation
Office of Commercial Space
Transportation Space transport
Research and Special Programs
Administration Aviation, hazardous materials,
pipelines, multimodal
Federal Aviation Administration Aviation
Federal Highway Administration Highways
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration Highways
Urban Mass Transportation
Administration Public transportation
Federal Railroad Administration Rail
Maritime Administration Water
U.S. Coast Guard Water
St. Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation Water
Other federal government agency/
Bureau of the Census Multimodal
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water
Interstate Commerce Commission Trucking, rail, intercity bus
U.S. Department of Agriculture Trucking, rail, water
NOTE: See text for discussion of private sector data sources.
situation lie in the decentralized nature of the federal statistical system
as well as the development of data programs within the department itself.
DOT was a latecomer in the national statistical system. When the
department was founded, national transportation statistics were embodied in
the System of National Accounts managed by the U.S. Department of
Commerce.2 and the regulatory data programs of such agencies as the
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB), and
Federal Maritime Commission. All of these programs and their data sets were
modally focused. Although responsibility for na-
Meeting Data Needs 47
tional transportation policy making was largely centralized within DOT,
these major transportation data activities remained outside the department.
With deregulation, some of these activities were reduced (e.g., ICC
transportation data programs), whereas others were transferred to the
department (e.g., CAB aviation economic data programs).
New data programs were established within DOT, but their primary
purpose was to serve the missions and programs of the modally focused
operating administrations. The modal focus of the department is evident
today. DOT's largest statistical programs (those with funding that exceeds
$500,000 per program) reside in the operating administrations (Table 3-A,
at end of chapter); projected funding for these major data programs, which
will reach nearly $50 million in fiscal year 1991, is heavily concentrated
in three agencies--the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA)..3 Of course, this is where most of the
department's programs and most of the nation's transportation activity are
focused. In contrast, funding of statistical activities that cut across the
modes, many of which are housed within the Research and Special Programs
Administration and its Volpe National Transportation Systems Center,
reached about $660,000 in fiscal year 1991 (Table 3-B, at end of chapter).
The sum of funding for these multimodal data programs barely exceeds the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) criterion of $500,000 for a single
major statistical program; currently they account for slightly more than 1
percent of DOT's major statistical programs.
Congress has played an important role in the development of data bases
for national transportation policy making, but these efforts are still
largely modally focused, reflecting the modal orientation of the
congressional committee structure. In the mid-1970s, prompted in part by
congressional concern over the deterioration of the nation's infra-
structure, FHWA and the states developed a highway performance monitoring
system (HPMS) to provide a more consistent basis for long-term monitoring
of the condition of major highways built with the assistance of federal
funds, including the Interstate highway system..4 More recently, Congress
directed FAA to develop a set of standard indicators to measure the safety
of the aviation system consistently over time (FAA 1989).
State and local governments are not major producers of national
transportation data programs, although they provide considerable data to
DOT primarily through reporting requirements of Federal-Aid programs that
are aggregated by DOT to provide national summary data.
48 DATA FOR DECISIONS
These include, for example, HPMS and other FHWA statistical programs, the
Section 15 reporting requirements for Urban Mass Transportation
Administration (UMTA) grant recipients, and FAA reporting requirements for
airports.
Private involvement in transportation data collection has grown in the
wake of deregulation. Many industry associations now compile regulatory
data on large carriers, which are still collected by ICC, for their
membership. Some also conduct special surveys for smaller carriers that are
no longer required to report. For example, the Association of American
Railroads conducts an annual survey of regional and local railroads to
obtain basic information (e.g., revenue, employees, commodities carried,
etc.) about this growing industry sector from which ICC no longer requires
detailed reporting. Finally, private vendors may take public source data,
compile them in computerized formats that organize the data for analysis,
and sell them. For example, this practice has been the main way of
disseminating the large volume of economic, financial, and operating data
on the airlines to private users (Carey 1990, 10,11).
Appendix A provides more detailed descriptions of some of the major
national transportation data programs within and outside DOT. The large
number of data bases cataloged in this appendix suggests the range of
transportation data programs. However, many of these programs are used for
administrative and operating purposes and are not well structured for
policy analysis.
DATA DEFICIENCIES
Despite the existence of extensive transportation data programs,
significant deficiencies exist in the data needed for national policy
making. It is beyond the scope of this study to detail all data gaps and
potential areas for improvement, nor would such a list indicate priority
areas for attention. Instead, the report is focused on major areas of need:
(a) supplying critical missing data and (b) integrating and supplementing
existing data in areas for which DOT continues to have major regulatory
(e.g., safety and the environment) and mission responsibilities (Table 3-
2). These needs are discussed within the broad framework for organizing
data for the national transportation performance monitoring system (NTPMS)
(i.e., by supply, demand, performance, and impacts) defined in the previous
chapter. For some data categories, more research is needed to identify the
appropriate data to
Meeting Data Needs 49
measure and collect; these areas are described in the following discussions
of each data category.
Data on Supply and Demand
The biggest gap in DOT's multimodal data programs is in flow data. Flow
data refer to information on passenger and freight volumes from origin to
final destination by trip purpose, distance, mode, and passenger and
freight characteristics.
These data are critical to strategic policy making for several
reasons. First, they provide basic input for understanding and monitoring
how the system is being used and by whom. The data are essential to
answering such questions as who or what is moving on the system? for what
purpose? by what means? and from where to where? For example, the data are
basic to understanding trade flows. Shippers are finding it more cost-
effective to transport certain international shipments via rail for the
long-distance inland portion of the journey than via the Panama Canal. This
intermodal traffic may be significant, but data on the origin (exports) and
final destination (imports) of trade flows are not readily available. Thus,
it is difficult to know the extent of this traffic or its characteristics
(Smith 1989).5 and the implications for future transportation
infrastructure requirements.
Second, passenger and freight flow data can help inform many strategic
policy issues facing the department. For example, congestion has been
identified as a major problem that affects many transportation modes and
results in millions of dollars of delay, increases the cost of transporting
goods and people, and ultimately, adversely affects U.S. competitiveness in
world markets (DOT 1990, 24). Flow data are essential to identify
transportation demand across modes, pinpoint key links within and between
modes, and help indicate where investments in new capacity or intermodal
links would pay off.
Finally, good flow data should help alleviate multiple data deficien-
cies. Flow data by mode provide the basic exposure measures of people and
cargo for safety analysis; they provide the denominator for calculating
accident rates per passenger-mile or ton-mile. Flow data are also basic
inputs to forecasts of vehicle activity, which are used to calculate
accident rates per vehicle mile and project levels of congestion,
emissions, and energy use. Obtaining detailed data for analyses of safety,
congestion, and urban air quality, however, is not likely to come from
national surveys of passenger and freight movements with
Click HERE for graphic.
52 DATA FOR DECISIONS
out requiring a large sample at a high cost. Supplementing national and
regional data with more extensive sampling in selected transportation
corridors and major urban areas should provide sufficient detail for
national monitoring and analysis purposes.
The most recent source data on passenger and commodity flows date back
to the National Travel and Commodity Transportation Surveys conducted by
the Bureau of the Census in 1977..6 DOT's fiscal year 1992 budget
submission includes a proposal for restarting these two major surveys. This
initiative should be the primary new data collection priority for NTPMS.
Opportunities for automating portions of the data collection for the
proposed Commodity Flow Survey, which are discussed more fully in the last
section of this chapter and in Appendix B, offer the potential for reducing
survey costs.
Data on Transportation System Performance
Many data programs measure the safety, access, and, to a lesser extent,
service, provided by individual transportation modes. Development of NTPMS
will require linking and analyzing these data to provide a more consistent
and comparable basis on which to assess the overall performance of the
system.
Safety and Personal Security
The Statement of National Transportation Policy identified safety as the
top departmental priority (DOT 1990, 7), yet the data to monitor the safety
and security of the system across all transportation modes are inadequate.
For example, although information on accidents and fatalities is available
for each of the modes, data on exposure to risk, or activity levels, which
are needed to calculate accident rates, are not. [These exposure data are
equivalent to the flow data already mentioned; however, they must be made
available at a level of detail (e.g., by rural and urban area, by type of
road) appropriate for safety analysis.] The authors of a recent TRB report,
Data Requirements for Monitoring Truck Safety, found that data on travel
estimates for tracks, a basic input for computing accident rates, are
neither reliably nor consistently measured; thus, government has inadequate
information for monitoring track safety and developing regulations that may
affect other modes, such as rail (TRB 1990a, 1). Improving exposure data
should be a priority for safety data col-
Meeting Data Needs 53
lection for all modes; data on accident and fatality rates and the absolute
numbers of accidents and fatalities are needed to track safety performance
adequately. Development of the data is an ambitious undertaking, which will
require a long-term cooperative effort among the DOT operating
administrations, as well as the states, local governments, and others that
monitor transportation activity.
Comparability of safety data across modes is also limited by different
accident reporting thresholds, particularly for nonfatal accidents. For
example, thresholds are not used in UMTA's Section 15 Reporting System to
define how serious injuries or property damage must be before it is
reported. As a result, it is difficult to compare safety records across
transit systems, much less between transit and other forms of
transportation..7
Cross modal safety comparisons are limited by the absence of data on
injuries or by inconsistent definitions of what constitutes an injury.
Better injury data, particularly on serious injuries, is needed for all
modes. Consideration should be given to more widespread use of the
Abbreviated Injury Scale, the most widely recognized injury severity
scoring system (Rice et al. 1989, 31), which is used by NHTSA in its
highway accident data programs. A cooperative inter-administration effort
within DOT to work toward consistent reporting thresholds and greater
standardization of injury reporting across the modes is desirable.
Lack of uniform reporting requirements also affects the consistency of
safety data collected for each mode; these data are the basic input for any
systemwide safety appraisal or attempt to identify causal relationships.
Because the vast majority of transportation-related accidents and
fatalities occur on highways (DOT 1990, 83), efforts to improve the quality
and consistency of police accident reports, the primary source of highway
safety data, should have large benefits. NHTSA has developed a uniform
coding system for state accident reports--critical automated data reporting
elements (CADRE)--to standardize information collection on a core set of
data elements essential for highway safety analyses (IIHS Status Report
1990, 6) and is engaging in a cooperative effort with the states to
implement this system. This approach could be a model for improving other
DOT accident reporting systems..8
Measures of safety for transportation modes with relatively few, but
potentially severe, accidents, such as airplane crashes and pipeline
failures, need to be developed. For example, Congress has requested that
FAA identify a set of safety indicators that can be used
54 DATA FOR DECISIONS
to track aviation safety on a consistent basis and provide an early warning
of potential problem areas or emerging issues (FAA 1989, 1-1). The
difficulty is finding reliable indicators that are related to the risk of
accident occurrence (FAA 1989, 1-3).
DOT gathers little information on the level of security provided to
passengers by different modes of transport, with the exception of the
aviation sector.
Access
Perhaps the most fundamental role of transportation is to provide access to
markets and personal mobility. An important mission responsibility of DOT
is to promote policies and programs that accommodate the mobility needs of
U.S. citizens.
Meeting this mission, however, is not always easy. As the rural
population has declined, provision of transportation services to widely
dispersed, low-density rural areas has become more costly. Low-in-come,
elderly, and disabled populations are particularly affected, because low-
density rural areas cannot support conventional public transportation modes
(DOT 1989, 28). These groups may also have difficulty finding appropriate
modes of transportation in urban areas. The issues of mobility and access
are further complicated by lack of a common understanding of what
communities, and populations within these communities, require for
mobility, and how these needs may differ for local and long-distance
transportation. Data on the delivery of transportation services in rural
areas and to low-income, elderly, and disabled populations can help the
department monitor changes in the provision of service, identify where loss
of service is occurring, and help coordinate development and assistance
strategies.
Rural data are available, but they are scattered. The Essential Air
Services Program was begun by DOT in 1978 to ensure continued provision of
air service to small urban and rural areas following deregulation. As part
of this program, regional and commuter air-lines, which serve rural areas,
are required to report operating data (passengers enplaned, flight hours,
etc.) by market. These data can be supplemented by information from the
Official Airline Guide on schedules to determine the time and frequency of
service. The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) can supply
informa-
Meeting Data Needs 55
tion on passenger rail service in rural areas, but data on freight rail
service are lacking, except for the largest carriers..9 Data on other
public and private carriers, such as public transit and intercity bus, are
limited. The Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA)
receives funding from UMTA to prepare a directory of rural (Section 18)
transit service providers, including the type of service offered, fleet
size, and county(ies) in which service is provided. No data are available,
however, on the frequency of service, the number of passengers served, or
the cost of service, nor is information collected on private or nonprofit
service providers that do not receive UMTA funding. Data on intercity bus
activities have not been collected since deregulation of the intercity bus
industry in 1982. However, officials at the Bureau of the Census are
proposing a new annual survey of charter, rural, and intercity bus service,
which could fill this data gap. Overlaying and integrating all these
service elements into a locationally defined geographic information system
(GIS) would permit analyses of the availability of transportation services
in rural areas.
Data on the provision of transportation services to the elderly,
handicapped, and disadvantaged are limited. For example, DOT is issuing
regulations to implement the American Disabilities Act of 1990 that are
likely to cost transportation providers hundreds of millions of dollars
based on a survey from the mid-1970s of the affected population (personal
communication with the DOT Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and
International Affairs, July 16, 1991). UMTA collects some data on the
provision of transit services for the elderly and handicapped [Section
16(b)] as part of the CTAA directory. The Department of Health and Human
Services (DHHS) also provides funding for transportation services for the
elderly and the disadvantaged through programs under the Older Americans
Act, Medicaid, Head Start, and the Community Services and Social Services
Block Grant Programs. The department is attempting to gather baseline
information on the share of DHHS program funds that is used to provide
transportation services and identify the service providers..10
Improving data on the accessibility of transportation will require DOT
to integrate and analyze available data from scattered sources, work
jointly with other federal agencies (e.g., DHHS) to separate out data on
target populations, and cooperate with industry associations and nonprofit
organizations to amplify existing data sources.
56 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Service Delivery
Several of the operating administrations prepare reports on the condition
and performance of modal systems, yet together, they do not provide an
understandable and reliable basis for comparing the efficiency or quality
of service delivered by individual modes or assessing the performance of
the system as a whole (OTA 1991a, 18). Coverage should be expanded where
possible to include more modes; measures of service quality should be
introduced; and methods for measuring intermodal performance should be
devised (Table 3-2).
Three DOT operating administrations and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) produce condition and performance reports of varying
scope and analytic content. Perhaps the best known of these--FHWA's
biennial report on the condition and performance of the nation's highways
and bridges--draws extensively on HPMS, a data system that tracks the
physical characteristics, usage, condition, and operating performance for a
sample of road types. Analytic models are an integral pan of the system and
provide policy makers with the ability to examine the impacts of various
assumptions about travel growth and investment levels on highway
performance.
UMTA has prepared a biennial report to Congress on the current
performance and condition of public mass transportation systems since 1984,
drawing largely on Section 15 data. The reports provide a number of
indicators of transit performance as well as estimates of investment
requirements to maintain existing systems,.11 but there is little analytic
capability to examine the impacts of alternative investment levels on
transit system performance or of alternative strategies (e.g., pricing) on
transit use.
Since 1987 FAA has included a brief review of the condition and
performance of the airport system, which it plans to expand in future
years, in its National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, a report
required by Congress (FAA 1987, iii). The review includes some measures of
system performance, such as airport congestion and delays, but provides
limited information on the consequences of alternative levels of demand or
investment on overall system performance.
Finally, USACE publishes biennial data on the performance of locks on
the inland waterway system, including traffic levels, type of tonnage
carried, and vessel transit time through the locks.
These reports could provide the nucleus of a more integrated look at
systemwide performance, if the following additions were made. First,
Meeting Data Needs 57
measures of the quality of service--speed, reliability, frequency--are
lacking for nearly every mode, with the exception of aviation and inland
waterways, where some measures of delay are available..12 Because of the
importance of performance to users and the prevalence of congestion, such
measures should be developed, with some degree of standardization among the
modes. FHWA has already launched an effort to improve the measurement of
highway congestion in major urban areas through HPMS (Pisarski 1990).
Second, measures of intermodal performance should be developed.
Existing performance reports are modally focused and do not provide a
picture of performance at modal connecting links. Without these dam, the
department is poorly positioned to examine barriers (e.g., lack of
container standardization, overweight maritime containers) that impede the
performance of an increasingly multimodal transport system (OTA 1991b, 11;
TRB 1992) and affect economic growth and international trade.
Developing performance measures for all modes could prove difficult,
particularly for modes such as rail and pipelines whose facilities are
owned and operated by the private sector and where proprietary interests
may limit access to data. It may be possible, however, for DOT to gather
selected performance data by working cooperatively with private industry
groups.
Making progress in improving the comparability of modal condition and
performance reports will likely require a special effort by representatives
from the various operating administrations to develop more standardized
performance measures and agree on common demographic and economic
assumptions underlying forecasts, forecast periods, and analytic models
that should support performance reporting.
Data on Impacts of the Transportation System on Other National Objectives
Increasingly, transportation policies are being developed in the context of
other national policy objectives, such as meeting national security needs
and improving environmental quality. Policy makers at DOT must be able to
articulate the value of transportation in this broader environment as well
as its effect on meeting other national objectives. Gathering the data to
measure these impacts requires joint cooperation among federal agencies.
58 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Economic Growth
Transportation is a service industry; it provides inputs to other indus-
trial sectors (Helfand et al. 1984, 9; DOT 1990, vi). To the extent that
transportation services improve productivity, permit more efficient al-
location of productive resources, and enhance consumer choice, they
contribute to economic growth and international competitiveness.
DOT should be able to articulate these linkages if the department is
to devise policies and investment strategies to encourage economic growth.
At present, these linkages are poorly understood. Moreover, current
measures of the productivity of the transportation sector do not reflect
the full value of transportation services to the economy. For example, they
do not include any measures of the quality of service, a common measurement
problem in the service sector generally (Pisarski 1991). DOT must work
jointly with other federal agencies that measure the productivity of
transportation and its contribution to the economy--the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) and the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)--in a
cooperative effort to understand these linkages and develop more
comprehensive measures of the contribution of the transportation sector to
economic growth.
Existing measures of the role of transportation in the national
economy should also be strengthened. BEA uses information on the
transportation sector as one input in the preparation of summary data on
the Gross National Product.13 and the Balance of Payments, key elements of
the System of National Accounts. BLS measures the productivity of U.S.
service industries including transportation.
These measures are critical indicators of the magnitude and perfor-
mance of the transportation sector in the general economy, yet they are
only as good as the data that support them. BLS measures of transportation
productivity illustrate the data problems related to productivity
measurement. BLS measures labor productivity as output per worker hour;
output is expressed either as a physical quantity (i.e., passenger-miles,
ton-miles) or as a value of the service performed (i.e., revenue) (Dean and
Kunze 1991, 1-7). The data from which BLS derives the output component of
its productivity index cover only a limited portion of total transportation
activity. This situation is partly a result of changes in the sector
following deregulation, changes which have not yet been captured in data
programs. The Bureau of the Census has responded by planning a significant
expansion of its 1992 Economic Census of Transportation and proposing an
expanded program of an-
Meeting Data Needs 59
nual surveys (see Appendix A, pp. 137-139). The Boskin initiative, which
proposes a 5-year, $230 million program to improve the quality of
government economic statistics, may also provide some additional funding
for transportation data as part of an overall plan to increase the coverage
of the service sector (Executive Office of the President 1991 ). These
efforts should receive strong support from DOT.
National Security
The Persian Gulf War provided a vivid illustration of how vital trans-
portation is to national defense. Fortunately, the adequacy of the trans-
portation system to meet the "just-in-time" delivery of the military force
as well as civilian demands was tested in a recessionary environment with
considerable slack in the system.
Of course, the timing and duration of military emergencies cannot be
projected with any certainty; the Secretary of DOT, however, should be able
to assess what impact different levels of demand, military and civilian,
would have on economic performance; identify where added investment in
facilities would provide the greatest benefits in improved military
deployment capability; and evaluate how the special requirements of
military equipment (e.g., ammunition shipped in containers) would affect
commercial activity.
Collecting the data to address these questions is complex, time-
consuming, and costly, because of the special characteristics of defense
transportation data requirements. First, the data must be precise regarding
the location, physical characteristics, and performance capabilities of
transportation facilities. For example, it is not enough to know that there
are three bridges rated structurally deficient on primary highways in the
metropolitan Miami area. Data on condition and use must be linked directly
to specific facilities at specific locations on strategic defense highways.
Second, the data must be comprehensive. Defense transportation data needs
are concerned with all transportation modes and how they interact; it is
frequently at the links between the modes--rail or highway connections to
ports, for example--where delays and breakdowns in transporting equipment
occur.
The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) has been working with DOT and the
Oak Ridge National Laboratories of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
since the early 1980s to develop a national transportation data base
integrated into a GIS to provide the information
60 DATA FOR DECISIONS
needed for strategic defense transportation planning and policy making. The
National Highway Network data base, which contains information on the
Strategic Highway Corridor Network--a network of highways considered most
critical for defense transportation purposes, is the most advanced element
of the system (Lewis 1990, 1). Additional data bases are being included,
but missing or inconsistent geographical coding is a problem for many data
systems, such as the National Bridge Inventory. Obtaining adequate detail
on facilities owned by the private sector such as rail lines (e.g.,
clearances for oversize shipments, gross weight capacity, and traffic
volumes) is also a problem. Improving and expanding this data system will
require continued joint action between DOT and DOD. Given the magnitude of
the task, the experience of the Persian Gulf War can perhaps provide
perspective on which data needs should take precedence.
Environmental Quality
The Clean Air Act of 1990 introduced changes that will profoundly affect
the character of future transportation investments. The act [Pub. L. 101-
549, Sec. 101 (f)(2) and (3)] specifies that in nonattainment areas (i.e.,
large urban areas with unacceptably high levels of ozone and carbon
monoxide), proposed transportation projects and programs must conform with
and contribute to emission reduction measures specified in Environmental
Protection Agency .(EPA)-approved state implementation plans (SIP)..14
Thus, the attainment of federal air quality standards will become a
critical, and in some cases a controlling, factor in making transportation
investment choices in most of the nation's major urban areas (Hawthorn
1991, 17). Transportation control measures, such as transit improvements,
high-occupancy vehicle incentives, and demand management measures to reduce
congestion, are likely to receive greater emphasis in the future as ways to
offset growth in emissions and improve urban air quality (Hawthorn 1991,
21).
Good data are essential to ensure compliance with the act.15 and to
enable DOT policy makers to better evaluate alternative investment
strategies for balancing air quality concerns with mobility needs. Traffic
or vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data are critical to projecting future
emissions levels, determining the need for transportation control measures,
and monitoring compliance (Hawthorn
Meeting Data Needs 61
1991, 18). States are the major source of VMT data, which are reported to
DOT as part of FHWA's HPMS. However, they are not available for all major
urban areas,.16 nor do they necessarily provide a representative sample of
urban area traffic (Pisarski 1990, 18, Appendix B; GAO 1989, 58). Moreover,
forecasting models used to project VMT have consistently underestimated
actual traffic growth, suggesting that the models do not include key
variables that affect travel demand (Hawthorn 1991, 20).
In addition to VMT, better data are needed on other critical factors
that affect emissions levels. For example, traffic speed data are important
because emissions levels vary inversely with speed (i.e., VMT increases on
congested roads will cause disproportionately larger increases in
emissions) (Hawthorn 1991, 19). Currently, good data on speed (i.e., travel
time) are simply not collected (Pisarski 1990, 23); average daily traffic
counts are not adequate to measure emissions levels, which vary as a
function of speed, which changes throughout the day. Vehicle operating
conditions also affect emissions levels; vehicles operating from a "cold
start," that is, sitting idle for 1 hr or more, will produce more emissions
than those operating from a "warm start." Trip data (i.e., origin and final
destination) are needed to measure this factor, but are not readily
available by urban area. Finally, better data are needed on vehicle mix
(heavy trucks, light trucks, passenger cars) and fuel use (diesel versus
gasoline), which also have differential effects on emissions levels.
Closing these data gaps will require joint action between DOT
transportation analysts and state officials to define appropriate methods
of gathering and projecting urban traffic data, DOE energy analysts to
provide data on vehicle emissions, and EPA environmental analysts to
incorporate these data into models that measure their pollution
contribution. Although these data may not all be collected through DOT, the
department should be involved in advising state and local officials on how
to structure a data collection effort and will likely require summary data
by major urban areas for its own monitoring needs and reporting
requirements.
Although this section is focused on the impact of transportation on
clean air, transportation affects many other environmental concerns--global
warming, wetland intrusion, water quality, noise pollution--where the data
on impacts, and more importantly, the ability to analyze how these impacts
affect the environment, are poorly developed.
62 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Energy
Transportation also has a major impact on energy use. The transportation
sector accounts for more than one-fourth of all energy consumed and almost
two-thirds of all petroleum consumed in the United States (Greene et al.
1988). The near total dependence of the sector on fossil fuels has
important national security implications. Dependence of transportation on
fossil fuels also raises environmental concerns, including impacts on urban
air quality discussed in the preceding subsection, as well as long-term
effects on global climate change..17
Considerable data are available from a wide range of sources on total
energy use by different passenger and freight transportation modes.
However, the data need to be refined and, in some cases, structured
differently to address the issues facing the transportation sector today.
For example, more needs to be known about the energy efficiency of various
types of vehicles and transport modes. These data are of interest to DOT
for the following reasons. First, the agency is responsible for regulating
motor vehicle fuel economy standards. Second, improvements in vehicle fuel
efficiency have been and are likely to continue to be an important factor
in achieving the twin goals of reduced energy use and improved
environmental quality; for example, one of the most effective ways of
reducing emissions of greenhouse gases from the transportation sector is
through increased vehicle fuel efficiency (DeLuchi 1990, 168). Thus, it
will be important for DOT as well as DOE and EPA to have the capability to
monitor the fuel economy achieved by various types of vehicles and
transportation modes to gain a better understanding of the energy
performance of the sector.
DOE currently collects data on energy consumption and efficiency for
personal use vehicles from its Residential Energy Consumption Survey. There
is no comparable survey on the nonresidential transportation sector to
capture data on energy consumption and energy efficiency of commercial
vehicles and other freight transport modes. DOE has issued a notice of
request for comments (Federal Register 1991) in an effort to determine how
best to collect these data.
Energy use data also need to be gathered on a trip as well as a modal
basis. Without the data structured in this way, it is impossible to assess
the relative benefits of alternative transportation investments. For
example, proponents of high-speed rail (HSR) systems contend that one of
the benefits of introducing HSR in the United
Meeting Data Needs 63
States is the greater energy efficiency of rail compared with competing air
and automobile travel and the cleaner energy source used to power the
system (i.e., electricity versus fossil fuels). However, total projected
energy benefits may be less if the energy costs of accessing the new system
are also considered in initial origin to final destination trip
comparisons. DOT should work cooperatively with DOE to examine
opportunities for supplementing existing data surveys where possible to
obtain trip data.
Emerging Trends
Transportation not only affects the environment in which it operates, but
is also affected by changes in this environment. Thus, data must also be
collected on key trends that are likely to affect the transportation system
of the future. For example, changes in demographics will have profound
implications for transportation services. The aging of the population is
likely to require a different mix of services (e.g., more public transit,
more user-friendly highways), and result in more leisure travel that is
dispersed in time and space (Johnston 1989, 19). The projected slowing of
the population growth rate may mean some saturation in new drivers and car
ownership levels with reduced pressure on expanding highway capacity. Other
trends, such as regional growth patterns, metropolitan area growth, employ-
ment shifts, and changes in technology, are also likely to have important
implications on the future demand for and structure of transportation
services (Johnston 1989, 16).
Trend data are available from many sources, such as the Bureau of the
Census, BLS, and BEA. The primary need is to develop the capability within
DOT to analyze the data from a system perspective to anticipate shifts in
demand for transportation services, and user needs for modified or new
transportation modes.
PRIVATE PROVISION OF DATA: ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Reducing the data deficiencies noted in the previous section requires
collecting some new data as well as supplementing existing data bases. The
current environment, however, is not conducive to an expansion of data
gathering activities. Deregulation has reduced the amount of mandatory
data, particularly economic and financial, that must be
64 DATA FOR DECISIONS
reported by the private sector. Federal paperwork reduction measures have
been focused on reducing reporting burdens. Private carriers are reluctant
to provide information, even to industry associations, that could be
helpful to competitors (TRB 1990b, 16). Collecting data, particularly
household and business survey dam, has become more expensive, while budget
constraints keep a tight lid on spending for data.
Within these overall constraints, opportunities exist to balance DOT's
requirements for data and the private sector's willingness to provide these
data, either directly or through joint data collection efforts. First, with
the exception of the surveys discussed in the following subsection, the
nature of much of the dam needed to develop NTPMS--summary tabulations and
trend data--should not raise disclosure concerns or confidentiality
problems. Second, the high cost of new data collection efforts should
create incentives for collaboration. The private sector has become an
increasingly important source of transportation data, as private vendors
and industry groups have attempted to fill the vacuum created by the
decline in regulatory reporting; DOT cannot afford to engage in duplicative
data collection efforts unless the information is extremely policy
sensitive. At the same time, private data providers have limited budgets
and may be interested in joint public-private data collection efforts,
particularly if the data are market focused and performance oriented,
reflecting user concerns.
The private sector can be involved in several ways in the provision of
data; each raises a somewhat different set of issues.
Direct Data Collection
One of the most common methods of obtaining national data is to survey
private households and business establishments directly. The planned
National Travel and Commodity Flow surveys would be conducted in this
manner. Surveys of this type raise concerns of confidentiality (i.e.,
protection of the data) and access by users. If the Census Bureau
administers the survey--and the DOT plans to use the Census Bureau to take
advantage of its sampling frame and confidentiality restrictions to conduct
the survey of business establishments for the Commodity Flow Survey--then
these problems can largely be circumvented. However, using private
contractors may be desirable when survey data are needed at lower cost and
quicker turnaround than the Census Bureau can provide; provision must be
made for protecting the
Meeting Data Needs 65
confidentiality of these data. DOT should develop a policy that addresses
confidentiality and data access issues as part of the development of NTPMS,
a topic that is discussed more fully in Chapter 4. The results of a
multiyear study on Confidentiality and Data Access conducted by the
National Research Council Committee on National Statistics, which will be
completed by mid-1992, may provide additional suggestions for safeguarding
confidentiality while providing access to federal surveys and
administrative records for statistical purposes.
Privately Compiled Data or Private Data Sources
Private firms compile and sell data that originate as public information.
These vendors add value to the product by "cleaning" the data and putting
it in formats that can be readily analyzed and are generally computer
accessible. For example, industry associations, such as the Association of
American Railroads and the American Trucking Associations, compile and
aggregate data collected by ICC and make it available to nonmembers for a
fee. Among the advantages of private vendors are their specialized
expertise in information processing technologies and the timeliness of the
products they offer. To the extent that DOT can obtain services like these
in useful form more cost-effectively from the private sector than from
developing the expertise itself, the services should be purchased from
private vendors, or the department could franchise private vendors to
provide these services. DOT should be able to negotiate favorable terms
when it provides data to the private sector for value-added applications,
such as provision of a limited number of free machine-readable copies for
government use.
DOT should also consider opportunities for purchasing transportation
data directly collected by the private sector, such as surveys conducted by
industry associations, or engaging in cooperative data gathering efforts.
DOT analysts should fully understand the methods and limitations of
privately provided data, such as representativeness of sample data to the
underlying population, sampling errors, and confidence levels. Where the
data are to be used by DOT as input for critical policy evaluations instead
of monitoring purposes, the quality and neutrality of the data should be
scrutinized much more closely.
Confidentiality issues will also have to be worked out. If DOT needs
detail on individual respondents, it will have to guarantee a level of
66 DATA FOR DECISIONS
confidentiality that will not breach the arrangements under which the
initial data were collected.
Joint public-private data collection efforts offer another way for DOT
to obtain data in the form it needs at a reasonable cost and with a minimum
of burden on private providers. The desirability of obtaining the data is
likely to be greater for both parties through joint development of a survey
or addition of questions to an existing survey and shared costs. For
example, the U.S. Travel Data Center conducts a national travel survey,
based on monthly surveys of a national probability sample of 1,500 U.S.
adults, on intercity trip and traveler characteristics. The survey could
readily be expanded to provide additional travel information that would
complement other national sources of intercity passenger travel data and
could be of interest to both DOT and the U.S. Travel Data Center. Although
some joint data collection may be possible through contracting, DOT should
explore the feasibility of other, more flexible, arrangements for cost-
sharing cooperative ventures with the private sector..18 The Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center, for example, can accept private funds and
engage in multiyear contracts with private industry.
NEW TECHNOLOGY
Applications of advanced technologies to the transportation sector have the
potential to enhance the speed and quality of data collection and analysis,
while reducing the cost and burden of reporting. Two main areas of
opportunity, which are described in more detail in Appendix B, are (a)
automation of traditional data collection methods and (b) development of
new technological systems for transportation management and operation with
potential data spinoffs. GIS, which are not a new technology, but whose
sophistication has expanded with advances in personal computers and
computer graphics, are also discussed.
The first area includes techniques for automating surveys and data
recording. For example, computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI)
provides automated dialing, electronic editing and scanning of responses,
and even automated sampling and selection of survey respondents. Hand-held
"clipboard computers," which are being promoted by NHTSA, provide police
with computers even smaller than laptops for direct entry of accident data
with built-in editing and coding checks to reduce or eliminate data entry
errors. The data can
Meeting Data Needs 67
be directly uploaded to state computers, both speeding data processing time
and reducing multiple data entry and potential for error. These
technologies are available and in use; their potential for enhancing the
speed and quality of data collection has been demonstrated.
The second category of technologies includes systems such as
electronic data interchange (EDI) and intelligent vehicle-highway systems
(IVHS). EDI allows for electronic communication among shippers, carriers,
and third party services and automated linking of their respective
documents in a paperless records system. In a cost-cutting move, the U.S.
Customs Service now requires electronic filing of customs documents through
an automated manifest system; bar-coded invoices enable carriers to move
swiftly through ports of entry (Hanelt 1989, 7). Consideration is being
given to linking customs data with domestic freight flow data to be
collected by the proposed Commodity Flow Survey in order to learn more
about the foreign trade component of freight movements. These data, if
gathered by traditional survey methods, could only be obtained at great
cost and respondent burden, if at all (Appendix B) .
IVHS technologies, such as on-board vehicle computers that monitor
vehicle activity (e.g., hours of operation, miles traveled, fuel consumed),
automated traffic sensing and control devices that monitor real-time
changes in traffic, and satellite tracking systems that provide precise
locational information, also have the potential to provide trend data that
could be aggregated for national monitoring purposes (e.g., determining
vehicle fuel efficiency by classes of vehicles or tracking changes in
traffic volume by area and road type). Because the current focus of these
technologies is primarily on improving system management and operations,
however, their potential as data collection tools has not been thoroughly
investigated. DOT should examine the data collection potential of these
systems, particularly those such as IVHS, for which the department has a
significant research program.
GIS are computer-based systems that provide a powerful tool for
analysis of geographically oriented dam. Because most transportation data
are spatially dimensioned, they lend themselves to GIS applications. GIS
provide a particularly effective way of integrating modal data to enhance
intermodal comparisons and examine the impacts of changes in the supply or
demand of transportation services on system performance. DOT should build
on its existing GIS capabilities, particularly their application as an
analytic support tool for NTPMS.
68 DATA FOR DECISIONS
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Transportation data are plentiful, but inadequate for national policy
making. The biggest gap in DOT's multimodal data programs is in passenger
and freight flow data. These data provide basic system information on who
or what is moving, by what node, and from where to where; they are also
basic input for other desired system indicators. Flow data provide an
exposure measure for calculating accident rates per passenger-mile or ron-
mile. They are a critical input to forecasts of vehicle activity, which
affect projections of congestion, estimates of emissions levels in urban
areas with unacceptably high levels of ozone and carbon monoxide, and
monitoring of energy use by the collection of national passenger and
freight flow data, which have not been gathered since 1977. Although
national surveys will not provide the data foe detailed analyses of local
congestion or air quality problems, additional sampling in major
transportation corridors and urban areas should provide adequate detail for
national monitoring and analysis purposes.
Development of NTPMS will also require improving the comparability of
data collected on individual transportation modes to enhance intermodal
comparisons and provide an assessment of overall system performance.
Existing data must also be integrated and supplemented to enhance the
capability if the department to determine the contribution of the
transportation system to such other national objectives as economic growth,
national security, environmental quality, and energy use. DOT must work
cooperatively with the operating administrations, other federal agencies,
and the states to develop these data.
Opportunities for using data that are gathered by the private sector
or collaborating with the private sector in data collection efforts should
be explored as an alternative to new data collection efforts. Advances in
data gathering and information processing technologies have the potential
to reduce costs and reporting burdens while improving the speed and
reliability of data collection and analysis. The areas of greatest
opportunity for application to developing NTPMS, such as automated
surveying methods, electronic linking of records through EDI, automated
vehicle and traffic monitoring through IVHS technologies, and
Meeting Data Needs 69
integration if data into GIS for analysis, should be carefully
investigated.
Acting on these opportunities requires a focal point within DOT for
taking lead in making these data available. Changes in institutional
arrangements within the department to meet this goal are examined in the
next chapter.
NOTES
1. Information for this section on the evolution of transportation
statistics was drawn from a background paper prepared for the study
committee by Alan E. Pisarski, consultant to the project, in October
1990.
2. The System of National Accounts includes the accounting of goods and
services produced and received, the gross national product system, and
foreign trade statistics; price indices and employment statistics may
also be considered part of this system. The system is planned and
managed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of
Commerce and the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of
Labor; data collection is handled primarily by the Bureau of the
Census.
3. Until 1988, FAA's data collection programs were characterized as
operational information systems and not as statistical programs
subject to the $500,000 Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
reporting threshold.
4. Congress required biennial reporting on the condition and performance
of the nation's highway system in 1968. HPMS was implemented in 1979
to provide a more consistent source of highway data not only for the
congressional report, but also for FHWA policy, planning, and
operating purposes.
5. As part of the move to automate customs data, trade documentation
forms have been modified to include new data elements, including the
state of the origin and final destination for exports and imports,
respectively. However, the data are incomplete and inaccurate (Hanelt
1989, 8).
6. The 1982 Commodity Transportation Survey was attempted with a reduced
budget, but technical problems limited the usefulness of the survey.
The 1982 and 1987 National Travel Surveys were canceled because of
lack of funding. The Nationwide Personal Transportation Study, in
which a national sample of households is surveyed about the amount and
nature of personal travel, is focused primarily on intracity travel;
only 1 percent of the vehicle trips reported in the latest survey in
1983-1984 were trips of 75 mi or greater (Klinger and Kuzmak 1986,
Vol. I, 1-7).
7. UMTA issued an advanced notice of proposed rolemaking (Federal
Register 1990), requesting comments on ways to improve the quality and
consistency of its safety data, among other revisions to the Section
15 program.
8. Police reports on fatal track accidents, which provide the basis for
the track subset of NHTSA's Fatal Accident Reporting System, have been
supplemented by a data base on tracks involved in fatal accidents
(TIFA) developed by the University of Michigan Transportation Research
Institute under the
70 DATA FOR DECISIONS
sponsorship of the motor carrier industry, which provides considerable
supplementary detail on the vehicle, driver, and carrier through
merging of motor carrier accident reports and selected follow-up
interviews.
9. The annual survey of regional and short-line railroads conducted by
the Association of American Railroads does not contain origin and
destination information.
10. DHHS is focusing on programs for the elderly, Medicaid, and Head Start
and has contracted with CTAA to provide the data. The limited
reporting requirements for the block grant programs preclude trying to
learn what share of these funds is expended on transportation
services.
11. With the exception of the one-time Rail Modernization Study, which was
completed in 1987, up-to-date information is unavailable on the
condition of fixed transit facilities, such as rail stations or bus
maintenance and operating facilities (Zimmerman 1989, 2).
12. Delay measures, however, are frequently flawed. For example, aviation
on-time flight performance data measure delays from official airline
schedules. This performance measure may not provide a reliable
indicator of delay, because carriers may simply build in a delay
factor in their scheduling.
13. Through its input-output tables, BEA measures for each industry the
value added by inputs from every other industry, the net product of
which is the gross national product.
14. States have the responsibility to inventory emissions contributing to
violations of national ambient air quality standards, track these
emissions over time, and ensure implementation of control strategies
that reduce emissions and move areas toward attainment. The act,
however, specifies that in preparing SIP, states must provide for
consultation with affected agencies, such as state departments of
transportation, local metropolitan planning organizations, state
departments of the environment, local air agencies, and other local
officials (Hawthorn 1991, 20).
15. The Clean Air Act requires EPA, in consultation with DOT, to issue VMT
forecast guidance by May 15, 1991; to update transportation and air
quality planning guidelines to coordinate SIP preparation and
monitoring within 9 months; to determine the emission reduction
potential as well as costs and benefits of various transportation
control measures within 12 months; and, to submit a report to Congress
every 3 years, beginning in 1993, evaluating how well transportation
programming is meeting the air quality objectives of the act (Hawthorn
1991,20).
16. Because the focus of HPMS is on national estimates of road conditions,
some states' sampling procedures for urban road conditions provide
aggregate data at the statewide level, but are inadequate for
measuring conditions in specific urban areas (GAO 1989, 58). However,
FHWA requires states to report VMT data by individual urbanized areas
by fiscal year 1993, and both FHWA and the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials are working to develop
national guidelines for traffic monitoring.
17. The U.S. highway transportation sector, for example, contributes about
25 to 30 percent of all carbon dioxide emitted from fossil fuel use, a
key contributor to global warming (DeLuchi 1990, 169).
18. Such cooperative ventures are encouraged by the Federal Technology
Transfer Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-502), which allows federal
laboratories to enter into cooperative research with private industry,
universities, and others to encourage technology transfer (U.S.
Congress 1986).
Meeting Data Needs 7 1
REFERENCES
ABBREVIATIONS
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
GAO General Accounting Office
IIHS Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OTA Office of Technology Assessment
TRB Transportation Research Board
Carey, J. S. 1990. Passenger Air Transportation Data Needs, Resources,
and Issues. In Transportation Research Record 1253, TRB, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 5-16.
Dean, E. R., and K. Kunze. 1991. Productivity Measurement in Service
Industries. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C. Presented at the
Conference on Output Measurement in the Service Sector, Charleston, S.C.,
May 1990, Conference on Research on Income and Wealth, National Bureau of
Economic Research, revised March, 64 pp.
DeLuchi, M.A. 1990. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases from the Use of
Gasoline, Methanol, and Other Alternative Transportation Fuels. In Methanol
As An Alternative Fuel Choice: An Assessment (W. L. Kohl. ed.), The Johns
Hopkins Foreign Policy Institute, Washington, D.C., pp. 167-199.
DOT. 1989. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities: Volume1:
Building the National Transportation Policy. July, 35 pp.
DOT. 1990. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities:
A Statement of National Transportation Policy Strategies for Action. Feb.,
129 pp.
Executive Office of the President. 1991. FY 1992 Economics Statistics
Initiative Improving the Quality of Economics Statistics. Council of
Economic Advisers, Washington, D.C., Feb. 14.
FAA. 1987. National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) 1986-
1995. U.S. Department of Transportation, Nov.
FAA. 1989. Aviation Safety Indicators: Concept Definition. U.S.
Department of Transportation, Nov.
Federal Register. 1990. Vol. 55, No. 156, Aug. 13, pp. 33,078-33,086.
Federal Register. 1991. Vol. 56, No. 58, March 26, pp. 12,514-12,515.
GAO. 1989. Traffic Congestion Trends, Measures, and Effects. GAO-
PEMD-90-1. Washington, D.C., 86 pp.
Greene, D. L., D. Sperling, and B. McNutt. 1988. Transportation Energy
to the Year 2020. In Special Report 220: A Look Ahead: Year 2000. TRB,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 207-231.
Hanelt, R. 1989. International Oceanborne Trade Data. In Proc.,
Western Regional Transportation Data Forum, Transportation Research Forum,
San Francisco, Calif., June 22-23, pp. 7-9.
Hawthorn, G. 1991. Transportation Provisions in the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990. ITE Journal, Vol. 61, No. 4, April, pp. 17-24.
72 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Helfand, S. D., V. Natrella, and A. E. Pisarski. 1984. Statistics for
Transportation, Communication, and Finance and Insurance: Data Availability
and Needs. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 138 pp.
IIHS Status Report. 1990. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety,
Arlington, Va., Vol. 25, No. 9, Oct. 6.
Johnston, W. B. 1989. Transportation for the Next Century. In Moving
America: A Look Ahead to the 21st Century. U.S. Department of
Transportation, July 24, pp. 15-30.
Klinger, D., and J. R. Kuzmyak. 1986. Personal Travel in the U.S.,
1983-1984 Nationwide Personal Transportation Study. DTFH61-84-C-(X)098.
Vols. I and II. COMSIS Corporation, Wheaton, Md.; U.S. Department of
Transportation, Aug.
Lewis, S. M. 1990. The Use of GIS in the Federal Highway
Administration Office of Policy Development. U.S. Department of
Transportation, March 16, 9 pp.
OMB. 1988-1991. Statistical Programs of the U.S. Government, Fiscal
Years 1988-1991. Executive Office of the President.
OTA. 1991a. Moving Ahead: 1991 Surface Transportation Legislation.
OTA-SET-496. Congress of the United States, June, 63 pp.
OTA. 1991b. Delivering the Goods: Public Works Technologies,
Management, and Financing. OTA-SET-477. Congress of the United States,
April, 253 pp.
Pisarski, A. E. 1990. Summary and Recommendations of the Workshop on
National Urban Congestion Monitoring. FHWA-PL-90-029. FHWA, U.S. Department
of Transportation, Sept., 38 pp.
Pisarski, A. E. 1991. A Brief Review of Transportation Productivity
Statistics Prepared for the Highway Users Federation, Washington, D.C.,
Aug. 1991, 9 pp.
Pub. L. 99-502. 1986. Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986. 100
Star., p. 1,785.
Pub. L. 101-549. 1990. Clean Air Act. 104 Stat. pp. 2,399-2,712.
Rice, D.P., E.J. MacKenzie, and Associates. 1989. Cost of Injury in
the United States: A Report to Congress. Institute for Health and Aging,
University of California, San Francisco; Injury Prevention Center, Johns
Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.
Smith, D. S. 1989. Coping with Transportation Data Shortfalls. In
Proc., Western Regional Transportation Data Forum. Transportation Research
Forum, San Francisco, Calif., June 22-23, pp. 4-6.
TRB 1990a. Special Report 228: Data Requirements for Monitoring Truck
Safety. National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 132 pp.
TRB. 1990b. Transportation Research Circular 367: Proceedings of the
Special Conference on Freight Transportation Data: The Changing Federal
Role Since Deregulation. National Research Council, Washington, D.C., Dec.,
27 pp.
Meeting Data Needs 73
TRB. 1992 (forthcoming). Special Report 236: Intermodal Marine
Container Transportation: Impediments and Opportunities. National Research
Council, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Congress. Senate. 1986. Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation. S. Rept. 99-283, 99th Cong., 2nd Sess., April 21.
Zimmerman, S. L. 1989. National Transportation Data Needs for the
1990s: Transit Strategic Planning. Presented at National Data Conference,
TRB, Washington, D.C., Oct., 4 pp.
Click HERE for graphic.
Click HERE for graphic.
4
Organizational Issues:
Managing the Data
The need for more effective and permanent institutional mechanisms within
the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to ensure the collection and
analysis of data to support informed national transportation policy making
is recognized in the Statement of National Transportation Policy (DOT 1990,
124). The committee's recommendations for establishing a new organizational
structure to carry out these tasks are presented in this chapter.
OVERVIEW
The deficiencies of transportation statistics for national policy making
are a longstanding problem..1 Nearly a decade before DOT was established
in 1967, the congressional Subcommittee on Census and Government Statistics
had described transportation statistics as "one of the most poorly
organized of the Federal statistical fields" (U.S. Congress 1959). In 1960,
a panel of the National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council
found that"... (transportation) information is not adequate for scientific
examination of the transportation system as a whole, nor its relationships
to vital economic, social, political, and defense questions. Without such
information it is difficult to identify important problems and promising
methods for solution" (NRC 1960).
Soon after it was established, DOT itself noted in a report to Con-
gress that because transportation data are fragmented, incompatible, and
contain significant gaps, "it is not possible to examine the transportation
system as a whole or in terms of its related parts" (DOT 1969, vii).
Transportation Secretary John Volpe submitted a $36 mil-
77
78 DATA FOR DECISIONS
lion proposal to Congress in 1969 to establish a 5-year program to meet
critical transportation information needs (DOT 1969, vii). Full funding for
this program was not forthcoming, nor has the collection of systemwide data
ever been a priority for the department..2
The primary reason for the lack of emphasis on data on transportation
as an integrated system lies in the evolution of the department itself as a
decentralized group of modally focused operating administrations (Figure 4-
1); DOT has been characterized as a "holding company" instead of a unified
department (Dean 1991, 10). Throughout DOT's history, transportation issues
have been viewed from the perspective of the modal providers, each of which
has developed independent data programs to support its missions and pro-
grams. Thus, data programs of the department are narrowly centered on modal
issues. Moreover, their focus is on issues internal to the operation of
individual transportation modes instead of the linkages between the system
and the broader external environment that it serves and affects.
During the mid- to late 1970s, in part the result of a government-wide
effort to improve federal statistics, attention was focused again on the
deficiencies of decentralized transportation data for policy. In a major
report on federal statistical programs, the U.S. Department of Commerce
noted that "... the existing (transportation statistics) system . . .
appears incapable of exploring transportation-wide issues" (U.S. Department
of Commerce 1978, 227). Establishment of a statistical center within DOT
and possible centralization of all DOT data collection activities within
the center were recommended (U.S. Department of Commerce 1978, 227).
The concept of a statistical center at DOT received little support,
but in 1980, in an effort to improve coordination of departmental data
collection activities, DOT designated the Research and Special Programs
Administration (RSPA), itself only 3 years old,.3 as the lead agency for
coordination and planning of transportation statistical information systems
in the department (DOT Order 5300.1), a position it retains today. The
Center for Transportation Information was established at RSPA's Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center (VNTSC) in Cambridge, Massachusetts,
to provide data support for the operating administrations and the Office of
the Secretary (OST).
Funding for RSPA and other departmental multimodal data programs,
however, soon fell prey to budgetary cutbacks during the 1980s. When
adjusted for inflation, funding for multimodal data collection declined
from more than $1 million annually in the early 1980s
Click HERE for graphic.
80 DATA FOR DECISIONS
to about $400,000 annually by the end of the decade (Figure 4-2 and Table
3-B). From 1974 through 1981, multimodal data programs accounted for about
9 percent of DOT's combined funding for multimodal and major statistical
programs;.4 this share dropped to about 2 percent from 1982 to the present
(Figure 4-3). Two reports, which contain summary data for all modes --
National Transportation Statistics and Transportation Safety Information --
both prepared by VNTSC, received no appropriations for fiscal year 1991;
VNTSC hopes to finance these reports from user fees in the future. The
dominance of the modal data programs of DOT's operating administrations has
made it difficult to develop a constituency base in the department and
adequate financial support to sustain a multimodal data program capability.
Today, the situation is more conducive to developing this capability.
Recent DOT strategic planning engaged operating administrators to work
together on issues that cut across individual modes. The DOT leadership has
committed to developing an on-going strategic planning capability (DOT
1990, 11), which should encourage continued dialogue among the modes, and
has taken steps to enhance the department's data programs for this purpose.
Specifically, the secretary has
Click HERE for graphic.
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 81
Click HERE for graphic.
established two data committees to coordinate both the internal and
interagency collection of data for national transportation policy making.
In addition, funding to restart the multimodal commodity and passenger flow
surveys was included in the department's budgets for fiscal years 1992 and
1993.
Congressional leaders have focused on improvements in transportation
statistics for national policy making as part of surface transportation
reauthorization bills. The Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
(S. 1204), which was passed by the Senate in June 1991, mandates
establishment of a new Bureau of Transportation Statistics at DOT to
compile, analyze, and publish comparative modal statistics and summary data
on the condition and performance of the national transportation system. The
companion house bill--the Intermodal Surface Transportation Infrastructure
Act of 1991 (H.R. 3566)--includes a proposal for creation of an intermodal
data base, which would provide, among other information, data on commodity
and passenger flows, as part of a new Office of Intermodalism in DOT. The
committee believes that DOT should take advantage of the current attention
on transportation statistics to analyze how best to structure its data
activities for national policy making and make appropriate permanent
organizational changes.
One option would be for DOT to build on the mechanisms it already has
in place--the two data committees--to coordinate the collection of data for
the National Transportation Performance Monitoring System (NTPMS). The
mission of these committees is to review data needs for national
transportation policy making and report annually to the secretary on new
data collection requirements and ways to integrate and improve existing
data programs. These committees could provide the focal point of a
department effort to develop
82 DATA FOR DECISIONS
NTPMS. This approach would also avoid previous objections by the operating
administrations and others to the concept of a central statistical unit
within DOT that might centralize all departmental data collection
activities.
The primary limitation of this option is that it continues the depart-
ment's ad hoc support of multimodal data programs. Without a clear mandate
for developing NTPMS on a permanent basis and a budget and staff to support
the data collection and analysis involved, it is unlikely that this
approach would be any more successful than past efforts to coordinate
transportation data programs for national policy making.
FEDERAL STATISTICAL AGENCIES--A MODEL FOR DOT
Many federal agencies have developed and sustained broad data programs to
support agency mission objectives by establishing central
statistical offices like the National Center for Education Statistics, the
National Center for Health Statistics, and the Energy Information Ad-
ministration (EIA). Another option would be for DOT to create a
Transportation Data Center to meet its multimodal data collection needs
modeled on these federal statistical agencies.
Typically, these units have a broad mission to produce data and
analyses for policy makers both within and outside their departments. They
may be mandated by statute, and many are relatively autonomous within their
parent departments. Finally, most have separate budgets, and many have
sizeable staffs (Wellington 1988). The following characteristics are among
the most critical to the effective operation of federal statistical
agencies.
Clear Mission and Mandate
A central statistical unit must have a clearly defined and well-accepted
mission and a mandate to carry out this mission (CNSTAT 1991). Many federal
statistical agencies, and in some cases specific data collection
activities? are mandated by statute (Wellington 1988, 18). Obtaining
enabling legislation requires broad-based support and perception of need.
For example, Congress mandated creation of the Energy Information
Administration in 1978, following considerable controversy over the
validity of energy data on supply and demand. Whether similar congressional
support will be
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 83
forthcoming for a Bureau of Transportation Statistics proposed by the
Senate in the surface transportation bill must await passage of the final
legislation.
Independence
The independence of a central statistical agency is essential to establish
the credibility of its data and products (CNSTAT 1991 ). Independence is
enhanced when the statistical agency head is appointed by the President
with approval by the Senate for a fixed term. In many departments,
independence of statistical agency directors is further enhanced by their
relative autonomy within the department; some statistical agency heads
report directly to the department secretary, whereas others am within one
to two reporting levels of the top (Wellington 1988, 19, 24). Finally, in
some cases, for example the EIA administrator, independence to collect and
publish substantive data without departmental approval is ensured by
statute (Wellington 1988, 17).
Separate or line-item budget authority for the statistical agency
within the overall department budget also helps ensure greater autonomy for
the unit in determining what data it will collect and what analysis it will
conduct (Wellington 1988, 18). Separate budgets have tended to result in
sustained support, although not always full funding, for core data
programs. Given DOT's history of intermittent and ad hoc support of
multimodal data programs, a similar funding arrangement is a prerequisite
for ensuring continuity of data programs for monitoring purposes and policy
analysis.
The relationship of the statistical agency with other department
units, particularly the policy office, must also be clearly defined. Most
of the major statistical units in federal agencies are separate from the
policy function, which protects the integrity and neutrality of the data
they collect (Wellington 1988, 17).
Professionalism
An effective statistical agency is also committed to high professional
standards (CNSTAT 1991). This includes the professional qualifications of
the agency head, who should be knowledgeable in the subject area of the
statistical unit, and of staff. Incentives for attracting high-quality
staff may be enhanced by the Boskin initiative, which would establish a
Center for Survey Methods at a local Washington
84 DATA FOR DECISIONS
D.C. university and fund a graduate degree program in survey statistics for
current and prospective federal statisticians (Executive Office of the
President 1991). Advisory committees can also provide valuable technical as
well as broader policy advice to statistical agency directors on the scope
and quality of data collection (Wellington 1988, 36).
Recommendation
The committee recommends that DOT establish a transportation data center
(TDC), adopting the best elements of other federal statistical agencies. It
believes that a permanent and separate institution within the department is
required to provide sustained support and continuity of data for analysis
and informed decision making by DOT policy makers, Congress, and the
transportation community. Specifically, TDC should be authorized by
statute; given clear authority to develop systemwide multimodal data and
analytic support capability for national transportation policy making; and
provided a separate budget, qualified director, and full-time professional
staff to carry out these activities.
CONCEPT OF A TRANSPORTATION DATA CENTER
TDC would provide a focal point for the collection and integration of
systemwide transportation data and would act as the key !ink among the
operating administrations within DOT, other federal agencies and levels of
government, and the private sector in the provision of these data.
The primary role of TDC would be to conduct general purpose data
activities to support the broad policy needs of the department. Its main
responsibilities would include development of the national transportation
performance monitoring system (NTPMS), management of the department's
general purpose multimodal surveys, and preparation of the required
biennial report on the state of the nation's transportation system. A
secondary role of TDC would be to support other offices within the
department. For example, it could provide special analyses for the
Assistant Secretary for Policy and International Affairs or for the newly
formed Office of Strategic Planning under the Assistant Secretary for
Budget and Programs; it could also work with the operating administrations
to help make modal data programs more strategically oriented.
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 85
The new data collection activities of TDC would be limited. TDC should
engage in data acquisition only when the required data fall between or
transcend existing programs of the operating administrations, such as
multimodal passenger and commodity flow surveys or intermodal data or when
the center must supplement modal data programs to improve the comparability
of data for systemwide analysis. Mode-specific data acquisition should re-
main with the relevant operating administrations. Thus, a major source of
concern about earlier proposals for a transportation data center--
centralization of modal data programs--should not be an issue..6
With a permanent central institution charged with collecting system-
wide data in place, the department should be in a better position to
articulate its data deficiencies and build the case for obtaining the
necessary resources to improve them.
FUNCTIONS OF TDC
The activities of TDC should be focused on five core areas.
Identification of Data Needs
Development of the data for NTPMS to support national transportation policy
making will require a detailed assessment of what information is required,
to what extent it already exists, how readily it can be accessed, and,
where data are missing, what the priorities should be for collecting them.
Drawing on the expertise of its professional staff and that of the
operating administrations, TDC should be responsible for making these
determinations and ensuring that the relevant data programs are put in
place. Preparation of the required biennial report on the performance of
the transportation system should provide a vehicle for defining more
precisely where key data are missing or where the comparability of existing
modal data from the operating administrations is weak.
A thorough inventory of existing transportation data bases and an
assessment of the compatibility of computer hardware and software systems
affecting data integration could also be part of this effort. Periodic
inventories of the major data programs of the department and related
agencies have been conducted, but they have typically been one-time
surveys..7 As a byproduct of this inventorying effort, TDC
86 DATA FOR DECISIONS
could act as a data depository for the department, developing an electronic
inventory of departmental data bases, which would provide a brief
description of the available data and a point of contact regarding more
detailed information about the contents of the data bases and conditions
under which they can be accessed.
Data Compilation
New data collection activities of TDC would be limited and highly focused
on multimodal surveys and intermodal data. Management of the proposed
National Passenger and Commodity Flow surveys, which are currently being
handled by ad hoc informal working groups, should be assumed by TDC to
ensure adequate and sustained funding to complete the surveys.
Perhaps equally important, TDC should take responsibility for
obtaining and linking modal data from the operating administrations and
aggregating them into time series for NTPMS. From a data perspective, TDC
would operate as a decentralized distributed network, that is, desired data
from existing modal data programs would be accessed electronically and
linked. Advances in computer technology now enable data integration through
sets of networked data bases instead of by centralization of data into one
or more large data bases (personal communication with Jane Bortnick,
Assistant Chief, Science Policy Research Division, The Library of Congress,
December 6, 1990)..8 Linking data should be achieved by creating bridges
among existing data sets; generally, this will require adding questions to
existing data programs to allow linking of data elements without detracting
from the purposes for which the data programs were originally structured.
Compilation of data for performance monitoring will require TDC staff
to make numerous decisions about frequency of data collection, desirability
of sampling in the use of administrative records, level of geographic or
other detail for analysis, and the like. Thus, an important activity of the
data center should be the development of a long-term plan for data
collection that provides guidelines and procedures for treating these
issues.
TDC staff should also keep abreast of new technologies that could
enhance the quality and reliability and reduce the cost and burden of data
collection and look for appropriate applications in developing NTPMS.
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 87
Data Standards and Quality Assurance
A far more challenging task is improving the comparability and quality of
the source data. This will require a long-term cooperative effort among
TDC, the operating administrations, and other data providers. TDC should
take the lead in setting the necessary standards for data comparability --
establishing common definitions and common assumptions about travel demands
and economic forecasts and developing common standards for survey methods
(e.g., data collection procedures, sampling methods, quality controls)--for
data programs that will provide the key source dam for multimodal analysis
and policy making. A technical advisory committee of outside experts in
transportation statistics and analysis should be established to provide
periodic technical advice to TDC on setting data standards. This group
would help ensure that the data products of TDC are technically sound and
of high quality.
TDC must assume responsibility for the quality of the data it col-
lects. The multimodal passenger and commodity flow surveys, for example,
should contain thorough documentation of data collection methodologies and
discussion of any data limitations. TDC should also know and disclose the
quality of the data it obtains from others, making clear any limitations of
the data that might affect analysis for policy purposes.
TDC should also develop a policy on confidentiality as part of its
quality assurance program to protect the identity of individuals or
businesses involved in providing data. Confidentiality is essential for
encouraging high response rates and accurate data (CNSTAT 1991). If
possible, the confidentiality policy should be included as part of the
legislation mandating the center.
Data Synthesis and Analysis
Turning data into information that is useful for national transportation
policy making requires synthesizing, analyzing, and interpreting the data.
TDC staff should have the capability not only to collect data, but also to
analyze the data and conduct special research studies related to these
data. Although the analyst-researcher has different skills than the data
producer, the closer the working relationship between the two, the greater
the assurance that the data will be structured to produce the desired
information and the more likely the limita-
88 DATA FOR DECISIONS
tions of the data will be recognized in interpreting the results (CNSTAT
1991). Not all of the analysis and research could or should be conducted by
the center. However, the experience of other federal statistical agencies
suggests that an important component of an effective federal statistical
unit is "an active research program [that] is integral to its activities"
(CNSTAT 1991, 4, 5). The analytic role of the data center should be focused
on impartial interpretation and explanation of the data; it should not
involve conducting policy analysis or giving policy advice. TDC should
simply report baseline conditions and trends and explain what the data
mean, combining and summarizing them in forms that are useful for more
detailed analysis. For example, it should develop analytic tools like
geographic information systems for integrating modal data and enhancing
intermodal comparisons and analyses of system impacts from changes in the
supply and demand of modal services. Development of modeling capability and
other analytic tools, which were discussed in Chapter 2, should also be
part of the data center's analysis capabilities.
Data Dissemination
TDC should be responsible for disseminating the data it collects or obtains
from others in a format that is useful for both the department and the
transportation community. The primary product of TDC will be the biennial
summary report on the state of the nation's transportation system. This
report will summarize critical time series data and provide benchmarks of
system performance through a series of condition and performance
indicators.
To the extent possible, TDC's data collection and dissemination
activities should be responsive to the needs of data users, both public and
private, and its data products should be designed for technical and
nontechnical audiences. TDC should establish a user advisory committee,
representing public (at all governmental levels) and private users and
providers of transportation data, to assist the center in defining the type
of data to be collected for the NTPMS and how it should be structured..9
OPERATION OF TDC
The success of TDC in achieving the goals and carrying out the functions
just described will require coordination and cooperation with numerous
existing organizations both within and outside DOT.
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 89
Operating Administrations
Development of NTPMS will require working closely with the operating
administrations and data providers at other governmental levels, such as
the states, as the primary sources for much of the data. Publication of the
potentially highly visible state of the nation's transportation system
report and distribution to a wide audience should offer an incentive for
the operating administrations to provide quality input. In turn, TDC could
offer assistance to the operating administrations to improve modal data
programs for policy applications and enlist support in obtaining funds for
this purpose.
Improving the comparability of the modal data programs of the
operating administrations will require a long-term cooperative effort. The
DOT Transportation Data Committee, formed by the secretary in November
1990, could assist in this activity. The committee, which meets quarterly,
was formed as an internal working group to review data needs for policy
making; it must report annually to the secretary on new data collection
requirements and ways to integrate and improve existing data programs.
VNTSC
RSPA's VNTSC could assist the center in structuring NTPMS. RSPA has the
lead responsibility within the department for planning and developing a
coordinated program in transportation information, including preparation of
the department's only multimodal reports, although limited funding has been
available for these activities during the past decade. VNTSC, in
particular, has worked informally with several of the operating
administrations and has several of the modal data bases on line. VNTSC's
familiarity with these data bases would be valuable in assessing the
feasibility of accessing data from the operating administrations. Over the
years, VNTSC has also conducted several inventories of transportation data
programs, a function it could perform regularly for TDC.
OST
Because the primary purpose of TDC is to provide data and analytic support
for national transportation policy making, the center should seek input
from the two assistant transportation secretaries most involved in policy
issues--the Assistant Secretary for Policy
90 DATA FOR DECISIONS
and International Affairs and the Assistant Secretary for Budget and
Programs, who has responsibility for the newly formed DOT Office of
Strategic Planning.10--in defining the long-term strategic issues and
policy questions facing the department. TDC professional staff would
determine what data are needed to inform these policy concerns and put in
place the data programs that are needed. Frequent contact between these
offices and the data center should help ensure the relevancy of the data
collected by TDC for policy analysis. However, because frequent changes in
data programs are costly and detrimental to trend analysis, the
responsiveness of data programs to short-term policy concerns is likely to
be limited. TDC should work closely with OST to anticipate policy issues
and related data needs to the greatest extent possible in structuring
NTPMS.
Interagency Data Coordination
Development of NTPMS, particularly those data related to assessing the role
and impact of transportation on other major national objectives, requires
joint cooperation between TDC and other federal agencies. The Federal
Interagency Transportation Statistics Committee, which was also established
by the secretary in November 1990, could provide the catalyst for greater
interdepartmental coordination. Currently, the committee has a broad
mandate to provide a forum for federal agencies to exchange information on
transportation data needs and programs. This agenda could be more directly
focused on the data requirements of NTPMS and the steps needed to
strengthen those elements that require interagency data collection efforts.
One way to coordinate interagency collection of transportation statis-
tics would be through formal memoranda of understanding (MOU), borrowing a
model used by Statistics Canada to coordinate collection of national
transportation statistics. MOU among TDC and other major data providers and
users, such as the Bureau of the Census or the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
could be used to define and agree on key data needs and data collection
programs, as well as on probable sources of funding.
Bureau of the Census
The Census Bureau could provide unique assistance to TDC because of its
special areas of expertise. For example, it could work with TDC to develop
appropriate policies on issues of confidentiality
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 91
and data access as well as statistical methods of data collection. Based on
its recent efforts to expand contacts with data users and respondents, the
Census Bureau could assist TDC in designing a user out-reach and data
dissemination program. Finally, jointly sponsored data collection programs
could be considered.
Private Sector
TDC should also work cooperatively with the private sector in designing and
collecting data for NTPMS. Collaboration could range from purchasing survey
dam gathered by industry organizations to engaging in cooperative data
gathering efforts. Ideally, TDC should be given the authority to enter into
flexible cost-sharing arrangements for joint public-private data gathering
activities. The private sector should also be formally represented on the
TDC user advisory committee to help define data requirements from a user
perspective.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Developing an ongoing data and analytic capability to support informed
national transportation policy making requires a permanent
institutional structure within DOT dedicated to this purpose. The
committee concluded that the ad hoc, incremental approaches of the
past have not been successful in creating a sustained consistent base
of information, which is necessary to the secretary's national policy,
advisory, and decision-making functions. It recommends that DOT take
advantage of current initiatives to improve transportation dam, both
within the department and as part of pending federal legislation, to
establish a transportation dam center. TDC should be modeled on the
characteristics of other successful federal statistical agencies. It
should be authorized by statute, have a clear mandate to develop
systemwide multimodal data and analytic support for national
transportation policy making, and have a separate budget and full-time
professional director and staff to ensure commitment to high profes-
sional standards.
TDC should operate as the focal point for the collection and
integration of systemwide data and act as the key link among the
92 DATA FOR DECISIONS
operating administrations within DOT, other federal agencies and
levels of government, and the private sector in the provision of
these data. The primary role of TDC would be to conduct general
purpose data activities to support broad policy needs, including
development of NTPMS, management of the department's general
purpose multimodal data surveys, and preparation of the required
biennial report on the state of the nation's transportation
system. New data collection activities would be highly focused
in multimodal surveys that transcend the responsibilities of the
operating administrations, such as the passenger and commodity
flow surveys, and on data needed to supplement modal programs to
improve the compatibility of data for systemwide analysis. Modal
programs and related data acquisition would remain the
responsibility of the operating administrations.
The primary functions of a data center would be to identify data
to develop NTPMS; compile the necessary data, drawing in existing
public and private data where possible; set standards for improving
the comparability of data drawn from existing sources and ensure the
quality of its products; synthesize and analyze the data into
information useful to policy makers; and disseminate the data to the
secretary, Congress, and the transportation community. Two advisory
committees - one representing data users and providers, and the other,
experts in transportation statistics and analysis - should be
established to assist TDC in carrying out these functions
Cooperation and coordination with numerous existing organizations
are essential to the success of these efforts. TDC should work
jointly with the operating administrations and other levels of
government who provide data such as the states, RSPA's VNTSC, OST,
other federal agencies including the Bureau of the Census, and the
private sector.
NOTES
1. Material in this section is drawn heavily from two papers
prepared for the Strategic Transportation Data Needs Study: (a) a
background paper by Alan E. Pisarski, consultant to the project,
prepared in October 1990 and (b) a paper entitled The
Institutional Framework of DOT Multimodal Information
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 93
Programs: A Brief Historical Perspective, prepared by RSPA's VNTSC in
November 1990.
2. However, publication of National Transportation Statistics, which
contains comparative statistics for all of the modes, was begun at
this time.
3. The Research and Special Programs Directorate was created in 1977 to
take over the operational activities of the Office of the Secretary
(OST) and other responsibilities and organizations that did not fit
well into the modal administrations, such as hazardous materials
transportation, pipeline safety, and VNTSC (Dean 1991, 21). In 1978
the directorate was reorganized as RSPA.
4. Some small overlap may exist between data programs identified as
multimodal and those identified as modal, but the vast majority of
multimodal data programs are below the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) $500,000 criterion for a major statistical data program (Table
3-B).
5. Four of the data programs of the Energy Information Administration
(ETA) as well as an annual forecast of energy trends are required by
statute (personal communication with William Dorsey, Director, Office
of Planning, Management, and Information Services, December 18, 1990).
6. At least two proposals were presented to create a national data center
for transportation statistics. The Transportation Statistics Act of
1975 (H.R. 7778) proposed the establishment of a National Center for
Transportation Statistics within OST; concern by other agencies
responsible for transportation statistics, such as the Interstate
Commerce Commission, and limited support from DOT resulted in the
demise of this initiative. In 1978 the U.S. Department of Commerce
study mentioned earlier recommended that a statistical center be
established within DOT, which also received little support within DOT
and from the transportation community (VNTSC 1990, 5-7).
7. The Transportation Research Board prepared an inventory of major
transportation data sources and programs in 1981 as part of a study on
data needs of nonfederal users of transportation data (TRB 1981, A-17-
A-26). VNTSC prepared an inventory of transportation information
systems in 1983 (VNTSC 1983) to identify possible duplication among
data bases in compliance with the guidelines of the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
8. Two major new federal research projects, the U.S. Global Change
Research Program and the U.S. Human Genome Project, are considering
data systems that synthesize diverse types of information from many
different sources through network integration instead of creation of a
single large data base (NRC 1990, 72-77; U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services and U.S. Department of Energy 1990, 18).
9. This committee should include a statistician, because it is important
from the outset to structure any data collection activities in a
statistically sound manner.
10. The mission of this office is to encourage and make permanent a
strategic perspective within DOT. The department's fiscal year 1993
budget contains a request for $1.5 million to support 4 to 5 permanent
positions and 1 to 2 rotating positions from the operating
administrations to staff the Office of Strategic Planning.
94 DATA FOR DECISIONS
REFERENCES
ABBREVIATIONS
CNSTAT Committee on National Statistics
DOT U .S. Department of Transportation
NRC National Research Council
OMB Office of Management and Budget
TRB Transportation Research Board
VNTSC Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
CNSTAT. 1991. White Paper: Principles for a Federal Statistical
Agency. National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 8 pp.
Dean, A. L. 1991. The Organization and Management of the Department of
Transportation. National Academy of Public Administration, Washington,
D.C., March, p. 54.
DOT. 1969. Transportation Information.: A Report to the Committee on
Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives. May, 244 pp.
DOT. 1990. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities: A
Statement of National Transportation Policy Strategies for Action. Feb.,
129 pp.
Executive Office of the President. 1991. FY 1992 Economics Statistics
Initiative Improving the Quality of Economics Statistics. Council of
Economic Advisers, Washington, D.C., Feb. 14.
NRC. 1960. Proceedings of the Conference on Transportation Research.
Publication 840. Woods Hole, Mass., Aug. In Transportation Information: A
Report to the Committee on Appropriations, U.S. House of Representatives,
May 1969, pp. 131-133.
NRC. 1990. The U.S. Global Change Research Program: An Assessment of
FY 1991 Plans. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., Aug., 107 pp.
OMB. 1988-1991. Statistical Programs of the United States Government,
Fiscal Years 1988-1991. Executive Office of the President.
TRB. 1981. identification of Transportation Data Needs and Measures
for Facilitation of Data Flows. DOT-TSC-1710. Washington, D.C.; VNTSC, U.S.
Department of Transportation, March, 14 1 pp.
U.S. Congress. House. 1959. Subcommittee on Census and Government
Statistics of the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service. In
Transportation Information: A Report to the Committee on Appropriations,
U.S. House of Representatives, May 1969, p. 131.
U.S. Congress. House. 1975. H.R. 7778, The Transportation Statistics
Act of 1975. 94th Cong., 1st Sess. U.S. Congress. Senate. 1991. S. 1204,
The Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. 102nd Cong., 1st Sess.,
Sections 115(d)(l)(A) and (B).
U.S. Congress. House. 1991. H.R. 3566, Intermodal Surface
Transportation Infrastructure Act of 1991. 102nd Cong., 1st Sess., Section
502(b)(4).
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1978. A Framework for Planning U.S. Federal
Statistics for the 1980s. Office of Federal Statistical Policy and
Standards, Washington, D.C., 440 pp.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of
Energy. 1990. Understanding Our Genetic Inheritance, The U.S. Human Genome
Project: The First Five Years, FY 1991-1995. DOE/ER-0452P. Bethesda, Md.,
89 pp.
Organizational Issues: Managing the Data 95
VNTSC. 1983. Inventory of Transportation Information Systems. DOT-TSC-
OST-83-3. U.S. Department of Transportation, Cambridge, Mass., 582 pp.
VNTSC. 1990. The Institutional Framework of DOT Multimodal Information
Programs: A Brief Historical Perspective. RSPA, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Cambridge, Mass., 13 pp.
Wellington, D.G. 1988. Federal Statistical Agencies as Models for a
Bureau of Environmental Statistics. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C., Sept., 150 pp.
5
Next Steps
Establishment of a transportation data center (TDC) within the U.S.,
Department of Transportation (DOT) is the key to a long overdue
improvement in the availability and quality of data and analysis for
national transportation decision making. The committee recommends that the
department move quickly to put TDC in place and proposes the following
steps to accomplish this objective.
IMMEDIATE STEPS
TDC should be legislatively mandated to provide the strongest assurance of
permanency. If the proposed Bureau of Transportation Statistics contained
in the Senate surface transportation bill survives in final legislation,
then the mandate and mission of a transportation data center will be
clearly specified. However, if a legislative mandate is not forthcoming in
this congressional session, then the Secretary of DOT should establish TDC
administratively. There is ample precedent for such a step; in 1977 then
Secretary of Transportation Brock Adams established the Research and
Special Programs Administration by executive action (Dean 1991, 21). Once
the data center is established, the secretary should continue to seek
permanent authorization through legislation to ensure a clear and
continuing mandate.
TDC should be provided a separate budget, a qualified director, and a
permanent full-time staff. The committee estimates that an initial annual
budget of approximately $20 million is needed in this start-up phase to
support a director and small core staff, fund the passenger and freight
flow surveys (described in the following paragraphs), and initiate efforts
to integrate existing transportation data and develop analytic tools. A 20
million dollar level of effort would mean a substantial increase of about
40 percent over
97
98 DATA FOR DECISIONS
DOT's current funding of major statistical programs, including multimodal
data programs (Tables 3-A and 3-B). However, DOT's total data effort,
including the data center, would represent approximately two tenths of one
percent of the department's budget of $30 billion, a fraction of the
resources involved in regulatory and investment decisions involving
billions of dollars.
The director of TDC should be a highly qualified professional,
knowledgeable about transportation and experienced in the collection and
analysis of transportation statistics. A core staff should be assembled
with expertise in transportation data programs and policies, statistics,
data base management, data processing, analysis, and modeling.
The first activity of TDC should be to assume responsibility for the
national passenger and commodity flow surveys and get them under way.
Congress has appropriated $4 million in DOT's fiscal year 1992 budget to
start work on these surveys; the department has estimated additional
funding requirements of approximately $11 million to complete the surveys
(DOT 1990). t The data center must ensure that continuing and adequate
support of these essential data is provided in the future.
SHORT-TERM STEPS
Once TDC is established, it should begin to develop a national
transportation performance monitoring system (NTPMS), the key building
block for creating an ongoing departmental capability to monitor indicators
of the nation's transportation system and its environment over time. TDC
staff should refine the NTPMS framework; identify data requirements more
precisely, conducting analyses where needed (e.g., inventories of major
existing data bases); define appropriate system performance indicators; and
begin to collect the data for time series analysis.
To the maximum extent possible, TDC should tap staff expertise in the
operating administrations, the Volpe National Transportation Systems
Center, the Office of the Secretary, and the DOT Data Coordinating
Committees to assist in these efforts. It should also establish a user
advisory committee representing public and private users and providers of
transportation data, to ensure that the NTPMS framework and data collection
efforts reflect the needs and concerns of transportation data users.
Next Steps 99
TDC should issue an initial report on the state of the nation's
transportation system no more than a year after the center is established.
This report, which should be legislatively mandated, will provide a focal
point for TDC's activities and a vehicle for summarizing the center's
findings. The initial report should be viewed as a working document; it
should help identify what is known and unknown about the performance and
impacts of the transportation system and provide a roadmap for future data
gathering and analysis activities.
LONG-TERM STEPS
The most time-consuming task facing TDC is to improve the comparability and
quality of existing data. This will require TDC to set standards to improve
data comparability and work closely with the operating administrations and
other key data providers to enable the center to assemble the data needed
for systemwide monitoring and analysis. To assist in this task, TDC should
establish a technical advisory committee, drawing on the expertise of the
statistics profession as well as those knowledgeable about existing
transportation data programs, to help ensure that data compilation is
technically sound and feasible.
As TDC expands its efforts to compile the data required for NTPMS and
its reporting requirements, it must also work jointly with other federal
agencies and the private sector. It should be empowered to enter into
memoranda of understanding with other federal agencies to set interagency
data collection priorities and responsibilities and collaborate with the
private sector in joint data gathering efforts if appropriate. To exercise
this authority, the data center should be able to enter into flexible,
cost-sharing, cooperative ventures with other public agencies and the
private sector, subject to confidentiality constraints.
TDC staff should also identify technological advances that could
reduce the cost and enhance the quality and reliability of data collection
and analysis and look for suitable applications. A survey of the advanced
technologies described in Appendix B, particularly those such as
intelligent vehicle-highway systems and geographic information systems in
which the department has a research effort under way or an existing
capability, would be a good starting point.
100 DATA FOR DECISIONS
CONCLUSION
The long-term success of TDC will depend on the cooperation of many
organizations both within and outside DOT. It will also require more
resources than the initial $20 million if the center is to launch a serious
effort to improve the comparability and quality of existing transportation
data programs. In many cases, enhancements of existing data will require
long lead times for data providers to respond and adequate resources to
acquire, process, analyze, disseminate, and maintain the data.
The center has a broad potential constituency base--the leadership at
DOT; congressional supporters from oversight committees; other constituent
groups who are concerned with making transportation policy, such as state
and local governments, environmental and energy groups; and finally, system
users, including shippers, the tourism industry, and the defense
establishment.
The department has an opportunity to bring these parties together to
reverse long-standing criticisms of the inadequacies of transportation
statistics. The recent strategic planning process highlighted the systemic
nature of the issues facing the department today and the deficiencies of
strictly modally oriented data programs. The Interagency Committee on
Transportation Statistics chaired by DOT was recently reestablished after
more than a decade to provide a forum for defining mutual data needs and
encouraging cooperative inter-agency data gathering efforts. Pending
federal legislation would establish a data center at DOT to provide
comprehensive transportation statistics. DOT must take advantage of these
initiatives to create and sustain a permanent focal point within the
department dedicated to developing the knowledge base to inform policy
makers about the strategic choices that will shape the transportation sys-
tem of the future.
NOTE
1. DOT's initial budget request for fiscal year 1992 was $7 million for
the multimodal surveys. A lower appropriations level will require that
the surveys be performed over a 3- to 4-year period instead of the
planned 2-year timeframe.
Next Steps 101
REFERENCES
ABBREVIATION
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
Dean, A. L. 1991. The Organization and Management of the Department of
Transportation. National Academy of Public Administration, Washington,
D.C., March, p. 54.
DOT. 1990. FY 1992 Budget: Special Analysis for Data Collection,
Processing, and Dissemination. Draft internal report.
Appendix A
Summaries of Major National
Transportation Data Programs
This appendix contains summary descriptions of the major national
transportation data programs available for strategic policy making
purposes. The majority of the information was provided by representatives
of the operating administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT), liaisons of other federal agencies to the study committee, and the
project consultant.
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Agency Mission
The focus of the Office of the Secretary (OST) of DOT is primarily on
policy formulation, resource allocation, interagency and intra-departmental
coordination, evaluation of programs, and intermodal matters requiring
integration and balancing of modal interests.
The Policy Office of OST is not primarily a statistical agency, but it
does collect, publish, and analyze statistical data in support of its
mission. Statistical activities include monitoring competition in the
airline and maritime industries, monitoring on-time performance of major
air carriers, developing legislative proposals, responding to congressional
requests for information and special studies, developing policy on
transportation issues, supporting international negotiations on aviation
matters, and analyzing handicapped access and aviation consumer issues in
support of the issuance of regulations.
Current Data Programs
Air Carrier On-Time Performance Report
The 12 largest air carriers are required to submit monthly reports to DOT
on domestic flights that are delayed 15 min or more from the
103
104 DATA FOR DECISIONS
scheduled departure or arrival time at an airport. The regulation requires
this information to be reported for only the 31 largest U.S. airports, but
the participating air carriers have voluntarily submitted reports for all
airports on their domestic systems. A summary report that covers each
airline's overall performance and the performance of individual airports by
time of day is published each month. Detailed tabulations and a data tape
that shows specific flight information can be purchased from the
department's Volpe National Transportation Systems Center in Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
Nation wide Personal Transportation Study
See Federal Highway Administration (p. 118).
Transborder Surface Transportation Data Project
See Federal Railroad Administration (p. 125).
OFFICE OF COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION
Agency Mission
The Office of Commercial Space Transportation (OCST) was established in
1984 within OST. The provisions of the Commercial Space Launch Act, which
gave DOT the authority to regulate U.S. commercial space launch activities
are carded out through OCST. Its mission is to facilitate development of a
safe and competitive U.S. commercial space transportation industry. OSCT
carries out these responsibilities by (a) licensing and regulating all U.S.
commercial launch activities to ensure that they are conducted safely and
responsibly and (b) promoting and encouraging commercial space
transportation.
Current Data Programs
Two of the data bases that OSCT is developing to support its responsi-
bilities in the rapidly evolving commercial space transportation sector are
discussed here.
Appendix A 105
Space Transportation Analysis and Research
This data base provides information on international space transportation
infrastructure and markets. Specifically, it provides information on launch
vehicles, payloads (e.g., physical and operating characteristics), future
and historical launch events, characteristics and facilities of launch
sites, and characteristics of commercial launch service companies (e.g.,
facilities, products, and services).
Space Accident Data Base
OCST has developed the framework for this data base and entered some data
on space-related accidents and incidents for commercial space launches in
the United States. The data base encompasses ground, launch, orbital, and
reentry accidents and incidents; it provides information on the parties
involved and the payload, the date, a description and the sequence of the
accident or incident, and the consequences (e.g., casualties, damage, and
delays).
RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION
Agency Mission
The mission of the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) is
to serve as a research, analytical, and technical development arm of DOT
for long-range and multimodal research and development and to conduct
special programs. Particular emphasis is given to pipeline safety,
transportation of hazardous cargo by all modes of transportation, safety,
security, facilitation of domestic and international commerce, and
intermodal research and development activities, including university
programs.
Current Data Programs
Aviation Statistics
RSPA's Office of Airline Statistics manages the following data programs
related to aviation economics and operating statistics:
106 DATA FOR DECISIONS
- Form 41: Schedule T-100(f): Foreign Air Carrier Traffic Data by
Nonstop Segment and On-Flight Market is filed by foreign air carriers
that provide service to and from the United States. Schedule T-100
contains traffic (e.g., passengers enplaned) and operating (e.g., air-
craft departures) statistics by nonstop segments and on-flight markets
for scheduled, nonscheduled, and chartered operations. Data are for
operations between the carrier's home country and the United States.
- Form 41: Report of Financial and Operating Statistics for Large
Certificated Air Carriers (Financial Schedules Only) is filed by large
certificated U.S. air carriers. It comprises 15 financial schedules.
- Carrier's Audit Report must be submitted by each large certificated
U.S. air carrier whose records are audited by an independent certified
public accountant.
- Form 291-A: Statement of Operations and Summary Statistics for Section
418 Operations contains profit and loss data and traffic and capacity
statistics. The form is filed by U.S. air carriers operating under
Section 418 domestic all-cargo certificates.
- Form 41: Schedule T-100: U.S. Air Carrier Traffic and Capacity Data by
Nonstop Segment and On-Flight Market and Supplemental Schedules, T-1:
U.S. Air Carrier Traffic and Capacity Summary by Service Class, T-2:
U.S. Air Carrier Traffic and Capacity Statistics by Aircraft Type, and
T-3: U.S. Air Carrier Airport Activity Statistics are filed by all
large certificated U.S. air carriers. Schedule T-100 contains traffic
(e.g., passengers enplaned) and capacity (e.g., available seat miles)
statistics by nonstop segments and on-flight markets for domestic and
international scheduled, nonscheduled, and chartered operations. The
supplemental schedules contain summary traffic and capacity statistics
without segment or market detail for domestic all-cargo operations,
domestic charter operations, and international military charter
operations.
- Form 251: Report of Passengers Denied Confirmed Space must be filed
quarterly for scheduled passenger service performed with large
aircraft (i.e., more than 60 seats), by all large U.S. certificated
air carriers and foreign air carriers that provide service from the
United States, disclosing the number of passengers who were denied
confirmed space and how those passengers were accommodated.
- Form 298-C: Report of Financial and Operating Statistics for Small
Aircraft Operators contains five schedules. U.S. scheduled passenger
commuter air carriers file three of the five; small U.S. certificated
air carriers file all five.
Appendix A 107
- Form 2787: Passenger Origination and Destination Survey must be filed
by certificated U.S. air carriers providing scheduled passenger
service. The report includes a 10 percent survey of all tickets except
for the largest domestic markets (approximately 1,000 markets), in
which a 1 percent sample may be used. All carriers have elected to
file a 10 percent sample. The survey provides information on the
origin and destination of the passenger, routings by carrier, fare
paid, and fare class.
- U.S. International Air Travel Statistics is a program that was
recently transferred to RSPA from OST. The compilation of interna-
tional air travel statistics began in the 1970s under a joint project
with DOT, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and the
Travel and Tourism Administration. The project consisted of coding INS
Form 1-92, completed by international air carriers arriving in and
departing from the United States. The information coded from the form
included the international airports of embarkation and debarkation,
flight number, date, and number of U.S. citizens and noncitizens
aboard the flight. The origin and destination information is now being
obtained from another form submitted to RSPA by the air carriers, but
citizenship data is still being coded.
- Electronic Tariff Information System (Airlines) is another program
that was recently transferred to RSPA from OST. International air
carriers are regulated by DOT, so tariffs for changes in passenger
fares, rules, and cargo rates must be filed with RSPA's Office of
Automated Tariffs. Until fiscal year 1990, tariffs had been filed
manually. In January 1989, DOT published a regulation that allows the
international airline industry to file electronically with DOT and
withdrew the requirement for manual posting at pricing locations.
After an experimental program, the automation of international
aviation tariffs began in phases. In July 1990, the fares portion of
the system was completed and is operational. Future enhancements will
include automating passenger rules and cargo rate tariffs.
Hazardous Materials Information System
RSPA's Office of Hazardous Materials Transportation collects the following
data on the movement of hazardous materials. A summary of ongoing programs
and policies for promoting hazardous materials transportation safety is
provided in an Annual Report on Hazardous Materials Transportation. A
national overview of safety and enforce-
108 DATA FOR DECISIONS
ment initiatives, and incident and accident data is provided; regulations
and exemptions to regulations issued during the year are described; the
status of the national safety program is summarized; and areas of future
concentration are identified. Statistical summaries of incident and
accident data indicate the condition of the hazardous materials
transportation industry, and in conjunction with enforcement data, indicate
the performance of that industry.
Pipeline Safety
RSPRs Office of Pipeline Safety collects the following data on liquids and
natural gas pipelines for the Hazardous Materials Information System.
Operators of natural gas transmission and gathering, and distribution
pipeline systems, as well as liquids petroleum pipeline systems, are
required to file incident and accident reports for any pipeline leak or
failure that results in death, injuries that require hospitalization, or
property and product loss in excess of specified amounts. These reports
provide data about the nature of the incident, apparent cause, and impacts.
Annual reports covering inventory data (e.g., miles of pipe by type) and
leak repairs are also required of natural gas pipeline operators.
Multimodal Statistical Reports
RSPA's Volpe National Transportation Systems Center is responsible for two
multimodal publications:
- National Transportation Statistics provides summaries of modal
operating and financial data, information on modal performance and
safety trends, and supplementary data on transportation's impact on
the economy and energy use.
- Transportation Safety Information summarizes safety information-
accidents, fatalities, injuries, and fatality rates where activity
data are available--for all modes.
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
Agency Mission
The primary function of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is to
foster the development and safety of American aviation. More spe-
Appendix A 109
cifically, FAA is responsible for developing the major policies necessary
to guide the long-range growth of civil aviation; modernizing the air
traffic control system; establishing in a single authority the essential
management functions necessary to support the common needs of civil and
military operations; and providing for the most effective and efficient use
of the airspace over the United States. The agency is also responsible for
rulemaking relative to these functions.
FAA constructs, operates, and maintains the National Airspace System
and the facilities that are part of the system; allocates and regulates the
use of airspace; ensures adequate separation among aircraft operating in
controlled airspace; and, through research and development programs,
provides new systems and equipment for improving use of the nation's
airspace.
The Airport Improvements Program authorizes FAA to make grants of
federal funds to sponsors for airport development and for advanced planning
and engineering. FAA also prescribes and administers rules and regulations
concerning the competency of pilots, mechanics, and other FAA-licensed
aviation technicians; aircraft airworthiness; and air traffic control. It
promotes safety through certification of pilots and other technicians,
aircraft, and flight and aircraft maintenance schools. Finally, it reviews
the design, structure, and performance of new aircraft to ensure passenger
safety.
Current Data Programs
FAA maintains a diverse set of data that supports critical activities in
safety regulation; airspace and air traffic management; management of air
navigation facilities; research, engineering, and development; testing and
evaluation of aviation systems; airport programs; registration of aircraft;
and others.
Because of the large amount of FAA data, many of which are used for
administrative purposes, an attempt was made here to limit the list to
those major statistical publications and data bases from which summary
statistics and trend data can readily be derived for policy purposes.
Major Statistical Publications
- Airport Activity Statistics of Certificated Route Air Carriers is a
joint annual publication of FAA and RSPA that contains data on pas-
110 DATA FOR Decisions
senger enplanements and tons of enplaned freight (express and mail) by
airport, carrier and type of operation, and type of aircraft.
- Census of U.S. Civil Aircraft is an annual publication that includes
statistical data on the registered civil fleet, air carrier aircraft,
and general aviation aircraft, both registered and active, including
detailed reports for general aviation aircraft by owner's state and
county, and registered aircraft by make and model.
- FAA Air Traffic Activity is an annual publication with data on
terminal and en route air traffic activity (e.g., takeoffs and
landings, aircraft handled, and flight plans filed). The data is
collected and compiled from the FAA-operated airport traffic control
towers, air route traffic control centers, flight service stations,
approach control facilities, and FAA contract-towered airports.
- FAA Statistical Handbook of Aviation is an annual publication that
presents historical statistical information pertaining to FAA; the Na-
tional Airspace System (NAS); airports; airport activity; U.S. civil
air carrier fleet; U.S. civil air carrier operating data; pilots,
mechanics, and other FAA-licensed aviation technicians; general
aviation aircraft; aircraft accidents; aeronautical production; and
imports and exports.
- FAA Forecast is an annual publication of forecasts for key aviation
activity and FAA workload measures.
- General Aviation Activity and Avionics Surveys is an annual report
that presents the results of the General Aviation Activity and
Avionics Survey conducted to obtain information on the activity and
avionics of the U.S. registered general aviation aircraft fleet. The
report contains estimated flying time, landings, fuel consumption,
lifetime airframe hours, avionics, and engine hours of the active
general aviation aircraft by manufacturer and model group, aircraft
type, state and region of based aircraft, and primary use.
- General Aviation Pilot and Aircraft Activity Survey is a triennial
report that includes data on the type and source of weather
information services, trip length in time and distance, pilot age and
certification, estimates of total 1990 general aviation operations,
fuel consumption, and aircraft miles flown.
- Rotorcraft Activity Survey is a special one-time report containing
breakdowns of active rotorcraft, annual flight hours, average flight
hours, and other statistics by rotorcraft type, manufacturer and model
group, region and state of based aircraft, and primary use. Also in-
cluded are law enforcement and public use rotorcraft, lifetime
airframe hours, engine hours, estimated miles flown, and estimated
number of landings.
Appendix A 111
- U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics is a detailed annual report containing
statistics on pilots, mechanics, and other FAA-licensed aviation
technicians and the number of certificates issued.
Data Bases and Data Systems
The following list of major data bases comprises, for the most part, real-
time operational data systems; however, summary statistics can be and are
regularly derived from them.
- Civil Aviation Security Information System provides information about
security checks of airports, air carriers, and security stations;
tracks security alerts, bulletins, and summaries; and records reports
of arrests made at screening stations, bomb threats, explosion
reports, screening device findings, hijackings, and use of K-9 teams.
- Comprehensive Airmen Information System includes information on
personal, medical, and certification status of individuals associated
with civil aviation operations including pilots, mechanics, flight
crews, and others.
- Enforcement Information System contains data about violations of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs); violator's identification; the
FAR violated; description of the aircraft, engine, or component in-
volved; demographics; and recommended sanctions.
- Service Difficulty Reports System contains reports about abnormal,
potentially unsafe conditions in aircraft, aircraft components, and
aircraft equipment.
- Simulator Inventory and Evaluation Schedule System contains results of
checklist inspection and certification activities, identification and
correction of discrepancies, and vital statistics for operators and
manufacturers.
- Manufacturing Inspection Management Information System includes parts
manufacturer approval supplements, technical standard order
authorizations, information on production and quality control
activities, type certification conformity inspections, results of
applications for airworthiness certification of individual aircraft,
reports of production flight tests, export certifications, and
information about the private-sector designees authorized by FAA to
perform manufacturing and airworthiness inspections.
- National Airspace Information Monitoring System (NAIMS) is an
automated data base management system used for tracking and analyz-
112 DATA FOR DECISIONS
ing reported safety-related incidents and rules violations occurring
in the NAS. NAIMS subsystems include the following:
- Operational Errors System contains reports on occurrences attributable
to elements of the air traffic control system that result in less than
the applicable minimum separation distance among: (a) two or more
aircraft, or (b) an aircraft and terrain or obstacles, which include
vehicles, equipment, or personnel on runways.
- Operational Deviations System contains reports on controlled
occurrences in which applicable minimum separation distances as just
defined were maintained, but one of the following situations occurred:
(a) less than the applicable minimum separation distance existed be-
tween an aircraft and protected airspace without prior approval; (b)
an aircraft penetrated airspace that was delegated to another position
of operation or another facility without prior coordination and
approval; (c) an aircraft penetrated airspace that was delegated to
another position of operation or another facility at an altitude or
route contrary to the altitude or route requested and approved in
direct coordination or as specified in a letter of agreement,
precoordination, or internal procedure; or (d) an aircraft, vehicle,
equipment, or person encroached upon a landing area that was delegated
to another position of operation without prior coordination and
approval.
- Pilot Deviations System contains reports on actions of pilots that
result in alleged violations of airspace or ground air traffic control
clearances.
- Near Midair Collisions (NMACs) are reports received from pilots or
flight crew members (who were in the cockpit of one of the aircraft
involved) stating that a collision hazard existed between two or more
airborne aircraft, regardless of aircraft separation distance. The
usual criterion for declaring an NMAC is an unintentional proximity of
less than 500 ft.
- Pedestrian/Vehicle Deviations System includes reports on any entry or
movement on an airport movement area by a vehicle or pedestrian that
was not authorized by an air traffic controller.
- Runway Incursions are reports on occurrences at airports that involve
an aircraft, vehicle, person, or object on the ground that result in
loss of separation with an aircraft taking off, intending to take off,
landing, or attempting to land.
- Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) is maintained by Battelle
Laboratories under an FAA-funded National Aeronautics and Space
Administration contract. ASRS was developed to store reports of
situations observed by pilots, controllers, passengers, or mechanics
Appendix A 113
that compromised safety, or had the potential to do so. Before entry
into the data base, the information is evaluated by ASRS analysts and
is edited to ensure the anonymity of the reporting individuals.
Limited immunity is provided to reporting individuals for inadvertent
violation of FAA regulations.
- Accident/Incident System contains environmental data, contributing
factors, weather conditions, and personal and medical data about the
people involved in aircraft accidents and incidents. The National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) also investigates accidents in-
volving civil aircraft in the United States and collects data in the
NTSB Accident and Incident System on accidents, fatalities, serious
injuries, and accident rates per million passenger miles flown and per
million aircraft miles flown for U.S. carriers (for scheduled and
unscheduled service), commuter carriers, and general aviation.
- Air Traffic Operating Management System contains the number of flights
delayed more than 15 min by cause of delay (e.g., weather, air traffic
control center volume, airport terminal volume) and by airport. (This
delay system should not be confused with the On-Time Flight
Performance Reporting System operated by the OST Office of
Intergovernmental and Consumer Affairs.)
- Air Traffic Activity System includes monthly information about
activity at the FAA air traffic facilities--aircraft operations,
aircraft handled, and flight plans filed.
- Aeronautical Information System contains operational and physical
descriptions of all civil (public and private) airports; selected
military airports, navigational aids, and flight service stations; air
traffic control towers, air route traffic control centers, and
airways; jet routes, military training routes, and preferred
instrument flight role routes; standard instrument approach
procedures; standard terminal arrival routes; standard instrument
departure routes; fixed reporting points; holding patterns;
restricted, warning, alert, prohibited, and military operations areas;
part-time control zones; and U.S. notices to pilots, mechanics, and
other FAA-licensed aviation technicians.
- National Forecasting System includes annual forecasts of aviation
activity and other selected statistics.
- Air Route Traffic Control Center Forecast is a facility level activity
forecast.
- Flight Service Station Forecast is also a facility level activity
forecast.
- Terminal Area Forecast contains activity forecasts for each of 5,000
public use airports.
114 DATA FOR DECISIONS
- Hub Forecasts are detailed forecasts of major air carrier airports and
all other airports within major metropolitan areas.
- National Outage Data Base contains down time and repair time, by
cause, for airway and air traffic control facilities (e.g., radars,
landing and navigational aids, etc.).
- Air Carrier Aircraft Utilization and Propulsion Reliability System
contains monthly reports from air carriers of the flight hours and
number of aircraft by manufacturer and model for aircraft used in air
carrier service for the month.
- Aircraft Registration System includes registrant's name and address,
registration status, and aircraft description for each aircraft reg-
istered with FAA.
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
Agency Mission
The roads and highways across the nation are used by more Americans more
often than any other transportation system. The Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) oversees federal support for the facilities of
greatest significance to the nation, including Interstate highways. The
agency is concerned with the total operation and environment of highway
systems, including highway and motor carrier safety. In administering its
highway transportation programs, it gives full consideration to the impacts
of highway development and travel; transportation needs; engineering and
safety concerns; social, economic, and environmental effects; and project
costs.
FHWA meets its data needs primarily through three offices. The
Associate Administrator for Policy oversees the Office of Highway
Information Management, which is responsible for collecting and publishing
highway data from the states, managing related programs such as the
Nationwide Personal Transportation Study, and coordinating statistical
policy within FHWA. The Office of Policy Development, also under the
Associate Administrator for Policy, manages census surveys of truck owners
and business establishments. The Associate Administrator for motor carriers
oversees the Office of Motor Carrier Information and Analysis, which is
responsible for collecting and publishing safety data from motor carriers.
Appendix A 115
Current Data Programs
Data Collected Through States
Highway Performance Monitoring System
The Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) is FHWA's on-going,
integrated, annual data base, which consists of data on systems mileage,
physical dimensions, usage, condition, performance, operating
characteristics, and fatal and injury accidents. The HPMS data reported
annually by each state consist of areawide data reports (e. g., areawide
summaries of mileage, travel, accidents, travel activity by vehicle type,
and population), universe data (23 data items that identify the nation's
total public mad mileage by systems, jurisdiction, and operation), and
sample section data for approximately 110,000 sample sections of the
nation's arterial and collector highway systems (55 additional pavement,
improvements, geometric, traffic and capacity, environment, and
supplemental items are reported for each sample section).
An equally important part of the overall HPMS is a set of analytical
models that are used to assess overall system performance, project future
capital needs, and evaluate future system performance under varying
assumptions of standards, travel growth, and investment levels. These
models, which convert data into useful information, constantly undergo
refinement.
Traffic Characteristics
Three types of data on traffic characteristics are collected, processed,
and analyzed:
- Traffic volumes from continuous automated traffic recorders are
reported by the states and used to produce a monthly report on traffic
volume trends that tracks changes in travel by state and functional
class of highway. Hourly traffic volume data are reported monthly for
about 3,000 stations.
- Travel by urban and rural functional systems is furnished annually as
part of each state's HPMS submittal. These data are, for the most
116 DATA FOR DECISIONS
part, based on traffic counts of the HPMS sections. On pan of the HPMS
samples, vehicles are classified to provide systemwide estimates of
the proportion of travel by 13 vehicle types. Suggested traffic
counting procedures are included in FHWA's traffic monitoring guide
and in the HPMS field manual.
- Vehicle classification data collected at track weigh stations and
corresponding track weight data are reported annually by the states.
Axle weight data are converted to axle loadings, and a series of
tables are produced for use in highway design, bridge design, pavement
management, and track enforcement programs. These data are collected
by weigh-in-motion scales that provide the desired data without
interrupting traffic flow. The processing of these data is done by
microcomputer in a fully decentralized manner, which allows state
users to analyze the data themselves while creating the data files for
transmittal to FHWA.
Highway User and Usage Data
The state highway agencies report a series of data elements which form
FHWA's highway statistics data base.
- FHWA collects motor-fuel use data from the states on a monthly basis.
"Motor fuel" applies to gasoline and all other fuels under the purview
of state motor-fuel tax laws. In addition to gasoline, motor fuel can
include "special fuels," which comprise diesel fuel, liquified
petroleum gases, and similar fuels when they are used to operate
vehicles on highways, as well as gasohol and neat alcohol.
- The highway finance data base contains information on highway
receipts, disbursements, debt status, and other financial information
of federal, state, and local agencies. Information included is on
inter-governmental transfers of funds from the federal government to
states, and from states to local governments. Revenue data includes
the amount and source of funds, including tax sources and debt.
Expenditure data are broken down by capital and maintenance spending,
spending for administration, police and safety purposes, and debt
service.
- Motor vehicle registrations are reported to FHWA by major vehicle
classes including automobiles, buses, tracks, and motorcycles. FHWA
also supplements the data supplied by the states with information
obtained from other sources. For instance, the Track Inventory
Appendix A 117
and Use Survey conducted by the Bureau of the Census is one source
that is used to achieve a level of uniformity in preparing various
estimates and summaries.
- Each state and the District of Columbia administers its own driver
licensing system and provides data to FHWA, which provides the basis
for summaries of drivers licenses by type, sex, and age. This informa-
tion is sometimes used as an exposure measure in the analysis of motor
vehicle accidents and fatalities.
National Bridge Inventory
The National Bridge Inventory (NBI) is a mainframe computer system that
includes detailed identification, classification, condition, appraisal, and
proposed improvement information on more than 570,000 bridges on U.S.
public roads. Bridge information is submitted by states in tape format at
least annually and can be submitted as individual updates or as a
replacement of the entire file. NBI data are accessible on line using a
report generator that can produce several reports in various formats. NBI
data are used to manage the bridge program and answer questions concerning
any physical aspect of the bridge system.
Data Collected From States and Motor Carriers
Motor Carrier Management Information System
The Office of Motor Carriers (OMC) is responsible for overseeing the safety
of the Interstate motor carrier fleet in the United States. The extensive
data system that supports this effort is known as the Motor Carrier
Management Information System (MCMIS). This is a computerized system that
provides a comprehensive record of the safety performance of individual
carriers for the use of OMC and authorized external organizations. The
state portion of the MCMIS is known as SAFETYNET, which has and will
continue to grow into a comprehensive data system for exchanging data among
states and with the federal government. Information maintained in the MCMIS
includes the following:
- Census: Carrier identification of the 200,000 interstate carriers,
type and size of operation, commodities carried, as well as other
characteristics of the operation are included.
118 DATA FOR DECISIONS
- Review and Rating: Between 20,000 and 30,000 on-site reviews of
carriers and hazardous material shippers are conducted annually by OMC
field and state staff; reviews take place in the offices of the
company and cover compliance with critical parts of the federal safety
regulations.
- Inspections: Data are collected during the 500,000 roadside in-
spections of vehicles and drivers conducted annually; violations of
regulations covering the driver and the vehicle, or specifically
related to hazardous materials, are included.
- Accidents: Interstate motor carriers are required to file a standard
accident report for accidents that meet or exceed federal reporting
thresholds; in addition, states report the occurrence of all
reportable truck accidents.
Highway Safety Information System
Highway Safety Information System (HSIS) is a new highway safety data base
developed by FHWA and the University of North Carolina Highway Safety
Research Center that provides detailed information linking accident,
roadway, and traffic data for analyses of highway safety problems. The
current system includes 5 years of data (1985-1989) from 5 states:
Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, and Utah. Detailed information on
accident characteristics, roadway features, and traffic volumes are
available from each of the five states. Additional data on roadway
geometrics, intersections, and guardrail characteristics are available from
one or more states.
Data Collected From Households and Truck Owners
Nationwide Personal Transportation Study
Nationwide Personal Transportation Study (NPTS) data are based on a
nationally representative sample of households from which the amount and
nature of personal travel by all modes is collected. NPTS has been
conducted by the Bureau of the Census under contract with DOT in 1969,
1977, and 1983. FHWA has had the responsibility for the technical and
administrative lead for DOT. Data collection for the most recent survey was
completed in March 1991 under contract with the Research Triangle Institute
of North Carolina. Substantial funding was provided by FHWA, the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administra-
Append& A 119
tion (NHTSA), and the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA).
Results are used within the department to address national transportation
policy issues, forecast future travel demand on various modes, analyze
transit use, and calculate accident exposure rates. NPTS is the only
authoritative nationwide source of information that allows a linkage
between the characteristics of travel and the demographics of the
household. Key indicators available from NPTS include trip generation rates
per household; distribution of households by income and vehicle ownership;
distribution of person trips by mode, purpose, and time of day; and average
annual miles by driver age and sex. The main limitation of the survey is
the extent of data on long-distance travel. In 1983, only one percent of
the reported vehicle trips were trips of 75 miles or more (Klinger and
Kuzmyak 1986, Vol. 1, 1-7).
Nationwide Track Activity and Commodity Survey
The Nationwide Track Activity and Commodity Survey (NTACS) is conducted for
FHWA by the Bureau of the Census as a follow-on to the Census Bureau's
quinquennial Track Inventory and Use Survey (TIUS). NTACS, which is funded
by FHWA, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and OST, measures
detailed trip characteristics and other information for trucks on randomly
sampled days, including items such as the city or county of each pickup and
delivery, the type and weights of commodities carded, the types of highways
used, amount of tolls paid, and the hours of the day that the vehicle was
operated. The sample includes all tracks that were reported as carrying
commodities over long distances in the 1987 TIUS, approximately half of the
trucks that were reported as carrying commodities locally in 1987 TIUS, and
a small portion of the remaining 1987 TIUS respondents.
Data Programs Under Development
Two data programs under development are the Passenger Flow Survey and the
Commodity Flow Survey. The Passenger Flow Survey would provide
comprehensive information on intercity passenger travel by all modes of
'transportation. Funding for planning and conducting the survey has been
requested in DOT's fiscal year 1992 and 1993 budgets. The Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center recently contracted for a preliminary design
study to define survey objectives more
120 DATA FOR DECISIONS
precisely, specify links with existing data programs such as NPTS, and
examine data collection methods and options. Comprehensive survey design is
planned for fiscal year 1992; data collection is anticipated to begin in
fiscal year 1993. For a discussion of the Commodity Flow Survey see the
section on the U.S. Bureau of the Census (p. 140).
NHTSA
Agency Mission
The mission of NHTSA is to improve the safety of motor vehicle
transportation through the development of a systematic approach for the
identification and elimination of motor vehicle and highway safety
problems. The National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) serves
this mission through the collection and analysis of motor vehicle crash
data, the development of advanced technologies for data collection, and the
creation of improved analysis techniques.
The data are used by NHTSA in support of research and the development
of motor vehicle and highway safety policies and programs. The analysis of
these data provide the scientific foundation for the agency's legal and
regulatory actions. These data bases are also the primary source of
information on motor vehicle and highway safety to other DOT agencies,
especially FHWA, and to the auto manufacturing and insurance industries,
state and local governments, and consumer interest groups.
Current Data Programs
NCSA develops and uses large-scale automated data bases to support problem
identification, program planning, and program evaluation. The main crash
data systems supported by the agency are the following:
Fatal Accident Reporting System
The Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS) provides basic information on
all highway traffic crashes in the United States in which one or more
persons die of their injuries within 30 days of the accident.
FARS has been in operation since 1975, producing a census of records
on more than 750,000 crash-induced fatalities. These data are
Appendix A 121
collected from the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
The data provide information on the demographics of the people involved,
their injuries, the types of vehicles involved, the roadway and
environment, alcohol involvement, restraint usage, and the history of each
driver's previous violations and accidents.
National Accident Sampling System
The National Accident Sampling System (NASS) provides information from
investigations of a statistical sample of police-reported accidents at all
levels of injury severity. NASS consists of two components: the
Crashworthiness Data System (CDS) and the General Estimates System (GES).
CDS currently comprises detailed investigations of real word highway
crashes involving passenger cars, light trucks, and vans, which provide
detailed information on the crashworthiness and occupant protection
afforded by these vehicles.
Information is collected on the sequence of crash events, the severity
of the crash, occupant injuries and their causes, and details of vehicle
crash protection performance. These data provide national estimates of the
scope and extent of highway crash injuries and causes. Occupant protection
research and rulemaking depend on this data base for the detailed crash
investigation-related data needed to understand crash injury mechanisms in
a real world environment, and for counter-measure development and
assessment.
GES currently comprises a uniform data file on a statistical sample of
police-reported traffic crashes, which provides the basis for estimates Of
the general state of traffic safety. The current GES collects more than
50,000 cases per year for the preparation of general estimates of highway
crash statistics. They are the only data the agency has that provide
national estimates of traffic crash characteristics for all types of
vehicles, and this is the only data base that provides these estimates with
measurable reliability. In cooperation with FHWA, the NASS-GES system has
been expanded to include data on heavy truck crashes to provide national
estimates of heavy truck safety.
State Data Systems Program
This data program provides a large data base that consists of all police-
reported accidents from a large number of states. This data base allows
122 DATA FOR DECISIONS
for a wide variety of motor vehicle and highway safety issues to be
assessed and currently contains data from 26 states.
The Crash Avoidance Research Data File is currently one of the main
constituents of the State Data Systems Program. Its function is to collect
and analyze data dealing with factors that contribute to crashes. Ancillary
data bases, such as the Crashworthiness Data File, are being expanded and
will be used in the statistical analyses of motor vehicle and highway
safety issues.
The purpose of the State Data Systems Program is to build a large,
high quality, statistically significant data base. Once the data collected
by individual states is standardized and of sufficient quality, NCSA will
be able to combine state data bases into a larger file that will model the
national safety experience. When this occurs, estimates of the national
highway safety experience can be made using state data files, eliminating
the need for GES. The linkage of automated state traffic crash data with
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and hospital-collected trauma data will
also enhance the quality of analysis dramatically. Currently, crash data
bases at the state level traditionally provide only a general
classification of the seriousness of a victim's injuries. Competent
crashworthiness analyses often require more detailed descriptions of
injuries (e.g., type of injuries and location at which they were
sustained).
UMTA
Agency Mission
The mission of UMTA is to assist public and private mass transportation
companies in the development of improved mass transportation facilities,
equipment, techniques, and methods; encourage the planning and
establishment of areawide urban mass transportation systems needed for
economical and desirable urban development; and provide assistance to state
and local governments in financing these systems.
Current Data Programs
UMTA currently supports the following major data bases.
Section 15
The Uniform System of Accounts and Records (Section 15) Reporting System
was statutorily authorized as the basis for formula allocation of
Appendix A 123
UMTA's Grant-in-Aid programs in the early 1980s. The Section 15 Reporting
System provides data on transit revenues by source; transit expenses by
function and object class; nonfinancial operating data, including
maintenance, employee counts, and service measures; and performance
indicators, which relate measures of service outputs or use (e.g., vehicle
revenue miles and passenger miles) to measures of resource inputs (e.g.,
revenue vehicles and labor hours).
Grants Management Information System
The Grants Management Information System provides comprehensive information
on all grants and contracts that UMTA has made since the 1960s.
Financial Management System
The Financial Management System provides financial information on
allotments, operating budget authority, and disbursements.
Other Data Activities
UMTA contracted with the Community Transportation Association of America in
1985 and again in 1989 to prepare a directory of rural (Section 18) and
elderly and handicapped [Section 16(b)(2)] transit service providers that
includes information about type of service offered, fleet size, and
county(ies) in which the service operates.
UMTA, in cooperation with FHWA, has also periodically contributed to
funding the National Personal Transportation Survey, for which the total
cost is approximately $2 million.
UMTA also cooperates with FHWA and outside interested parties through
the auspices of the Transportation Research Board on the Journey-to-Work
portion of the decennial census and subsequent special tabulations that are
included in the Census Transportation Planning Package. The data
preparation, which is funded by FHWA and UMTA, is conducted by the Census
Bureau under an Interagency Agreement.
FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION
Agency Mission
The mission of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is to promulgate
and enforce rail safety regulations, administer railroad finan-
124 DATA FOR DECISIONS
cial assistance programs, conduct research and development in support of
improved railroad safety and national rail transportation policy, provide
for the rehabilitation of Northeast Corridor rail passenger service, and
consolidate government support of rail transportation activities.
Current Data Programs
Carload Waybill Sample
The annual Carload Waybill Sample contains comprehensive detailed
information provided by Class I freight railroads from a 1 percent sample
of rail waybills to the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) about actual
rail shipments, including commodities carded; railroads involved; origin,
destination, and junction points; number of carloads; tons transported; and
total revenues. ICC contracts with the Association of American Railroads to
collect and process the data. FRA, which provides half of the funding for
the waybill sample, uses a confidential version to produce periodic and ad
hoc reports for use in traffic and competitive analyses in support of DOT
policy development. A more aggregated sample, which does not reveal
specific carriers or shipper locations, is available to the public.
Freight Commodity Statistics
This annual data base contains detailed commodity data filed with ICC by
Class I railroads on tons and carloads of local, forwarded, received,
overhead, and total traffic. Revenue for each commodity is also submitted.
This source supports in-house analyses requiring traffic mix information
for individual Class I railroads.
Princeton Transportation Network Model
FRA subscribes to this proprietary data base, owned by ALK Associates,
Inc., to study rail movements in the United States. A typical FRA analysis
involves flowing the waybill sample data over the network to examine
nationwide hazardous materials transport by rail.
Appendix A 125
Railroad Inspection Reporting System
The Railroad Inspection Reporting System (RIRS) is used to monitor each
FRA-performed inspection and record the nature of each defect uncovered and
any follow-up action by the railroad to correct the deficiency. RIRS
contains four data bases, each with its own forms and reports: (a) Signal,
Track, and Motive Power (locomotives); (b) Equipment (cars); (c) Operating
Practices; and (d) Hazardous Materials. Reports on inspector activity are
generated monthly; other periodic reports summarize railroad noncompliance.
FRA also produces ad hoc reports on specific elements of the inspection
form by railroad or division.
Railroad Accident/Incident Reporting System
The Railroad Accident/Incident Reporting System includes all railroad
accidents, grade-crossing accidents, railroad employee casualties, and any
other injuries on railroad property. These data bases provide the basis for
accident analyses and assessments as well as the annual Accident/Incident
Bulletin.
Grade Crossing Inventory System
This system contains a record of every public and private crossing in the
United States along with the accident history of each crossing. This data
base is often used in conjunction with the Grade Crossing Accident
Reporting System to generate Grade Crossing Accident Prediction reports
requested by states and railroads.
Transborder Surface Transportation Data Project
Originally this project was to be funded by OST, FHWA, and FRA, but it is
now funded solely by FRA. The objective is to determine the feasibility of
coding the foreign trade data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of the Census
from import and export documents to reflect the ground modes of
transportation of U.S. exports and imports to and from Canada and Mexico.
Currently, foreign trade data are only coded for vessel, air, and "other"
modes of transportation.
126 DATA FOR DECISIONS
MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
Agency Mission
The Maritime Administration (MARAD) administers programs to aid in the
development, promotion, and operation of the U.S. merchant marine.
Financial assistance programs are administered to support provision of
essential services on U.S. flag carriers and construction of ships in U.S.
shipyards. MARAD helps industry generate business for U.S. ships, conducts
programs to promote development of efficient port facilities and intermodal
transport, and promotes domestic shipping. It is also charged with
maintaining the National Defense Reserve Fleet and its component Ready
Reserve Force, and with organizing and directing emergency merchant ship
operations.
Current Data Programs
The following is a brief summary of some of MARAD's principal data systems.
It is not intended to represent an exhaustive inventory of all data bases
maintained by MARAD but to indicate the scope and diversity of MARAD
requirements, the various sources of such data, and the types of issues to
which such data may be applied.
Maritime Statistical Information System
The Maritime Statistical Information System is a relational data base that
combines MARAD's foreign trade, vessel, and port facilities data. The
foreign trade subsystem is primarily Bureau of Census foreign trade data
but also includes complete itineraries of more than 35,000 vessels
worldwide--data purchased from Lloyd's Maritime Information Service.
Foreign trade data obtained from the Bureau of Census includes information
that identifies both the vessel and the operator, which is not available to
the public and which Census collects only for MARAD and the Corps of
Engineers. This data is used within MARAD as the basis for calculating
subsidy rates and in support of a wide range of agency programs from
operating subsidies and ship financing to bilateral trade negotiations.
The vessel subsystem contains detailed vessel characteristics, pur-
chased from Lloyd's, on more than 35,000 merchant vessels word-wide and on
the U.S. flag merchant fleet, obtained from the U.S.
Appendix A 127
Coast Guard and other sources. It contains information from a variety of
sources on such items as container capacity, and whether the vessels am
government or privately owned, were built with subsidy, have outstanding
financing guarantees, or participate in the war risk binder program. The
data form the basis for many MARAD publications and support, in some way,
virtually all of MARAD's commercial and defense-related programs.
The ports subsystem contains MARAD's port facility inventory for
inland river and ocean ports, which is collected through field surveys to
supplement Corps of Engineers data. It supports MARAD's program to provide
technical assistance in port and intermodal planning and operations to
state and local port authorities, private industry, and foreign
governments. It also supports MARAD's program to develop contingency plans
for the use of ports and port facilities to meet defense needs.
Domestic Trade Data
MARAD obtains domestic trade data from the Corps of Engineers and produces
a variety of reports in support of the agency's programs dealing with the
inland waterways, Great Lakes, and domestic ocean trade--U.S. flag
transportation segments that account for more than one billion tons of
cargo each year.
Financial Reporting and Contract Surveillance
The Financial Reporting and Contract Surveillance program (FRACS) contains
financial reports and vessel operating statements for the more than 200
companies that are required to submit statements to MARAD. FRACS also
contains basic information about the companies and the MARAD contracts to
which they are party. It enables MARAD to monitor financial and operating
results on a timely basis and gives decision makers the benefits of an
automated retrieval system.
Cargo Preference Data
To meet a congressional mandate to monitor compliance with cargo preference
laws to maximize the use of U.S. flag vessels, MARAD
128 DATA FOR DECISIONS
monitors the shipping activities of federal agencies, independent estab-
lishments, and government corporations. To perform this activity, MARAD
maintains a computerized reporting system that processes information from
more than 60,000 bills of lading annually.
Intermodal Equipment
MARAD compiles and publishes an annual Intermodal Equipment Inventory--a
comprehensive statistical review and classification of equipment owned by
American steamship and container leasing companies.
Maritime Labor
MARAD supports the training of merchant marine officers through operation
of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and provision of financial assistance
to six state maritime academies. MARAD also monitors maritime industry
labor practices and policies in conjunction with national and international
organizations. In support of these programs, MARAD collects and publishes
data on maritime employment - seafaring, shipyard, and longshore. These
data are used extensively in developing training programs, making policy
regarding academy and state school support, and defense planning.
Sealift Planning
In connection with its national security responsibilities, MARAD maintains
data bases to evaluate U.S. shipbuilding and repair capabilities and
forecast U. S.-flag and U.S.-owned foreign-flag fleets.
U.S. COAST GUARD
Agency Mission
The mission of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) is to enforce or assist in the
enforcement of all applicable federal laws on the high seas and waters
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; administer laws, and
promulgate and enforce regulations for the promotion of safety of life and
property on the high seas and on waters subject to U.S.
Appendix A 129
jurisdiction, covering all matters not specifically delegated by law to
some other executive department or reserved to the states; develop,
establish, maintain, operate, and conduct, with due regard to the re-
quirements of national defense, aids to maritime navigation, icebreaking
facilities, oceanographic research, and rescue facilities for the promotion
of safety on and over the high seas and waters subject to U.S.
jurisdiction; maintain a state of readiness to function as a specialized
service in the Navy in time of war; and establish and maintain a
coordinated environmental program and a comprehensive ports and waterways
system, including all aspects of marine transportation.
Current Data Programs
Recreational Boating Safety System
The Recreational Boating Safety data base contains reports on recreational
boating accidents that occur in state waters or in waters under joint state
and federal control that result in loss of life, injury requiring medical
attention beyond first aid, damage to the vessel and other property
exceeding $200, or complete loss of the vessel. The accident reports
provide information on the time of day and year of the incident,
environmental conditions, type of incident, and cause. Data are also
collected on boat registrations, which provide a basis on which to
calculate accident and fatality rates.
Casualty Maintenance System
The Casualty Maintenance System (CASMAIN) is a data base administered by
the Marine Investigation Division that contains data on commercial vessel
casualties, including injuries and deaths. A typical report includes
information on case numbers, vessel identification numbers (VINS), casualty
coordinates, vessel names and types, gross tonnage, the primary nature and
cause of the accident, weather-related information, and reported damage.
CASMAIN queries are solicited from all facets of marine industry
(i.e., associations, unions, vessel owners, operators, and manufacturers.
Users include Congress; local, state, and federal government agencies;
financial institutions; universities; medical research facilities;
settlement attorneys; salvage operators; and foreign embassies.
130 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Seamen Documentation and Records System
The Seamen Documentation System includes the marine licensing program and
is located in the Office of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental
Protection. The system, among its other functions, maintains files of
shipping articles and master lists for reference in documenting service
time for mariners and providing service records to mariners, the maritime
community, and other interested parties. It also maintains records of every
mariner's service and other related information. This currently is a manual
system that is projected for automation by 1992.
Search and Rescue Management Information System
The Search and Rescue Management Information System is administered by the
Office of Navigation Safety and Waterways Services, which provides for the
collection, storage, and retrieval of information on the Coast Guard's
responses to search and rescue (SAR) incidents. The primary use of the
system is to derive a picture of the demands made of USCG by SAR clientele
and project these demands to measure unit workloads, determine resource use
and needs, justify budget requests, and analyze system operations for
potential savings.
Marine Safety Information System
The Marine Safety Information System (MSIS) is a data system that supports
USCG marine safety regulatory programs. The system tracks inspections of
U.S. and foreign vessels (including their cargos and equipment), offshore
oil and gas facilities, and port facilities (e.g., cargo docks) for such
safety-related items as presence of hazardous materials and adequacy of
tire-fighting equipment. Vessel inspection and violation histories are
used, among other purposes, to assist in USCG boarding decisions. MSIS also
records and tracks casualty information for marine accidents by vessel;
full investigative reports are contained in CASMAIN, although the two
systems will soon be linked electronically. Finally, MSIS tracks
information about pollution incidents, including the parties and vessels
involved and the costs.
Marine Pollution Retrieval System
The Marine Pollution Retrieval System (MPRS) and its predecessor, the
Pollution Incident Reporting System, were designed for the Marine
Appendix A 131
Environmental Response Program to generate a data base of pollution
incidents. MPRS reports pollution incidents that occur within all navigable
waters of the United States. The data base tracks the number of pollution
incidents; the nature, cause, extent, location, and time of the spill; and
the parties involved. Annual summary data are prepared and published
periodically in a report entitled Polluting Incidents In and Around U. S.
Waters.
SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Agency Mission
The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (SLSDC), a wholly
government-owned enterprise, is responsible for the development, operation,
and maintenance of the St. Lawrence Seaway between the port of Montreal and
Lake Erie within the territorial limits of the United States. It is the
function of the seaway corporation to provide a safe, efficient, and
effective water artery of maritime commerce, both in peacetime and in time
of national emergency.
Statistical activities of the SLSDC are used to support these respon-
sibilities. Its data collection efforts are specific to the seaway, and
focus on the flow of passengers and cargo, traffic control, aids to
navigation, and safety.
Current Data Programs
SLSDC collects data on the vessels, passengers, and cargo transiting the
St. Lawrence Seaway.
U.S. BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Overview and Data Collection Mandate
The Census Bureau is a general purpose statistical agency that collects,
tabulates, and publishes a wide variety of data about the people and the
economy of the nation. Over the years the Census Bureau has conducted a
limited number of transportation statistics programs and currently is
significantly expanding transportation industry statistics to meet
increased data user needs.
132 DATA FOR DECISIONS
The Bureau of the Census is required by law to collect and publish
general purpose data on the state of the economy and the population through
censuses and sample surveys. The majority of the data are used directly by
other agencies as input to their programs or to supplement other data
collections to meet specialized needs such as price indexes, productivity
measures, and economic development. The data collection authorization of
the census covers all sectors of the economy, except when a regulatory
organization requires data collection to complete its own mission.
Duplicative data collection is not allowed, and therefore regulatory data
is often used for general economic and policy decisions. The bureau serves
as the data collecting and compiling agent for other government agencies.
Current Transportation-Related Data Programs
Quinquennial Economic Census Programs
The Census of Transportation, conducted for the years 1987 and 1992,
consists of two parts: establishment-based universe statistics for selected
transportation industries and TIUS.
1987 and 1992 Statistics of Transportation Establishments
The transportation establishment statistics correspond to those collected
for other kinds of business in other economic censuses. They provide data
on general finances and employment and on a number of establishments. They
cover only three of the eight major groups in the transportation-related
part of the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system--42: Trucking
and Warehousing, 44: Water Transportation, and 47: Transportation Services.
For many of the industries in the transportation census (e.g., truck-
ing), the establishments have activities, workers, and equipment that may
move from place to place. For the census, an establishment is a relatively
permanent office, shop, station, terminal, or warehouse. Census figures for
states and metropolitan areas reflect permanent establishment location and
not necessarily the location where the trucking or other activities take
place.
The establishment counted in the Census of Transportation offers
services to the general public or to other business enterprises. Estab-
lishments that furnish similar services (e.g., warehousing) only to
Appendix A 133
other establishments of the same company are classified as auxiliary to the
other units of the company that they serve. Data for auxiliaries are
presented in a report issued as part of the 1987 Enterprise Statistics
series, but not in the Census of Transportation. The census excludes firms
that do not have paid employees. Thus, for example, many independent
truckers are not included in the 1987 establishment statistics.
TIUS 1982, 1987, 1992
TIUS, taken every 5 years as part of the economic census program, reports
on the physical characteristics and operational use of the nation's private
and commercial trucks. Unlike other economic census programs, the coverage
of TIUS cuts across SIC classifications and even includes personal
vehicles, although vehicles owned by federal, state, and local government
agencies are not covered. Some private or commercially owned vehicles that
do not have to be licensed (e.g., trucks used exclusively on private
property) are also excluded. The 1987 TIUS includes physical
characteristics of the nation's private trucking fleet, such as vehicle
type, gross weight, type and size of engine, type of transmission and
braking system, power steering, fuel conversion, air conditioning, type and
size of body, power axles, axle arrangements of trailer units, and cab
type. The survey also includes operational characteristics, such as base of
operation; number of trucks, truck-tractors, and trailers operated from
base of operation; area of operations; vehicle miles; miles per gallon; use
of vehicle; and type of commodities carded (including hazardous materials).
For 1987, about 135,000 private and commercial trucks were sampled
from approximately 44.8 million state vehicle registrations.
Census of Manufactures 1982, 1987, 1992
This census includes establishment coverage of more than 10,000
transportation equipment manufacturers. Coverage includes all eighteen 4-
digit industries of equipment manufacturers in SIC 37, from guided-missile
to recreational-camper manufacturers. Data include employment, wages, value
of shipments, value added, capital expenditures, operating expenses,
assets, and inventories.
134 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Census of Governments 1982, 1987, 1992
Coverage extends from the federal government and the 50 state governments
to some 83,000 units of local government--counties, cities, towns, school
districts, and special districts. Data collected include full- and part-
time employment and payrolls; revenues by type and sources, expenditure by
character, object, and function (including an array of transportation-
related functions); indebtedness by type and purpose; and assets held by
the government as cash or investments in securities.
Census of Construction 1982, 1987, 1992
Coverage includes transportation-related construction establishments, such
as those primarily engaged in highway, street, bridge, and tunnel
construction. Data include the value of work done, assets, expenses,
capital expenditures, and employment.
Census of Agriculture 1982, 1987, 1992
A universe count of farms and farm production by small geographic location
is provided by this census. Data highlight the county of agricultural
production (which is typically transported by truck, rail, or water) plus
expenses and assets, including fuel costs and trucks used.
Enterprise Statistics 1982, 1987, 1992
The Enterprise Statistics program regroups census data for establishments
under common ownership or control to show various economic characteristics
of the owning or controlling firms. This program also yields separate data
about auxiliary establishments. An auxiliary establishment is one whose
employees are primarily engaged in performing supportive services, such as
trucking and warehousing, for other establishments of the same company
instead of for the general public or other business firms. Information
available includes the number of auxiliaries and payroll, the number of
employees engaged in several different types of service, sales or receipts,
end-of-year inventories, rental payments, selected expense data, and so
forth.
Appendix A 135
Decennial Demographic Census
Questions on the means of transportation people use to get to work by
geographic location of their work place have been included in the decennial
Census of Population and Housing since 1960. In 1980, items on travel time
to work and carpool occupancy during the work trip were added. In 1990
information on the time at which individuals left home to go to work was
collected for the first time in the Census of Population and Housing. Data
on these topics are made available in printed reports and on computer tapes
for geographic areas such as census tracts, places, counties, metropolitan
areas, and states.
Existing Economic Survey Programs
- Motor Freight Transportation and Warehousing Survey is an annual
survey based on a sample of 1,500 firms that represent all employer
firms with one or more establishments that are primarily engaged in
providing for-hire commercial motor freight transportation and
warehousing services. This includes firms that furnish local or long-
distance trucking or transfer services and those that store farm
products, furniture and other household goods, or commercial goods of
any. nature. The survey provides about 50 data items on operating
revenues and operating expenses, plus inventories of revenue-
generating equipment for establishments in SIC 42 for the United
States. Comparable statistics are shown for the previous year along
with year-to-year percentage changes. Publication is released about 9
months after the period of reference.
- NTACS is a DOT-sponsored follow-on survey to the quinquennial TIUS,
and has been designed to obtain operational characteristics and
activity patterns of trucks by collecting trip-specific information
primarily from commodity-carrying trucks. It provides essential
information for the analyses of truck size and weight issues, highway
user charges, safety issues, energy and environmental constraints,
proposed investments in new roads and technology, hazardous materials
transport, and other aspects of the Federal-Aid Highway Program. Ques-
tions on NTACS also provide linkages between TIUS and other existing
sources of truck-related information.
- Annual Survey of Manufactures provides data on domestic manufacturers'
production of transportation equipment, including value of
136 DATA FOR DECISIONS
shipments, expenses, and other key measures for 18 transportation
equipment manufacturing industries.
- Annual Government Finance Surveys provide coverage of the federal
government, 50 state governments, and a sample of some 22,000 local
governments--counties, cities, towns, school districts, and special
districts. Data collected include full- and part-time employment and
payrolls; revenues by type and source, including transportation-
related sources (e.g., motor fuel taxes, toll charges); expenditure by
character, object, and function (including an array of transportation-
related functions); indebtedness by type and purpose; and assets held
by the government as cash or investments in securities.
- Surveys of Transportation Equipment Manufacturing provide national
estimates of domestic production of aerospace equipment, aircraft, and
truck trailers.
- County Business Patterns is an annual series of national and state
publications presenting county-level data on the number of
establishments with paid employees, total employment, and payroll on
an establishment basis, with economic activity classification re-
flecting the principal activity at each individual location. The
coverage includes about 45 transportation industries in each of more
than 3,000 counties.
- Foreign Trade Statistics provide a monthly census of U.S. export and
import transactions on the basis of official documents that shippers
and receivers must file with the U.S. Customs Service for each ship-
ment. These figures reflect the flow of merchandise, but not such
intangibles as services and financial commitments. The trade figures
trace commodity movements out of and into U.S. Customs jurisdictions.
Key variables in foreign trade reports are export value calculated
free alongside ship (f.a.s.), import value, specific commodities
shipped, and foreign country of origin or destination. Additional
variables shown selectively include SIC-based product code, methods of
transportation (e.g., air, sea, or land), U.S. state of origin or
destination, U.S. and foreign ports, quantities shipped, and weight
for air and sea shipments.
- Plant and Equipment Expenditure Survey is a quarterly publication of
transportation equipment manufacturers that provides investment
information for manufacturing and transportation service firms.
- Quarterly Financial Report contains up-to-date aggregate statistics on
the financial results and position of U.S. corporations. The report
presents estimated statements of income and retained earnings, balance
sheets, and related financial and operating ratios for the
transportation
Appendix A 137
equipment industry, including detailed information on motor vehicles and
motor vehicle equipment, aircraft, and parts.
Existing Demographic Surveys
- Information has been collected in the American Housing Survey (AHS)
since the mid-1970s on means of transportation to work, travel time to
work, and distance to work. Other data items, including information on
the geographic location of the work place, have been collected
periodically from both the national sample and the individual
metropolitan area samples of AHS. Data are available in printed re-
ports, public-use microdata files, and unpublished tabulations for se-
lected large cities and counties, and for the nation.
- Transportation expenses are collected as part of the Consumer
Expenditure Quarterly Interview Survey, which provides information on
how various groups of U.S. consumers spend. The survey data include
large expenditures, such as automobiles, and expenditures that occur
on a regular basis, such as gasoline and insurance premiums.
Approved and Budgeted Programs Under Development
The expanded 1992 Census of Transportation will present significantly more
transportation establishment statistics on revenues, payroll, and
employment by varied transportation classifications. It will provide these
data for 43 4-digit industries in the following major SIC groups.
SIC Major
Group Title
41 Local and Suburban Transit and Interurban Highway Passenger
Transportation
42 Motor Freight Transportation and Warehousing
44 Water Transportation
45 Transportation by Air (excludes large certificated passenger
air carriers)
46 Pipelines, except Natural Gas
47 Transportation Services
This represents an expansion in the scope of the Transportation Census
for 15 industries in major groups 41, 45, and 46, incorporating
138 DATA FOR DECISIONS
more than 24,000 additional establishments with more than 860,000
employees. General financial and employment dam, and number of
establishments will be provided.
The questionnaire and collection methodology for these industries were
tested as pan of the 1989 pretest. Review of the data collected on these
questionnaires and the accompanying evaluation forms should provide the
information needed to finalize the coverage and questionnaire design for
these industries in 1992.
Additionally, collection of data for the railroad industry and large
certificated passenger air carriers is under consideration. Review of the
data available from other government agencies (ICC and DOT, respectively)
and the reportability of requested data and information from the pretest
will determine whether these industries should be within the scope of the
1992 Census.
Plans are to publish data from the 1992 Census on a national basis
and, where not prohibited by confidentiality restrictions, for selected
states and metropolitan statistical areas. Publication plans for 1992
include the release of summary data for nonemployers in transportation
industries for the first time.
Future Planned Surveys
Charter, Rural, Intercity Bus Survey
This annual survey would provide a complete enumeration of approximately
2,000 firms offering intercity, rural, or charter bus transportation
services. Estimates of annual dollar volume for intercity and charter bus
activities range from $5 to $8 billion. The 1982 Bus Regulatory Reform Act
seriously reduced the amount of data on intercity bus activity. Although
intercity scheduled service has continued to decline, charter and tour
ridership is growing. More than 40 data items on revenues and expenses are
planned. If approved, the survey, covering calendar year 1992 activities,
will be published in December 1993.
Transportation Services Survey
This annual sample survey would cover all employer establishments from a
universe of 34,000 establishments providing transportation services (SIC
47). Estimates of dollar volume for services incidental to transportation
range from $12 to $14 billion annually.
Appendix A 139
Regulatory reform has had a profound effect on the structure of
freight transportation as traditional lines of delineation between ar-
rangers of freight transportation have become blurred. All public data
collection on freight forwarding ceased in 1980. About 35 data items on
detailed revenues and expenses are planned. If approved, the survey,
covering calendar year 1992 activities, will be published in December 1993.
Water Transportation Survey
All employer firms providing water transportation services would be covered
in this annual sample survey. The industry consists of 7,500 establishments
with estimated revenues of $7 to $9 billion.
Existing data sources deal almost exclusively with the physical char-
acteristics of the system--vessels, waterways, and port facilities of the
industries--or with commodity movements. The passenger transportation
segment of this industry is one of the fastest-growing components of the
travel sector. About 40 detailed data items on revenues and expenses are
planned. If approved, the survey, covering calendar year 1992 activities,
will be published in December 1993.
Proposed Joint Projects
State and Local Government Transportation Survey
This proposed survey would fill an important need for information about the
resources state and local governments devote to the provision of
transportation infrastructure and services. The survey would include all
aspects of government transportation services, including highways, water
transportation, air transportation, and transit operations. The data would
emphasize the financial and personnel resources that state and local
governments provide to construct, maintain, and operate these services.
The existing data on state and local government transportation ser-
vices is fragmented by the diffuse nature of federal, state, and local
government organizations. The Census Bureau's data collection programs on
state and local government finances and employment provide an ideal base
for establishing a comprehensive transportation information system (i.e.,
uniform time frame, definitions, data classification, and data collection
methods).
140 DATA FOR DECISIONS
This would be a voluntary survey of all state governments and a sample
of individual local governments--counties, municipalities, townships,
school districts, and special districts. The financial data would cover the
entire range of financial activities: revenues (motor fuel taxes, transit
charges, federal revenues); expenditures (highway construction, transit
system current operations); indebtedness (types of debt financing for
airports and highways); and gross assets (including highway trust funds).
For comparative purposes, the employment data, showing number of employees
and payroll, would cover the same functional areas as the expenditure
information. In addition, information would be collected from school
systems about the costs related to transportation of pupils.
In summary, this survey would provide, for the first time, compre-
hensive state and local financial data on transportation activities. New
consistent data would be published annually for the following categories:
(a) gross value of transportation assets by governmental unit by
transportation function and (b) specific relationship of governmental
financing along with the actual expenditures (e.g., federal government
contribution and debt financing by transportation function and purpose).
Information on funding sources will include tax levies, debt issues, fees
charged, and miscellaneous revenues.
1993 Commodity Flow Survey
The proposed commodity flow survey of shippers would measure the flow of
goods from origin to destination within the United States. The weight and
value of about 18 million sampled shipments would be collected. Other
information collected for these sampled shipments would be the mode of
transport, and commodity code (5-digit).
The survey would include establishments classified in manufacturing,
minerals and mining, wholesale, and other selected industries. The survey
would be conducted by the Census Bureau in 1993 with major funding provided
by DOT. The information would be used by DOT to evaluate truck size and
weight limits, user fees, cost allocation, energy and environmental
constraints, economic viability of competing modes, hazardous materials
transport, intermodal programs to improve economic productivity and
international competitiveness, and other key transportation issues.
Appendix A 141
Bus and Government Vehicle Survey
Little is known about the use of the highway system by buses and
government-owned vehicles. An estimated two million of these vehicles are
currently in use, and they certainly could have an important impact on
highway condition. In addition, complete information on bus and government
vehicle road use is needed for accurate forecasting of highway capacity and
investment requirements.
The Census Bureau and DOT are evaluating existing data sources in
these areas and formulating a proposal for efficiently measuring and
monitoring annual changes.
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Agency Mission
The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) serves as the Army's real
property manager, performing the full cycle of real property activities
(requirements, programming, acquisition, operation, maintenance, and
disposal); manages and executes engineering, construction, and real estate
programs for the Army and the U.S. Air Force; and performs research and
development in support of these programs. USACE manages and executes Civil
Works Programs, which include research and development, planning, design,
construction, operation and maintenance, and real estate activities related
to rivers, harbors, and waterways; and administers laws for protection and
preservation of navigable waters and related resources such as wetlands. It
also assists in recovery from natural disasters.
Through its Navigation Data Center, USACE collects, processes,
manages, and disseminates a variety of statistical data relating to foreign
and domestic waterborne commerce, vessel and port facility descriptions,
and navigation lockages. The reports include annual statistical tabulations
of domestic and foreign commodity movements on U.S. waterways and within
ports, an annual directory of operating domestic vessels, periodic
revisions of port facility descriptions, quarterly detailed statistics for
each Corps of Engineers-operated lock, and dredging statistics. Information
is provided both in published reports and on data processing software.
142 DATA FOR DECISIONS
The Navigation Data Center provides coordination of navigation
information within USACE, the U.So Department of Defense, all federal and
nonfederal agencies, and with private partners and the general public, to
ensure effective data collection and dissemination strategies. The center
consists of the Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center, the Port Facilities
Branch, and two teams covering the lock performance monitoring system and
dredging statistics.
Current Data Programs
Waterborne Commerce and Vessel Statistics
Waterborne Commerce of the United States (WCUS), Parts 1-5, contains
statistics on the commercial movement of foreign and domestic cargo
available in both hard copy and computer tape. The Public Domain Data Base
of WCUS contains aggregated information on waterborne commodity movements
by 26 geographical areas, available in both hard copy and computer tape.
The Principal Ports Tonnage Report ranks U.S. ports for a calendar year by
total tons, domestic and foreign. The State Tonnage Report contains total
waterborne commerce by state. The Transportation Lines of the U.S. lists
vessel operators and their addresses, type and physical description of
vessels, principal service, location, and commodity served. The Navigation
Data Center handles special requests for commerce and vessel statistics,
which are not contained in standard products, on a case-by-case basis.
Port Facilities
These data consist of the physical and intermodal characteristics of the
coastal, Great Lakes, and inland ports in the United States. Fifty-six Port
Series Reports are published at intervals of approximately 7 years,
covering more than 200 individual port areas. Reports consist of complete
descriptions of a port area's waterfront facilities, including detailed
information on berthing accommodations, petroleum and bulk handling
terminals, grain elevators, warehouses, cranes, transit sheds, marine
repair plants, fleeting areas, and floating equipment. A special 1988
report, Summary of Commodity Handling Terminals of the United States Inland
Waterways, groups the various terminals by type
Appendix A 143
of commodity handled and includes location, berthing length, cargo
direction, operating rate, and storage capacity for each facility.
Lock Performance Monitoring
Lock Performance Monitoring (LPM) data consist of descriptions of the
traffic through locks on the inland waterway system as well as the physical
aspects of lockages. Specifically, data is collected on vessel name,
number, river direction, number of cuts, lockage, entry and exit type,
arrival time, lockage time, and factors that may have interfered with the
lockage. Vessel data include vessel name and number, flotation dimensions,
number of passengers, barge types, number, and type and tonnage. The LPM
system produces several reports, including a semiannual Summary of Lock
Statistics and an Overview of the Lock Performance Monitoring System.
Dredging Statistics
Dredging statistics include data on bid schedules, location of contact,
dredge type, and cubic yards. The Navigation Data Center is responsible for
defining and developing a new system during fiscal years 1991 and 1992 to
provide both industry and the corps with a more current and accurate
dredging data program.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION
Agency Mission
The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) regulates interstate surface
transportation, including trains, trucks, buses, water carriers, freight
forwarders, transportation brokers, and a coal slurry pipeline. The
regulatory laws vary depending on the type of transportation; however, they
generally cover certification of carriers seeking to provide transportation
for the public and their rates, adequacy of service, purchases, and
mergers. The commission ensures that the carriers it regulates will provide
the public with rates and services that are fair and reasonable.
With enactment of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform
Act of 1976, the commission's statutory mandate was altered to provide for
less regulation over rail freight rates and practices. This
144 DATA FOR DECISIONS
fundamental shift in national transportation policy was reinforced by
enactment of the Motor Carrier Act of 1980, the Staggers Rail Act of 1980,
the Household Goods Transportation Act of 1980, and the Bus Regulatory
Reform Act of 1982. These measures provided for a sharply reduced federal
role in regulating the trucking, railroad, and bus industries.
Although ICC statistical activities have been reduced, the agency
still produces a number of important statistical products. The areas of
coverage include railroads and motor carriers of property and passengers
(i.e., trucks and buses).
In each modal area the industry is divided into classes based on
revenues. Trucking and intercity bus carriers with more than $5 million in
earnings are categorized as Class 1, those with between $5 million and $1
million as Class 2, and those with less than $1 million as Class 3. The
revenue thresholds were established in 1980 and are adjusted for inflation
each year.
Current Data Programs
Annual Reports to Congress
The commission has provided an annual report to Congress for more than 100
years. These extensive reports draw on the regulatory activities and
statistical reports received by the commission and provide a useful summary
of the status of regulated transportation.
Transport Statistics in the United States
This report, published annually, provides summary statistics for Class 1
rail and motor carriers, including general balance sheet and financial
data, operating income and expenses, and operating statistics. Some
information on physical equipment, such as track and operating equipment,
is also included.
Motor Carrier of Property Quarterly Freight Revenue Report Form
The Quarterly Freight Revenue (QFR) schedule, substantially reduced from
its pre-deregulation length, covers major financial and operating
statistics for trucking firms. Reporting is required on a quarterly and
Appendix A 145
cumulative annual basis. Only the carriers identified as Class 1 or 2 are
required to provide significant reporting in the trucking sector. Reporting
carriers number approximately 2,000 in contrast with more than 42,000
nonreporting carriers. Class 3 and exempt carriers are only required to
provide identification information and revenue data sufficient for
classification purposes.
The individual carrier reports are available for inspection in a
public reference room. Each quarter, the commission's Office of Economics
produces a brief release citing the top 100 carriers and reporting selected
earnings data. These are published under the titles Large Class 1 Motor
Carriers of Property Selected Earnings Data and Large Class 1 Household
Carriers Selected Earnings Data. Far more detailed financial and operating
statistics from data filed in QFR are provided for a fee by the American
Trucking Associations in the Motor Carrier Quarterly Report: Financial and
Operating Statistics.
Motor Carrier of Passengers Quarterly and Annual Report
Motor carriers of passengers (i.e., intercity bus carriers) complete a
substantially abbreviated version of the QFR financial and operating
schedule, called MP-1. Only the Class 1 carriers are obligated to provide
the required report in the bus sector. The Class 1 intercity bus carriers
number about 30 of more than 3,000 bus carriers. Reporting firms provide a
mix of scheduled service, tour and charter operations, school bus, and even
local transit services. One firm, Greyhound, generates most of the
industry's Class 1 revenues. The ICC Office of Economics provides a
parallel quarterly release to the trucking report for the top ten bus
carriers, Large Motor Carriers of Passengers Selected Earnings Data.
Quarterly Report of Railroad Revenues, Expenses and Income
Rail reporting follows a format similar to the motor carrier system, but,
because of the nature of the industry structure, Class 1 carriers represent
almost all of the industry's activity. Class 1 carriers are defined as
those with revenues above a certain threshold ($93.5 million in 1989); the
dividing line for Class 2 and 3 carriers is at $18.6 million. Only those in
Class 1 are required to report quarterly and annual financial and operating
information. Class 1 carriers numbered
146 DATA FOR DECISIONS
only 16 in 1990 but accounted for more than 90 percent of total industry
revenue. There are approximately 500 non-Class 1 carriers.
Report of Railroad Employment Class 1 Line-Haul Railroads and Wage
Statistics of Class 1 Railroads
Because the rail industry does not participate in the social security
system of the United States, ICC is responsible for the collection of
monthly and annual data on employment and wages for Class 1 railroads.
These data are provided to the Bureau of Labor Statistics for such purposes
as compiling employment statistics of the U.S., the unemployment rate, and
the calculation of productivity measures.
Rail Waybill Statistics
In addition to financial and operating statistical reporting, ICC, in a
jointly funded activity with FRA, contracts with the Association of
American Railroads (AAR) to produce the Rail Waybill Statistics, which
reports on rail origin-destination movements by commodity, based on a
sample of shipping documents and computer files. The report is published by
FRA (see p. 124).
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agency Mission
The mission of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is to improve and
maintain farm income and develop and expand markets abroad for agricultural
products. The department works to enhance the environment and maintain U.S.
production capacity by helping landowners protect soil, water, forests, and
other natural resources. Rural development, credit, conservation, and
research programs are also part of the department's mission. Finally, the
department safeguards and ensures standards of quality in the daily food
supply through inspection and grading services.
The Transportation and Marketing Division (TMD) of USDA's Agricultural
Marketing Service (AMS) helps develop an efficient agricultural and rural
transportation system by providing research, technical assistance, and
leadership in developing transportation policy and programs within USDA. In
doing so, TMD draws on a variety of
Appendix A 147
data sources in both the public and private sectors. TMD is both a data
user and a data gatherer.
Current Data Programs
Ocean Grain Freight Rates
TMD has electronically compiled more than 5 years of grain freight rates
from the weekly publication Maritime Research. Both U.S. and foreign
origins and destinations are included, along with shipper, volume, rate,
and other information. The information is used to determine the U.S.
competitive position in worldwide grain markets and estimate USDA export
commodity programming levels.
Trucking
TMD monitors trends in agricultural trucking. However, because un-processed
agricultural commodities moving by truck are generally un-regulated, the
lack of reporting requirements causes a major shortfall in reliable data.
Information on rates, tonnages, the number of carriers, and flow patterns
is generally nonexistent. Through records kept by the AMS market news
reporters, data are available on fruit and vegetable shipments and receipts
at major markets. TMD also calculates per-mile costs for exempt owner-
operators of truck fleets.
Waterways
TMD collects information on grain flows through seven strategic locks on
the Mississippi River system. Although the information is available from
USACE, timeliness and accuracy are sometimes an issue. TMD is interested in
grain traffic by type of grain, whereas the USACE data sometimes do not
distinguish among the various grain types.
Rail
TMD uses a waybill bill sample from the ICC to determine grain movements by
rail. However, certain use restrictions are placed on these data, which
limit their utility in analyzing the movement of agricultural goods.
148 DATA FOR DECISIONS
PRIVATE DATA SOURCES
The private sector also collects national data on the transportation
system primarily through surveys by industry associations or by compilation
and analysis of public data. The following is an illustrative but not
comprehensive list of some of the major private transportation-related data
sources organized by mode.
Trucking
- FREIGHTSCAN, a data base that is available from Data Resources Inc.,
provides annual information on commodity flows by product and mode by
origin and destination pair for states and Bureau of Economic Analysis
areas. Data are available on surface transportation modes only.
- TRANSEARCH, available from Reebie Associates, also provides annual
data on U.S. domestic freight traffic movements by market area,
commodity, and mode of transport. The main focus is on surface
transportation. TRANSEARCH also provides detailed information on U.S.
international trade flows in three separate data bases. FREIGHT
LOCATOR, a complementary data base, identifies and profiles trans-
portation requirements of plants accounting for 90 percent of U.S.
manufacturing output.
- TRAM, Inc. provides information on motor carriers from an indepth
survey of truck drivers conducted at 30 truck stops along high-density
corridors in the United States and Canada. Information is collected
on driver demographics, type of truck, company, and characteristics of
the haul, such as trip origin and destination, commodities hauled, and
truck weight.
Rail
- Railinc Corporation, a wholly owned, for-profit subsidiary of AAR,
manages several large rail data bases. The Universal Machine Language
Equipment Register data base contains the characteristics of a] rail
cars operating in the United States, including information on age of
equipment, number of locomotives in service by type of unit, umber of
freight cars in service by type, average freight car capacity, nd
aggregate capacity. The Train 11 data base provides detailed reports
on all rail car movements.
Appendix A 149
- Profiles of U.S. Railroads is a survey of non-Class 1 railroads (i.e.,
regional and short line railroads), also conducted by AAR. Data are
provided on revenues, employment, miles of road operated, ownership,
commodities carried, and average length of haul.
- ALK Associates, Inc. Transportation Network Model enhances the rail
waybill sample by adding origin-destination and other rate data to
track rail flows by means of a digitized rail network program. ALK, a
subcontractor to AAR, also has a digitized highway network with the
capacity to do traffic analyses such as hazmat routings.
Aviation
- Regional Airline Association Survey provides data on passenger
enplanements, revenue passenger miles (total and average per carrier),
number of airports served, average trip length, commuter aircraft ca-
pacity (i.e., seats per aircraft and fleet flying hours), and capacity
utilization (i.e., hours per aircraft).
- Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Survey is a survey of
airline passengers conducted annually by the Gallup Corporation for
ATA that includes demographic information, data on trip purpose, and
frequency of air travel.
- International Air Transport Association provides origin-destination
statistics on international flights and air freight data between re-
gional pairs. It also provides World Air Transport Statistics,
including operating and financial statistics, safety, traffic, and
capacity data on Atlantic and inter-European routes.
- Future Aviation Professionals of America provides data on commercial
flight crews, including information on new hires and retirement age
projections.
Water
The Port Import Export Reporting System, managed by the Journal of
Commerce, provides information on maritime foreign trade data by shipper on
origin or destination of inland shipments, overseas origin or destination
data, commodity detail, volume shipped, and price data. Data sources are
the ocean bill of lading for exports and the inward foreign manifest for
imports.
150 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Pipeline
- Oil and Gas Journal compiles source data from the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission on miles of petroleum pipeline by type,
operating revenue, and net income for interstate petroleum pipelines.
- Association of Oil Pipelines provides annual data on ton-miles of
petroleum and refined products transported.
- American Gas Association provides data on U.S. natural gas pipeline
mileage by type and financial data for gas pipeline companies.
- Gas Research Institute provides long-range projections of geographic
production and consumption patterns of natural gas.
Multimodal
- Transportation in America, a publication now published by the Eno
Foundation for Transportation, Inc., provides multimodal trend data
drawn from a multitude of public and private data sources supplemented
by estimates of missing data.
- U.S. Travel Data Center National Travel Survey, a monthly telephone
survey of 1,500 households, first conducted by the U.S. Travel Data
Center in 1979 to provide more current data between DOT's National
Travel Surveys, provides information on trip characteristics,
including mode, purpose, distance, and duration for all travel greater
than 100 mi from home as well as demographic data on the traveler.
NOTE
1. Information for this section was drawn largely from two articles on
freight (Anderson 1990) and passenger (Cook 1990) data sources,
supplemented by telephone follow-ups with selected providers.
REFERENCES
ABBREVIATION
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
Anderson, D. L. 1990. Freight Transportation Data Needs, Resources,
and Issues. In Transportation Research Record 1253. TRB, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 25-40.
Appendix A 151
Cook, S. D. 1990. Recreational Travel and Tourism Data Needs,
Resources, and Issues. In Transportation Research Record 1253. TRB,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 56-70.
Klinger, D. and J. R. Kuzmyak. 1986. Personal Travel in the U.S.,
1983-1984 Nationwide Personal Transportation Study. DTFH61-84-DC-00098.
Vols. I and II. COMSIS Corporation, Wheaton, Md.; U.S. Department of
Transportation, Aug.
Appendix B
New Technologies for
Transportation Data Collection
and Analysis: Opportunities and
Applications
ALAN E. PISARSKI
Transportation data collection is a time-consuming and expensive
undertaking. This, in part, explains the lack of comprehensive
transportation data collection by the federal government. Obtaining
adequate national coverage of almost any subject area of transportation may
well cost millions of dollars. Similarly, time requirements can be spread
over several years. For instance, to provide seasonal coverage of
activities throughout the year, survey work may be required every week.
Processing can take several years more. Actual data may be 3 years old
before becoming available. The 1990 Census data, collected in April 1990,
will be available beginning in late 1992 and early 1993. Surveys conducted
every 5 years often must be planned before the results from the previous
survey are available for review.
At the same time that these problems exist, new technologies are being
developed in the transportation field that may provide opportunities for
improving the speed and reducing the cost of data collection. They may
also be used to reduce respondent burdens in answering questions and
improve the quality of the resulting data.
Some of these new technologies are just emerging; others are more
fully developed. In every case, the opportunities for data development
provided by these technologies have not been fully evaluated. If these
opportunities could be realized, they would make a significant contribution
to the development of a data and analytic capability for national policy
making at the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
153
154 DATA FOR DECISIONS
These technologies can be divided into two classes of opportunity with
respect to their data development potential:
- New technology-assisted data collection methods to substitute for
traditional collection methods (e.g., use of hand-held computers to assist
counting and inventorying functions).
- New technological capabilities for performing system management,
operating, and administrative functions with potential data spinoffs [e.g.,
use of electronic data interchange (EDI) between carriers and shippers to
provide an automated summary picture of freight movements].
NEW TECHNOLOGY-ASSISTED DATA
COLLECTION METHODS
The computer industry is moving rapidly toward miniaturization, greater
capability, and lower cost. Many of these capabilities are finding their
way into data collection activities.
Computer-Assisted Telephone and Personal Interviewing
Using computers as part of the interviewing process, an interviewer can
talk to respondents about their travel activities while the computer keeps
track of the information obtained, edits it to clarify contradictory
responses, directs the interviewer to appropriate follow-up questions, and
enters the records in the appropriate data base in an instantaneous
process. Although this is not new to data collection activities in gen-
eral, particularly in the private sector, its use in the transportation
field has been limited. The Federal Highway Administration successfully
tested computer-assisted telephone interviewing in its recent National
Personal Transportation Study.
Clipboard Computers
Sometimes called palm-top computers, clipboard computers are powerful and
as tiny as their name implies. They are capable of storing information
quickly at the site of the event to be recorded. They have rapidly
developed into a tool for in-factory management control of production
processes, delivery systems management (e.g., United Par-
Appendix B 155
cel Service uses them for package tracking and control), and reading of
distant measurement devices (e.g., gas meters).
One of the greatest potential applications in transportation is for
police use in on-site accident data recording. The proper recording of
traffic crash data by police at the accident scene has always been an
obstacle to the collection of meaningful state-level data. The clipboard
computer, combining new hardware and software technologies, can markedly
improve the quality and utility of data collected by state and local police
and other highway safety personnel. It provides the police officer or
technician user-friendly direct entry of data into a hand-held computer
with built-in editing and coding checks to reduce or eliminate data entry
errors. The data can then be directly transferred to statewide computer
data bases, reducing the time necessary for paper transfers and data entry.
These approaches and others are being developed quickly and appli-
cations are being found in all sectors of the economy and society. The
transportation data community does not need to conduct extensive research
and development on these technologies; it only needs to remain aware of the
potential of these systems, monitor their development, and continually seek
new and better applications to transportation.
TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY
DEVELOPMENT SPINOFFS
Technologies are being developed in the transportation sector that
have the potential for enhancing data collection efforts. Many of these
developments involve automated mechanisms to manage and operate the
transportation system. Two important areas of emerging capability are
intelligent vehicle-highway systems (IVHS) and EDI.
DOT has proposed an increased research and development (R&D) program
on IVHS. IVHS refers to a broad range of systems that will use
sophisticated microcomputer and communications technology to monitor,
guide, or control operation of vehicles and provide travelers with
information about highway and travel conditions (TRB 1991). Among the
goals of these technologies are increased capacity of existing streets and
freeways, safer operational control of vehicles and facilities, and more
efficient routing and travel information. These operational activities may
also provide opportunities for improved monitoring information about the
road system and the activity on it. However, greater efforts
156 DATA FOR DECISIONS
will be required by the transportation data community to fully realize
the data potential of these new technologies.
On-Board Vehicle Data Systems
These data systems, available in almost all surface, air, and marine
vehicles, generate information for the control and management of the
vehicle and its cargo. Effectively all commercial vehicles have
available on-board systems that keep track of operations and
activities. For example, the trucking industry uses on-board
computers that act as complete monitors of truck activity. Such
computers routinely report hours of operation, stops and starts,
mileage traveled, fuel consumed, idle time, engine revolutions, and
even door openings and closings and brake applications. The summation
of a sample of equipped trucks could provide a national truck activity
data base. The option exists to instrument a vehicle with electronics
to incorporate operator-controlled observations about trip purpose,
road conditions, or other information.
Traffic Sensing and Control Devices
As roadways increasingly become facilities to be "operated," traffic
managers need a continuous stream of real-time data to control opera-
tions through ramp meters, traffic monitors, and automated signaliza-
tion systems. These data, which are generated in real time for
operational purposes, could be retained and summarized to support
local traffic counts and congestion monitoring programs for energy and
pollution monitoring and planning applications.
For example, IVHS technologies permit traffic signals to sense changes
in traffic volumes and respond with new signal patterns. If these volume
data were stored and saved, they could supplement or replace existing
traffic monitoring equipment. Radio devices can now transmit traffic
observations to a central point on an instantaneous and continuing basis.
A sample set of these devices could provide a national sample of traffic
monitoring for daily applications for the broader purposes of pollution
management, economic analyses, and congestion monitoring.
Satellite Sensing Systems
Satellites can monitor equipped buses, trucks, and rail cars and their
locations at points in time. These systems could provide summary
Appendix B 157
information on the travel patterns of the vehicles being tracked. For
example, satellite tracking systems permit urban buses to be monitored on a
continuous basis; buses can be rerouted when delays are apparent. Summary
data on schedule adherence and total vehicle travel flows could be gleaned
from these systems. Other approaches, using wayside interrogation devices
and on-board transponders, provide similar capabilities.
Automated Routing and Scheduling Systems
A number of private firms are developing the capability to route their own
vehicles to minimize traffic delays. Other firms provide routing
information as a service. As firms further develop this capability, the
sum of their activities would be valuable for environmental monitoring by
urban planners, traffic engineers, and others. Knowing the route schedules
of all the package delivery firms could assist traffic planners.
Automated Ordering, Billing, Taxing, and Control Systems
Private and public agencies (e.g., U.S. Customs Service) are developing
automated systems for transferring administrative information. The U.S.
railroad industry pioneered the development of these capabilities in the
1970s, primarily for control of cargo moving via more than one railroad.
These systems can potentially provide summary data of interest with less
cost and nuisance to providers.
CASE STUDY: A DATA APPLICATION OF EDI
Historically, the flow of freight transport has been controlled through
paper records. The automation of these records, which is increasingly a
standard part of freight documentation and billing, provides immense
opportunities for better data on freight flows. Many shippers and carriers
now transfer information by EDI. EDI provides for computer-to-computer
transfers of large quantities of business information without human
intervention. Orders to shippers, requests for freight services, billings
from carriers, and payments may all be transmitted electronically (Willenz
1988). The effectiveness of the use of EDI to provide public use summary
freight statistics, however, has not been tested.
158 DATA FOR DECISIONS
One of the issues in the development of EDI has been agreement on
protocols and standards. Distinct standards exist within industries and
countries. EDIFACT (EDI For Administration, Commerce, and Transportation)
has been developed as an international standard (Cram 1990).
Standardization is applied to the location, size, and formats of data
fields and data entry protocols used in computer transmittals.
One major application of EDI is the processing of customs information.
Automation of customs declaration documents through an automated manifest
system provides the opportunity for better international freight statistics
in the ocean trades and air freight services. About 60 percent of import
transactions was handled by EDI in 1986. A goal of 90 percent has been
set. So far, data indicate that 86 percent of all import transactions is
now being handled electronically (Farrell and Radspieler 1990). The
statistical improvement in time and cost is enormous. Before electronic
transfer, physical records were received and processed by the U.S. Customs
Service, mailed to the Bureau of the Census processing facility in Indiana,
keyed into computer formats, and edited. Errors might be discovered during
editing - 30 days after receipt. Now the edits defined by the Census
Bureau are embedded in the Customs Service computers, which edit data
continuously as they are received. Errors are corrected instantaneously.
These records provide a powerful source of information on in-bound freight
flows. Linkage of these records to domestic freight documents could
provide valuable data on international trade activities. In fiscal year
1993 the two bureaus will begin to automate export data in a similar
system.
A Commodity Flow Survey (CFS) is under design by DOT and the Bureau of
the Census. This survey would measure the flows of all goods moving
between major areas of the country. Such a survey, although valuable, is
also difficult and costly to design and perform. Past surveys have
suffered from inadequate funding and faulty design. One of the key issues
in the current design process is the treatment of goods moving in foreign
trade, either as imports or exports.
The fundamental survey approach is to collect information on shipments
from a selected set of sample establishments to all destination
establishments. Difficulty arises when the flows to be measured are either
received as imports or intended for export. In the case of imports, the
shipping establishment is a foreign entity and therefore not accessible to
be part of the sample of establishments. If the receiving establishment is
close to the port of entry, then no domestic travel of significance is
likely to be lost. If the receiving establishment is inland, all the
domestic travel of the import journey is unknown, and the
Appendix B 159
survey's over-all effectiveness is impeded. As the number of imports
grows, a significant share of total national freight movements will be
missed.
Further, unless all respondents are encumbered with a "Did you import
anything?" question, all specific identification of imports is lost (i.e.,
the flow of imports in the domestic transportation system cannot be
traced). Analyses of record-keeping practices indicate that only a small
percentage of all establishments engage in exports or imports, and most
establishments cannot answer such questions effectively. Thus, unless a
convoluted and complex set of questions is to be asked of all respondents,
there does not seem to be an effective method to obtain import flows data
as part of the CFS, given its current design. These are important data to
have. Beyond their transportation value, which is considerable, they have
great public policy significance. They will permit analysis of U.S.
experience against foreign competition and permit response to questions of
which states and areas are exporting or importing which products.
To overcome these problems, consideration is being given to linking
domestic flow data obtained by survey means with the records obtained
administratively for all imports and exports by the U.S. Customs Service.
Documents collected by the Customs Service and compiled by the Foreign
Trade Division of the Bureau of the Census will be evaluated for their
ability to substitute for survey records regarding points of entry, mode of
transport, and final destination of the imported products. These
documents, required for regulatory and administrative applications, are
increasingly available via EDI as described previously. Melding two
disparate data sets such as these is a significant statistical and data
processing task, but its superiority over the alternatives is overwhelming.
If this approach is successful, it can provide crucial data that would
otherwise be unavailable except at great public cost and respondent burden.
The issue regarding exports parallels the import problem, but because
of the nature of the sampling process, the concern is more one of double
counting and not loss of information. Again, the export document records
of the U.S. Customs Service can provide a major cost saving and data
enhancement opportunity.
These data have many potential uses. A valuable understanding of
future freight trends, for example, is possible if a better sense of the
miles of movement of tonnages of varying products can be calculated and the
mileage "multipliers" associated with a domestic versus a similar imported
product can be constructed. Total ton-miles of travel
160 DATA FOR DECISIONS
per unit of gross national product has been declining in recent years. One
factor that could explain this is that the substitution of foreign imports
for domestic products reduces the total transport requirement (i.e., the
sum of all the ton-miles of steel, plastic, glass, etc. to fabricate a
domestic automobile is far greater than the ton-miles involved in shipping
an import from the dock to the dealer). These substitution effects are
poorly understood, but will have important bearing on future transport
requirements. Ports would also find these data a valuable planning and
marketing tool. State officials are increasingly interested in export and
import activity as part of statewide economic planning. They ask, "What do
we export? Where does it go?" Finally, these data would provide important
information for public policy purposes on the flows of imports and exports
and their impacts on transportation, employment, and the general economy.
The importance of these data for the needs of the Secretary of DOT is wide
ranging. The secretary has made better commodity flow information a data
development priority (DOT 1990, 124). The secretary's main interest in
commodity flow information is expansion of the department's ability to
monitor intermodal freight movements and address national freight movement
capacity issues. The current interest in the role of intermodal flows is a
significant part of the considerations surrounding pending legislation on
surface transportation. Moreover, the secretary recognizes the need for a
set of general purpose freight data to respond to unknown and unanticipated
freight-related policy issues in the future. Ancillary interests include
systems performance inputs, ports utilization information, and foreign
trade flow information. If these data can be obtained quickly, at lower
cost, and with less respondent burden, the objectives of the secretary will
be materially enhanced.
TECHNOLOGIES FOR DATA ANALYSIS:
GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS
No discussion of technologies for data collection and analysis would be
complete without mention of geographic information systems (GIS). Although
GIS have been in existence for decades and thus are not technically a "new"
technology, their full capabilities only began to be exploited in the past
decade as a result of development in computing capabilities (e.g., the
personal computer and computer graphics).
GIS are computer-based data systems with a strong spatial component in
which data elements are identified by their spatial location and
Appendix B 161
are organized, manipulated, and displayed in spatial terms, generally maps.
(Data may be represented spatially as points, lines, or areas.) GIS consist
of five essential elements: data acquisition, preprocessing, data
management, manipulation, and analysis (Star and Estes 1990). The systems
allow for the integration of spatial geographic data with descriptive
analytic data.
Transportation is one of the most spatial of information areas and
thus lends itself to GIS applications. GIS provide a powerful tool for
overlaying modal data to make intermodal comparisons and analyze systemwide
impacts of changes in the demand or supply of transportation services. The
development of a data base - the national transportation network data
base - integrated into a GIS for strategic transportation defense planning
is described in Chapter 3. Another GIS application for policy analysis
would be to produce maps linking highway, rail, and waterway transportation
routes with commodity flow data on these routes. By overlaying these data,
analysts could readily see the effect of modifying flow rates and the
impact this would have on the entire system. Constraints on various parts
of the system could be imposed to further understand the impacts of changes
in freight flows.
Another application might focus on safety. Accident data on the var-
ious transportation systems could be merged with exposure data over time,
and a visual image of the multimodal safety of the system could be
constructed. Then, the effects of modifying the exposure by changing
traffic flows, for example, could be modeled to show the impact that such
changes would have on the safety of the entire system.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Just as DOT's multimodal data needs have been neglected, so have research
activities on methods to collect and analyze data more cost effectively.
The opportunities and the needs at this time could not be greater. Major
policy questions are being raised. If the data development capabilities of
such new technological programs as EDI and IVHS are recognized at this
early stage, they can be effectively incorporated into the long-term
structure of these programs. A number of questions should be answered:
- What new technological advances in the transportation sector can
prospectively provide opportunities for enhanced data development and
analysis?
162 DATA FOR DECISIONS
- How can these new technological developments help
- reduce the costs of data collection, processing, and analysis?
- speed data collection and reporting?
- reduce reporting burdens?
- enhance the quality and utility of data and analysis?
To address these questions, the department should conduct a thorough
survey and review of the potential application of advanced technologies for
improved data collection and analysis. It should incorporate into the
department's own IVHS R&D program the goal of analyzing the data collection
potential of design, planning, and monitoring information. DOT should give
priority consideration to opportunities for the use of administrative
records, EDI in particular, as an enhanced means of rapid, inexpensive data
collection. Finally, the department should expedite development of its GIS
capabilities for multimodal data analysis.
REFERENCES
Cram, V. S. 1990. The Growing Internationalization of EDI. EDI
Visions. Electronic Data Interchange Association, Alexandria, Va.
DOT. 1990. Moving America: New Directions, New Opportunities: A
Statement of National Transportation Policy Strategies for Action. Feb.,
129 pp.
Farrell, M., and A. Radspieler. 1990. Origin of Merchandise Exports
Data. Proc. 1990 Annual Research Conference, Bureau of the Census,
Washington, D.C., March.
Star, J., and J. Estes. 1990. Geographic Information Systems: An
Introduction. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 303 pp.
TRB. 1991. Special Report 232: Advanced Vehicle and Highway
Technologies. National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
Willenz, N. V. 1988. Electronic Data Interchange: A Quiet Revolution.
Price Waterhouse, Chicago, 111.
Study Committee
Biographical Information
Lillian C. Liburdi, Chair, is Director of the Port Department of The Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey, where she also has served as Director
of the Management and Budget Department, Acting Chief Financial Officer,
and Assistant Director of the Aviation Department. Before joining the Port
Authority, Ms. Liburdi served as Deputy and Associate Administrator of the
Urban Mass Transportation Administration. She received her bachelor's
degree in political science from American University and her master's
degree in engineering from Manhattan College. Ms. Liburdi is on the Board
of Directors of the American Association of Port Authorities, is an elected
member of the National Academy of Public Administration, and is a member of
the International Association of Ports and Harbors, the American Public
Transit Association, and the American Society for Public Administration.
She is a member and past president of the Women's Transportation Seminar
(WTS), and received the WTS Woman of the Year Award in 1989. She was named
Woman of the Year by the Ironbound Manufacturers Association in 1991. Ms.
Liburdi served on the advisory panels of the Office of Technology
Assessment's studies of motor carrier and aviation safety, chaired the
recent Transportation Research Board (TRB) Task Force on Women's
Involvement in TRB and in Transportation, and was a member of the Marine
Transportation Task Force of the TRB Executive Committee.
Brian J. L. Berry is the Lloyd Viel Berkner University Professor, Professor
of Political Economy, and Director of the Bruton Center for Development
Studies at The University of Texas at Dallas. He received his bachelor of
science in economics from University College, London, and his M.A. and
Ph.D. in geography from the University of Washington. Dr. Berry began his
career as Assistant Professor at the University of Chicago, where he became
Irving B. Harris Professor of
163
164 DATA FOR DECISIONS
Urban Geography, Chairman of the Department of Geography, and Director of
the Center for Urban Studies. Dr. Berry held academic positions at Harvard
University as Williams Professor of City and Regional Planning, Director of
the Laboratory for Computer Graphics and Spatial Analysis, Professor in the
Department of Sociology, and Faculty Fellow of the Harvard Institute for
International Development. He then became Dean of the School of Urban and
Public Affairs and University Professor of Urban Studies and Public Policy
at Carnegie Mellon University. Dr. Berry is a member of the National
Academy of Sciences, a Fellow of the Urban Land Institute and the American
Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a founding member of the American
Institute of Certified Planners. In 1987 he was elected Fellow of the
American Association for the Advancement of Science and was awarded the
James R. Anderson Medal of Honor by the Association of American
Geographers. In 1988 he received the Victoria Medal from the Royal
Geographic Society.
Joseph W. Duncan received his bachelor of science in mechanical engineering
from Case Institute of Technology, his M.B.A. from Harvard University, and
his Ph.D. in economics from Ohio State University. Dr. Duncan is Vice
President of The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation, where he also serves as the
Corporate Economist and Chief Statistician. He was previously Chief
Statistician for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the
Office of Management and Budget, where he was responsible for national
statistical policy. He also served as the U.S. representative to and
Chairman of the United Nations Statistical Commission, and as Director of
the Office of Federal Statistical Policy and Standards at the U.S.
Department of Commerce. Dr. Duncan is an elected member of the Conference
of Business Economists and serves as Vice President of the International
Association for Official Statistics, a section of the International Statis-
tical Institute. He is past President and Chairman of the National
Economists Club, a Fellow of the American Statistical Association, and
founding Chairman of the Statistics Committee of the National Association
of Business Economists.
Gary R. Fauth received his bachelor of arts in economics from Yale
University and his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University. He is a
Vice President in Charles River Associates' Transportation and Regional
Economics Program and has experience in a broad range of freight and
passenger transportation issues. Before joining Charles
Study Committee 165
River Associates, Dr. Fauth held several positions at Dun & Bradstreet
Technical Economic Services, including General Manager, Vice President of
Product Development and Management, and Director of Client Services. He
previously was Director of Economics and Strategic Planning for Union
Pacific Corporation, Assistant Deputy Director of the Office of Policy and
Analysis of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and Assistant and Associate
Professor at the Schools of Government and Design at Harvard University.
Dr. Fauth is an Economic Policy Fellow of the Brookings Institution.
Douglas C. Frechtling received his bachelor of arts in economics from
Hamilton College and his Ph.D. in economics from George Washington
University. He is a consultant in tourism analysis and marketing and an
Adjunct Associate Professor in the Graduate Program in Tourism Management
at George Washington University. Dr. Frechtling was founding Director and
Chief Executive Officer of the U.S. Travel Data Center, where he directed
the development of the National Travel Expenditure Model; numerous surveys
of travel behavior, including the Data Center's National Travel Survey; and
the annual Economic Review of Travel in America. Before that, he served as
Deputy Assistant to three secretaries of the U.S. Treasury and was on the
staff of the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress. Dr. Frechtling
is the founding Chairman and Director of the Washington Metropolitan Area
Chapter of the Travel and Tourism Research Association, a Fellow of the
Tourism Society, and a member of the Association of Travel Marketing
Executives, the American Economics Association, and the National
Association of Business Economists.
Richard S. Golaszewski received his bachelor of science in accounting from
La Salle College and his M. PA. in public sector management and finance
from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He is the
Executive Vice President of Gellman Research Associates, Inc. (GRA) and has
almost 15 years experience in consulting and specialized expertise in
aviation economics, safety, and public policy. Mr. Golaszewski was a
lecturer in the La Salle College M.B.A. Program and at the Wharton School.
He is a member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
and serves on its economics technical committee. He also is a member of
the Air Traffic Control Association and cofounder and president of the
Aviation Chapter of the Transportation Research Forum.
166 DATA FOR DECISIONS
George E. Hall is President of the Base Line Data Corporation, a
statistical consulting firm, and President of Slater Hall Information
Products. He was Associate Director for Demographic Fields of the U.S.
Bureau of the Census and previously held government positions as Deputy
Director of the Office of Federal Statistical Policy and Standards of the
Office of Management and Budget, Assistant Administrator of the Law
Enforcement Assistance Administration, and Director of the National
Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service. Mr. Hall holds a
bachelor's degree in economics from Howard University. He is a member of
the American Statistical Association and Past President of the Washington
Statistical Society.
William B. Johnston is Vice President for Special Projects at the Hudson
Institute. Before joining the Hudson Institute, he was Director of Public
Policy Research for the Conference Board and Assistant Secretary for Policy
and International Affairs at the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT),
where he chaired the administration's interagency task force that guided
the passage of rail and trucking deregulation legislation. Before his
service with DOT, Mr. Johnston was Associate Director of the White House
Policy Staff and a Research Fellow at the George Washington University
Center for Social Policy Studies. Mr. Johnston holds a bachelor's degree
in English literature from Yale University.
Ronald F. Kirby received his bachelor of science and Ph.D. in applied
mathematics from the University of Adelaide, South Australia. He is
Director of Transportation Planning for the Metropolitan Washington Council
of Governments. Dr. Kirby began his career in the United States as a
Senior Research Associate with Planning Research Corporation. He joined
the Urban Institute as a Senior Research Associate and became a Principal
Research Associate and Director of Transportation Studies. Dr. Kirby is a
member of the Operations Research Society of America, past member of TRB's
Division A Council, and past Chairman of Group I Council for Transportation
Systems Planning and Administration.
Edith B. Page is a Senior Associate with the Office of Technology
Assessment of the U.S. Congress, where she has conducted studies on a broad
range of transportation topics, including motor carrier and aviation
safety, and transportation of hazardous materials. She previously worked
at Public Technology, Inc. in research positions of in-
Study Committee 167
creasing responsibility. Ms. Page holds a bachelor of arts degree in
English literature from Oberlin College and a master's degree in English
literature from Columbia University. She is a member of WTS, liaison
member to the DOT National Motor Carrier Advisory Committee, and a member
of the National Academy of Public Administration's committee to review
DOT's National Transportation Strategy. She is also a member of TRB's
Committee on Hazardous Materials.
Olga J. Pendleton holds a bachelor of science degree in mathematics and
biology from the University of South Alabama and a master's degree and
Ph.D. in biometry and statistics from Emory University. She is a Research
Statistician and Program Manager of the Statistical Analysis and Research
Program at the Texas Transportation Institute, and Visiting Professor in
the Department of Statistics at Texas A&M University. Dr. Pendleton
previously was an Assistant Biometrician with the Department of
Biomathematics at the University of Texas System Cancer Center, Assistant
Professor of Statistics and Computer Science at the University of Georgia,
and Assistant Professor of Computer Science and Statistics at Mississippi
State University. Her current research is on traffic accident analysis.
Dr. Pendleton is a Fellow of the American Statistical Association and a
representative to the Board of Directors. She chairs the TRB Task Force on
Statistical Methods in Transportation, is a member of TRB's committees on
Methodology for Evaluating Highway Improvements and on Traffic Records and
Accident Analysis, and is a former member of the TRB study committee on the
Benefits and Costs of Alternative Federal Blood Alcohol Concentration
Standards for Vehicle Operators.
Henry L. Peyrebrune received a bachelor of science degree in civil
engineering from Purdue University and a certificate in traffic engineering
from the Bureau of Highway Traffic at Yale University. Mr. Peyrebrune is
Assistant Commissioner for the Office of Transportation Policy and Public
Transportation of the New York State Department of Transportation (NY DOT).
He has held numerous positions of increasing responsibility with NY DOT,
including Head of the Program Analysis Bureau, Acting Director of
Transportation Planning, and Director of Transportation Planning and
Research. Mr. Peyrebrune is a licensed professional engineer in New York
State. He is a member of several professional organizations, including the
Standing Committee on Planning of the American Association of State Highway
and Trans-
168 DATA FOR DECISIONS
portation Officials (AASHTO). He was heavily involved in both the TRB -
and AASHTO-sponsored 2020 projects.
Theodore H. Poister received his bachelor of arts degree in political
science, master's degree in public administration, and Ph.D. in social
science from Syracuse University. He is Professor of Public Administration
and Director of the Institute of Public Administration at Georgia State
University and Interim Chairman of the Department of Urban Studies. Dr.
Poister was Assistant and then Associate Professor of Public Administration
at the Pennsylvania State University and Assistant Professor of Economics
at Southern University. He is a member of the American Society for Public
Administration, the Policy Studies Organization, the Association for Public
Policy Analysis and Management, the Urban Affairs Association, and the
Academy of Management.
Jenifer Wishart holds a bachelor of economics degree from the University of
Queensland, Australia. Ms. Wishart is Vice President of U.S. Operations
for Hickling Corporation, a consulting firm specializing in transportation
economics. She previously served as Chief of the Public Investment Unit of
the Congressional Budget Office and a Transport Economist at the World
Bank. While she lived in Australia, Ms. Wishart worked as an economist for
the Air Transport Policy Branch of the Australian Department of Transport
and for the Australian Department of Labour and National Service. Ms.
Wishart is Chair of TRB's Committee on Taxation, Finance and Pricing, a
member of the International Chapter of the Transportation Research Forum,
and Treasurer of the American Water Resources Association.
The Transportation Research Board is a unit of the National Research
Council, which serves the National Academy of Sciences and the National
Academy of Engineering. The Board's purpose is to stimulate research
concerning the nature and performance of transportation systems, to
disseminate the information produced by the research, and to encourage the
application of appropriate research findings. The Board's program is
carried out by more than 300 committees, task forces, and panels composed
of more than 3,700 administrators, engineers, social scientists, attorneys,
educators, and others concerned with transportation; they serve without
compensation. The program is supported by state transportation and highway
departments, the modal administrations of the U.S. Department of
Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in he
development of transportation.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-
perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and
engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and
technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of
the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a
mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and
technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National Academy of
Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the
charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of
outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the
selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the
responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy
of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national
needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior
achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the
National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National
Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of
appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to
the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility
given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to
be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to
identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Stuart
Bondurant is acting president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of
Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology
with the Academy's purpose of furthering knowledge and advising the federal
government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by
the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both
the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in
providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and
engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the
Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M.
White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National
Research Council.
.
