TRB Committee AD150 MINUTES

Mid-Year Meeting/NATMEC at the Rosen Plaza May 15, 2002

I. Introductions and Round Robin

Gene Wolf - GEOSTATS

• Caltrans GPS add-on will be presented at TRB annual meeting
• Wearable GPS for physical activity in Atlanta along with a multi-day weekend/weekday GPS activity study for 75 households

David Pearson - TTI

• Laredo HH survey with GPS component
• Workplace survey and commercial vehicle surveys for Laredo planned
• Travel time and delay on routes which cover the study area
• Statewide Travel Demand Model (SAM) using NHTS data on rural areas
• Analysis with NHTS will be done by Alliance Texas and Wilbur Smith
• Video component for border crossing study raised concerns by politicians, but overall response rate for mail-out mail-back was about 15%

Nancy McGuckin - Consultant

• Pittsburgh Establishment Survey

Johanna Zmud -NuStats

• Two analytical Projects: 1) St. Louis looking at non-response 2) Geostats looking at GPS with prompted recall
• Looking at demographics of web responders for SCAG, St Louis, Atlanta

Joy Sharp - BTS

• Co-managing NHTS

Ed Christopher - FHWA Resource Center -and- Laurie Wargelin - MORPACE

• Add-on for NHTS in 7 areas just coming to completion
• NCDOT travel survey
• California Vehicle Survey pretest complete and starting study of hybrid vehicle acceptance

Jennifer Russo - Morpace -and- Ben Pierce - Battelle

• NHTS since 1998

Gene Bandy - Baltimore MPO -and- Mark Schlappi - Maricopa Council of Governments

• Looking at shared ride trips for HOV vs. Arterial vs. other roads

Mark Lepkofski - Battelle

II. Future Direction and Member Feedback

Membership

• Need current roster of membership - open for five new members, need two under 30 yrs. Members can be nominated between now and TRB to become members for 2003.

Committee Scope

• Need to remember that not all of our attention should be on household travel surveys, we should also focus on direct measurement and statistical approaches

Meeting Time?

• Usually Monday night...need feedback on when, and how
• Need pizza - not in the hotel's rules, but better to apologize than ask permission

Website Update:

• Will place current roster of Members on web
• Bio needed with contacts: If we collect resumes from all members we can review and create paragraphs. Easier for members to review than create a bio.
• TRB standards for papers will go up on the web
• Updated list of Conferences. Make sure and include: 1) Applications Planning in Baton Rouge -and- 2) ATBR in August in Switzerland

Next mid-year meeting (2003) April 6th at Planning Applications? Most of the mid-year meetings will be in Portland in July - we will discuss at annual meeting.

III. Paper Review Process

Current review process:

• Submitted August 1
• Reviewed by September 30

A standards document might make it easier to review (and reject) papers. Now that paper review is on the web, detailed standards for review may not be as available to committee members as when the standards were on the back of the paper form

Proposed Action Steps:

• Need to examine process because there is too much variance in quality of papers accepted for presentation. Need to notify reviewing members whether paper(s) they reviewed were accepted. Perhaps we should provide feedback to committee reviewers after first review by offering a copy of the re-edited paper to those members that reviewed it in the first place
• TRB shuts the paper review software down about September - need to add another step to allow this second step to close the loop. We should make recommendations to TRB if we find that the case.

TRB has paper review standards - Nancy McGuckin and David Pearson agreed to begin the review of current standards. Will get paper copies with current standards, and send those out to the committee members. With a couple of other members we can look at them and make recommendations

1. changes to the standards
2. process? How many reviewers, do reviewers see the papers after comment period, close the loop on reject/accept

Other topics related to Paper Review:

• Poster sessions: another presentation session, can also mix and match posters and presentations, sometimes posters work better (maps, graphics)
• Call for papers - is it out of our quota for two sessions?
• Competition for sessions is in the prime time, can go over limit of two IF schedule for Wednesday night or Thursday
• Quality check is committee responsibility
• Should papers present results or research?

IV. Committee Ambassadors

Want to establish a regular and formal approach to liaison with other committees. A tentative list of committees and possible ambassadors include:

• Urban Data (Ed Christopher)
• Census (David Pearson)
• Planning Applications Committee (Gene Bandy)
• Small and Medium (Stacey Bricka)
• Time Use and Activity Methods (?)
• Statewide (?)
• Transit Marketing and Fare Policy (?)
• Transit Service Quality (?)
• Spatial Data - GIS Applications Committee (?)

V. Call for papers

Co-sponsor session with Urban Data Committee on GPS results (not from Battelle or Geostats) - look for Universities, European experience

Jean Woilf will send a draft call for papers out next week for review.

• Time Use and Activity Patterns
• Examples and experiences - AAPOR, BLS need people out of the norm
• Try to get outside the box on what is being done in Transportation

Presentations

Ben Pierce Battelle, SCAG GPS Interim Findings

Jean Wolf CALTRANS Statewide GPS

TRB Home | OHPI Home | OHPI Feedback