The next step in the process is for the resolution to be approved by AASHTO's Executive Board. It is scheduled to be voted on at the November Board of Director's Meeting.

Once approved, the process would be similar to that used for the 1990 CTPP production. The cost of the CTPP 2000 program for each state would be 1.1-cents per person (using Census' July 2000 State Population Projections). The 1990 CTPP cost was 1-cent per person.

The current goal is to have comments back from the Urban and Statewide Data Committees by the end of October for a "2nd Draft", then send out to all State DOTs and MPOs for their comments later this Fall. The "3rd Draft", or near final, version would then be discussed at January's TRB Annual Meeting before being finalized and submitted to the Census Population Division.

"Alpha test" - October 15: copies to be loaded onto operating systems at DOT (Tom Mank, Elaine Murakami, Jerry Everett and Wende O'Neill), the Census Bureau (Phil Salopek and Todd Blair), and CATS (Ed Christopher) for their review and comments.

"Beta Test" - November 20: copies to two MPOs for their review and comments. The two MPOs who have agreed to "beta" test the TAZ-UP process are Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (Cleveland) and Capitol Region Council of Governments (Hartford).

A letter will be sent to all FHWA Division Offices requesting information on their respective MPOs / DOTs' system capabilities for performing "digital" updates and submittals of TAZ delineations for their region. If the agency does have the capability to provide digital TAZ submittals, they are asked whether or not they will need a copy of ArcView 3.1, which will be supplied to those agencies who don't already have it.   [See related article in this newsletter]

1. How did the 1990 census classify job activity/kind of work?
    The 1990 census recognized three dimensions:

• industrial class (the overall purpose of the business establishment);
• occupational class (the kind of work done in the individual job);
• class of worker (the organization's ownership).

2. How has census data on kind of work supported transportation planning?

• provided the small-area spatial distribution of workers by type, both by residence and by workplace;
• quantified inter-censal small-area change in employment, allowing the forecasting of future employment distribution by kind of work;
• facilitated the spatial allocation of non-geocodable workers.

Problems in locating jobs:

•  job location was impacted by geocoding errors and allocation inaccuracies;
• that translated into incorrect commuting trip destinations;
• inter-censal job location trends were distorted.

• jobs assigned to a single industrial class involved a variety of establishment types, e.g. manufacturing included factories, warehouses, research and development facilities, administrative offices, etc.;
• because each industrial class combined various land uses, the modeling of small-area employment location encountered apparently conflicting locational determinants;
• land use mixes made the linking of census data to non-census data on land and buildings a "make do" compromise.

The biggest change is the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Facts about NAICS:

• the official national industrial classification system replacing SIC;
• many SIC classes were split up and regrouped;
• has many new classes for new industries;
• has abolished the SIC concept of auxiliaries.

5. What new problems does Census 2000 present for employment data about kind of work?

A. Assigning appropriate NAICS-based codes:  Census 2000 industry questions are nearly identical to those of 1990. Many workers in what SIC called auxiliaries - the administrative offices, warehouses, research and development facilities, etc. that support the operations of a firm's other establishments - will give a "big picture" answer describing the firm's overall purpose. However, NAICS requires that such workers be assigned to such classes as "Management of Companies and Enterprises," "Warehousing," "Research and Development," etc.

B. Noncomparability of employment by industrial class, 1990 vs. 2000:  Since 1990 census industrial codes are SIC-based, and 2000 census codes will be NAICS-based, 1990 and 2000 employment by industry class will not be comparable.

C. Land use class is still to some extent a missing dimension.  NAICS is a major improvement in employment data, in that its classes correspond much better to land use types, including those of the ITE Traffic Generation manual. However, a minority of NAICS classes (e.g., construction, wholesale trade, educational services) still mix land uses.

6. What new opportunities does Census 2000 present for employment data about kind of work?

A. Correct assignment of NAICS codes.  The Census Bureau plans to match employer names and workplace addresses given in Census 2000 questionnaire responses against an employer/establishment list, and thereby directly assign NAICS codes. For unmatchable or missing responses, NAICS codes could be imputed using kind of work and workplace location.

B. Comparability of employment by industrial class, 1990 and 2000.  If the list used for matching has both SIC and NAICS codes, workers can be automatically double coded, and then facilitate double coding of unmatchable workers.

C. A full classification of workers by land use class.  Use NAICS where unequivocal regarding land use, and imputation based upon industry, occupation, and class of worker for the remaining cases.

7. What does transportation planning need?

Census 2000 employment data could meet these objectives:

A. Correct geocoding:  Achieve a higher rate of tract/block geocoding, supplemented by a fallback geocoding procedure by whole TAZs (traffic analysis zones).

B. Accurate Allocation:  For ungeocodable workers, use an improved allocation procedure that makes maximum use of trip characteristics and detailed industrial class, occupational class, and class of worker.

C. 1990 to 2000 comparability:  Classify Census 2000 employment to an SIC-based system, to allow comparison to 1990, or else (considering 1990 shortcomings) assign NAICS codes to 1990 census records, using imputation based upon worker characteristics.

D. Correct NAICS-based classification:  Use a method that correctly codes workers to NAICS.

E. Land use classification:  Use NAICS, plus other data items, to assign land use classes to all workers.

For information on improving the geographic allocation of ungeocodable workers and on assigning land use classes to workers in the decennial census see Ed Limoges' two papers in Conference Proceedings 13 - Decennial Census Data for Transportation Planning: Case Studies and Strategies for 2000, Volume 2: Case Studies, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1997, pp. 33-57.

The above is an abbreviated version of an article which appeared in the American Planning Association's latest Transportation Division Newsletter.

I opened the meeting by distributing the minutes from our inaugural meeting in January. Officially, our minutes are distributed as part of the minutes of our parent committee (Committee on Urban Data and Information Systems), but they can also be accessed at:
http://www.TRBcensus.com/minutes/0198trb.html.

We then acknowledged the CTPP 2000 Planning Group that has representatives on it from FHWA, FTA, BTS and the Census Bureau and has been meeting on a regular basis since February, 1998 to scope out the CTPP 2000. As readers of the CTPP 2000 Status Report know, this group has been very active planning the CTPP 2000 package and purchase, the TAZ definition program and work place coding.

Following our introductions, Bob LaMacchia of the Census Bureau Geography Division presented us with an overview of the Census 2000 plans and distributed copies of the Dress Rehearsal and American Community Survey (ACS) questionnaire forms. One item of note that the Subcommittee will be watching is the wording of the transportation questions on the ACS. It was noted that on the ACS questionnaire form, all the public transportation sub­modes are grouped under one box called "public transportation". On the Dress Rehearsal form, the transportation­related questions were exactly as they had been reported in past issues of the CTPP 2000 Status Report.

After Bob assured us that there would be a 2000 Census, we discussed the CTPP 2000 Package and its purchase. Jerry Everett, FHWA, informed us that in June, the AASHTO Standing Committee on Planning (SCOP) passed a resolution to coordinate the purchase of the 2000 CTPP tabulations through the pooled fund process. This resolution will next go to the AASHTO Executive Committee for their approval. Following up on this purchase, Elaine Murakami, FHWA, and I discussed the process and items to be considered when determining the content of CTPP 2000.

Other issues discussed included the TAZ definition program lead by Elaine Murakami; work place geocoding by Jerry Everett; the new employment classification system, NAICS by Ed Limoges, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (note his article starting on page 3 of this report); and, the activities underway regarding the American Community Survey. More detailed information on these and many more issues can be found in past issues of the CTPP 2000 Status Report located on our web site at:
http://www.TRBcensus.com/.

Finally, those who are interested in keeping apprised of the CTPP 2000 activities are encouraged to join our electronic mailing list by sending an E-mail to majordomo@chrispy.com with the words "subscribe ctpp­news" in the body of the message.

Ed Christopher
Chair, Subcommittee on Census Data for Transportation Planning

Participating MPOs / DOTs will receive a version of TIGER/Line98 file for digitizing changes / additions to their TAZs and, after running the step-by-step processes in "TAZ-UP", will end up with a polygon-to-TAZ equivalency file in the appropriate format submit to the Census Geography Division.

• Software is based on ArcView GIS from ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.).

•  Displays the TAZ TIGER/Line98 1990 TAZ boundaries and reference layers.
• Assigns census polygons to create digital representations of Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs).
• Generates a census polygon-to-TAZ equivalency file for submission of TAZ boundaries to the Census Geography Division.
• Generates a TAZ Names file in the required format with the appropriate Discriminator code and Relationship flags.

• Automated Edit Check function: ensures that TAZ boundaries form a continuous chain and consist only of "acceptable" census boundaries - specified as Class A (Road), Class B (Railroad), Class C (Misc.), Class D (Physical), Class F (Nonvisible), etc.
• Locator function: displays an index map showing where on the large map an area captured in a close-up view is located.
• Identify function: enables users to display feature names, address ranges, TLIDs (TIGER/Line identification numbers), and CFCCs (Census Feature Classification Codes) by pointing to a geographic feature, such as a road, river, or railroad.
• Search function: enables users to locate a geographic feature on the map by typing the feature's TLID.

• Services or a software utility to convert the TAZ TIGER/Line files to ARC/INFO coverages for ArcView GIS.
• Services or software to "conflate" a TIGER/Line file with files from another GIS and to generate TAZ polygons for import to the TAZ TIGER/Line database.

• User manual for MPO personnel.
• Software support to MPO personnel performing TAZ activities.
• Staff geographers available to perform TAZ activities under contract with an MPO, on-site or at company offices.

Census Population Division (JTW questions)

Census Geography Division (for TAZ update questions)

Todd Blair  PH: 301-457-1099  FAX: 301-457-4710  toddblair@quickmail.geo.census.gov

Bob LaMacchia PH: 301-457-1022 FAX: 301-457-4710 rlamac@census.gov

FHWA

Tom Mank (2000 CTPP Status questions)  PH: 202-366-4087  FAX: 202-366-7660  Tom.Mank@fhwa.dot.gov

Elaine Murakami  PH: 202-366-6971  FAX: 202-366-7742  Elaine.Murakami@fhwa.dot.gov

Jerry Everett  PH: 202-366-4079  FAX: 202-366-3713  Jerry.Everett@fhwa.dot.gov

BTS

Wende O'Neill  PH: 202-366-8876  FAX: 202-366-3640  E-mail: wende.oneill@bts.gov