As has been hinted at for several days, the UNC System will take a closer look at the pro-CATS transit study released by UNCC two months ago. As we have said for all those weeks, there remain many open questions about how the University's Center for Transportation Policy Studies came to do the study. However, let's set those to the side and again try to focus on the merits of the study. Or the lack thereof. From the very outset, even without reference to how the study came to be, it was clear the study was extraordinarily weak. At most -- at most -- and accepting the questionable data set the study opted to use, the study merely showed CATS to be just about as horrible as all its other peers in the public transit field. Big deal. But, of course, the data set is very questionable. No way Seattle's underground light rail project should be compared to Charlotte's surface plans. No way that the study should omit newer light rail construction from its comparison while including systems running since 1986. No way projects using new, more expensive exclusive right-of-way like Dallas should be compared to CATS and what should be the cheaper re-use of existing right-of-way. And the errors! That UNCC, the Chamber, and CATS all missed the errors in this report should have any fan of light wondering about the core competence of their champions.