Home

Longer Combination Vehicles on Exclusive Truck Lanes: Interstate 90 Corridor Case Study

Appendix A. Alternative Estimation of Candidate Trucks Diverted to LCVs

Three factors support estimates of the candidate trucks for diversion: 1) truck weight; 2) commodity data; and 3) shipment origin-destination data from the FAF2. The U.S. DOT’s Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study identified commodities and trip distances most likely to support LCV use. The study recognizes that short-haul (under 200 miles) five-axle single-trailer truck operations tend to be affected by increases in truck weight more than truck size because they handle high-density materials, and thus are less likely to divert to LCVs. (U.S. DOT Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study, Volume 3, August 2000.) The remainder of five-axle tractor semi trailers operations are long-haul (more than 200 miles), and tend to be impacted by increases in truck size more than truck weight, as packaged finished goods are low density. In addition, if a shipment is destined for more than 200 miles, the costs of delaying to obtain a full load and costs of coupling and decoupling the LCV are overcome. While there are exceptions for some shippers and commodities, shipments less than 200 miles generally will not utilize LCVs.

I-90/I-271 Candidate Truck Approach

A ‘select link’ analysis method was utilized with an FAF2 network assignment to select the candidate vehicles based on trip length, commodity type, and vehicle weight. The select link locations included the following:

• I-90 east of I-79 in Pennsylvania; and
• I-271 south of the I-90 interchange in Ohio.

With the data obtained in the select link queries, the three filters were applied (distance, commodity, and weight) to identify the candidate truck trips for diversion:

1. Distance Filter. Trip lengths of 200 miles or more are a source of potentially divertible trucks as per-mile shipping costs typically decrease with trip distance, making LCV operations more attractive to longer-haul shipments.
2. Commodity Filter. Low-density commodities, including plastics, metals, machinery, transportation, equipment, and miscellaneous commodities. These represent aggregated groups from FAF2 commodity data. Applying these two filters to the select links, the following candidate truck trips were captured (for all the trip length is greater than 200 miles):
   1. 46.5 percent of combination trucks on I-90 in Pennsylvania carry low density commodities in 2002;
   2. 55.6 percent of combination trucks on I-90 in Pennsylvania carry low density commodities in 2040;
   3. 45.6 percent of combination trucks on I-90/I-271 in Ohio carry low density commodities in 2002; and
   4. 52.8 percent of combination trucks on I-90/I-271 in Ohio carry low-density commodities in 2040.

3. Weight Filter (using maximum gross vehicle weight (MGVW)). The third filter isolates the share of combination trucks traveling at an MGVW range that would benefit from an increase in truck size and weight limits. This data is from the FHWA VTRIS W5 reports on I-80/Pennsylvania Turnpike near State College, Pennsylvania. The W5 report shows the number of trucks weighed in various gross weight ranges, total average vehicles weighed, and total average vehicles counted.

   The I-80 truck size and weight VTRIS data in Pennsylvania is used as a surrogate value for I-90 given the proximity, potential for similar trip characteristics and some overlaps in origin-destination pairs. There is no readily available truck size and weight data for the I-90 corridor in Ohio, Pennsylvania, or New York. Using this data, 43.5 percent of trucks are at or above 80 percent of the maximum gross vehicle weight (80,000 pounds for 5+ axle trailer combinations).

   The result is 20.2 percent of thru truck trips on I-90 in Pennsylvania and 19.9 percent of all truck trips on I-90 and I-271 in Ohio meeting the three filters.

I-90 Pennsylvania Origin/Destination Candidate Truck Adjustment

FAF2 zonal geography makes precise truck origins and destinations in the I-90 corridor in Pennsylvania difficult to ascertain (i.e., the FAF2 zone encompasses all of the state outside of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia). To overcome this challenge, the share of combination truck trips originating or terminating in the Erie portion of the FAF2 Zone is estimated using Pennsylvania DOT classification counts and ramp counts. The result of this analysis shows that 39 percent of class 5+ trucks on I-90 in Pennsylvania have a trip end in the Erie region. To identify the candidate trucks from the total I-90 trucks with Pennsylvania trip ends, the following filters were applied:

• Distance Filter. Excludes all trucks to/from adjacent FAF geographies (Pennsylvania Remaining, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Buffalo; all of which have a trip distance of 200 miles or less).
• Commodity Filter. Excludes high-density commodities (Stone, Mineral, petroleum products, chemicals).
• Weight Filter. Same method described above.

The result is 8.6 percent of the Pennsylvania origin/destination truck trips on I-90 meeting the three filters.

Candidate LCV Summary

The estimated corridor ADTT is multiplied by the percentage filters to obtain total candidate trucks for LCV diversion by corridor segment. Table A.1 shows the candidate STTs for diversion. The share of candidate trucks is slightly lower in Pennsylvania as a result of the adjustment to account for truck trips with a Pennsylvania origin or destination (i.e., 16.7 percent in Pennsylvania compared to 19.8 percent in Ohio in 2010).

Table A.1 Candidate Truck Trips for LCV Diversion

	ADTT (2010)	ADTT (2035)	Candidate STTs
			Commodity, Distance, and 80% MGVW
			2010	2035
I-90 at NY State Line	5,258	11,123	880	2,168
I-90 W. of I-86	5,238	11,081	876	2,159
I-90 Between U.S. 19 and I-79	5,388	11,399	901	2,221
I-90 at OH State line	6,551	13,858	1,096	2,701
I-90 at SR 11	7,584	16,045	1,269	3,127
I-90 at I-271	9,679	20,476	1,921	4,700
I-271 N. of U.S. 422	11,219	23,734	2,227	5,448
I-271 S. of I-480	7,375	15,601	1,464	3,581
I-271 Near I-80	5,416	11,457	1,075	2,630

Rail-to-LCV Diversion Details

The main body of this report summarizes the estimation technique and results for potential rail-to-LCV diversion to the new ETL facility. This appendix section supplements the Section 4.3 of the report with additional detail on the rail diversion approach.

Corridor Rail Tonnage Estimates

There are two sources for corridor rail tonnage. The first data source evaluated was the FAF2 database for selected origin/destination pairs that presumably use the I-90 corridor in Pennsylvania and Ohio (for example, New England states to the Midwest/North Central/Great Lakes region). These rail O/D pairs were identified in part from the origin and destination pairs from the highway select link analysis. From the evaluation of those FAF2 O/D pairs, the estimates are as follows: for 2010, 10.97 million tons annually with an estimated rail tonnage mode share of 18.4 percent in the corridor study area.

The other source of data for rail tonnage in the corridor is from the Erie County 2030 Transportation Plan, approved by the Erie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in July 2007. (Erie County 2030 Transportation Plan, Erie Metropolitan Planning Organization, July 2007.) The plan’s existing conditions report presents data regarding the two Class I freight railroads in Erie County: CSX and NS. The CSX and NS rail lines run parallel to each other along Lake Erie, north of I 90. CSX’s Chicago line and Lakeshore subdivision meet at Erie; and this portion of the line carries 113 million gross tons annually, generating approximately 70 trains per day over the Erie line. The NS’ line carries 27 million gross tons annually, and generates approximately 25 trains per day through Erie.

The CSX and NS data are 10 times greater than the FAF analysis indicates. Due to the macro level of analysis generated with FAF data and uncertainties in origin-destination pairs that use the corridor, this study used the Erie MPO data to set a baseline rail tonnage estimate. To develop the growth to 2040, the FAF2 data for the corridor was used to increase in corridor rail tonnage between 2010 and 2040. This growth percentage is applied to the baseline data to obtain an estimate of 2040 rail tonnage.

The rail diversion results for both the high and low diversion estimates assume that the baseline rail tonnage data at Erie is 93 percent through-trips (i.e., low trip origin or destination activity between Cleveland and the New York State line). This assumption is based on the following information about local (study area) rail trip ends.

1. The major rail shipment origins in the corridor between Buffalo and Cleveland are the Port of Erie (Pennsylvania), Port of Conneaut (Ohio), and Port of Ashtabula (Ohio). In total, according to data from the Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center for 2006, these three ports handle 15.3 million short tons of freight annually. (2006 Waterborne Commerce of the United States, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers)
2. According to the Erie County 2030 Transportation Plan, in 2006 O N Minerals, the current operator of the Mountfort Terminal at the Port of Erie imported approximately 1,200,000 tons of aggregates, sand, salt, shingles, steel beams, and heavy lift items through the Port. Of these products, 1,130,000 tons (94 percent) were distributed by truck and the balance (6 percent) by rail.
3. The Ashtabula and Conneaut Ports primarily handle coal (58 percent of total traffic). According to FAF2 data, coal is shipped by rail two times as often as by truck. Using this relationship for these Ports results in an estimate of 5.42 million tons of coal distributed by rail.
4. Based on the above data, 67 percent of coal and 6 percent of all other commodities transferred at the Ohio and Pennsylvania Lake Erie Ports use rail. This results in an estimate of 5.9 million tons, or about 7 percent of total rail tonnage through the corridor with a trip origin or destination at these three ports.
5. Gross tons from the Erie MPO are converted to net annual 87.5 million tons.

National FAF2 data for rail indicates 9.5 percent of all rail tonnage is low-density commodities (same commodities as defined for trucks). For this analysis, it is assumed that these are the candidate rail shipments for diversion to LCV.

High Rail Diversion Estimate

The high rail diversion estimate is based exclusively on cost savings resulting from expanded eligibility for LCV operations and new ETL tolls in the project corridor. The high diversion effect is estimated by identifying the change in per-mile truck operating costs and by applying a cross elasticity.

To develop changes in per-mile truck costs in order to estimate the magnitude of the rail-to-truck diversion, three primary assumptions are utilized:

1. LCV (127,000 pound) cost per mile = $3.90;
2. STT (80,000 pound) cost per mile = $3.13; and
3. A 1.60 payload factor.

The cost per-mile estimates exclude costs associated with tolls, assembly, and empty return.

This savings per loaded truck mile of operating a LCV versus an STT is calculated by multiplying the STT cost per mile ($3.13) by the 1.60 payload factor, and subtracting the average LCV cost per mile. The result is:

• Total cost savings per mile of approximately $1.13 per loaded truck mile for the LCV at 127,000 pounds vs. 80,000 Five Axle STT; and
• Which represents a savings of about 22 percent ($5.02 per mile to carry LCV freight in STTs).

All costs are from Working Paper 7 of the U.S. DOT Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study, updated to 2008 costs (CPI Factor from 1988 to 2008 = 1.83, Diesel Factor = 7.07).

Three ranges of per mile tolls are tested for the exclusive toll lanes. The maximum per mile toll is $1.20, which would have completely offset the cost benefits of converting from a STT to a LCV. The low-end range of tolls is $0.30 per mile, which is commensurate with current New York State Thruway and Ohio Turnpike tolls per mile for LCVs. The results of the toll on per-mile LCV operating costs are:

• $1.00 per mile toll – $0.13 savings per mile
  (2.6 percent reduction from STT cost per mile);
• $0.60 per mile toll – $0.53 savings per mile
  (10.6 percent reduction from STT cost per mile; and
• $0.30 per mile toll – $0.83 savings per mile (16.5 percent reduction from STT cost per mile).

Rail Ton-Mile Cross Elasticity = 0.52 (A Guidebook for Forecasting Freight Travel Demand, NCHRP Report 388, Exhibit G.2, TRB 1997.)

This elasticity was applied to the three LCV trip cost saving scenarios identified above. To convert from rail tons to the number of LCVs, the empty weight of a nine-axle LCV is 50,000 pounds, thus the average load is (127,000 – 50,000) = 77,000 pounds per LCV.

Low Rail Diversion Estimate

This estimate takes into account cost difference of operating a STT versus a LCV in the corridor. The corridor evaluated is I-90 from its interchange with I-95 just west of Boston to the Illinois State line. The STT corridor trip assumes current per-mile toll rates and operating costs. These costs are compared to LCV toll rates, including the proposed ETL in the corridor, plus LCV operating costs and current costs (2008 dollars) for assembling and disassembling twins (projected based on 1988 costs from Working Paper 7 of the U.S. DOT Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study).

Change in Corridor Total Costs

Total 2010 STT trip cost estimate (ETL no-build):

Route assumes STTs bypass Cleveland via I-480.

Toll Costs:

1. Massachusetts Turnpike Toll (Class 9, five-axle) = $29.50 (120.4 miles);
2. New York Thruway Toll (Class 5H) = $68.98 (387.4 miles);
3. Ohio Turnpike Toll (Class 8) = $21.00 (149.1 miles); and
4. Indiana Toll Road (five-axle) = $27.25 (157 miles).

Total Trip Toll Cost Estimate = $146.73.

Total STT Operations Cost = $4,793.60 (955 miles at $5.02 per mile).

Total 2010 LCV trip cost estimate (ETL build):

Total cost to an LCV with the proposed ETL system in place informs an estimate of total corridor trip cost savings. The cost difference includes LCV operation savings of $1.13 per mile compared to STTs. There are also increases in tolls on the existing toll facilities in the corridor for LCV operations versus STT operations. In addition, the cost of one assembly and one disassembly is assumed.

Toll and Assembly/Disassembly Costs:

1. Assembly (Massachusetts Turnpike Exit 14 – I-95 at I-90 interchange) = $27.49;
2. Massachusetts Turnpike Toll (nine-axle tandem assumed) = $29.50 (120.4 miles);
3. New York Thruway Toll (Class 7H assumed) = $118.42 (387.4 miles);
4. Proposed I-90 ETL = $127.70 ($1.00/mile) – $38.31 ($0.30 per mile) (127.7 miles);
5. Ohio Turnpike Toll (Class 11 assumed) = $70.25 (170.5 miles);
6. Indiana Toll Road (less than seven axles assumed) = $59.60 (157 miles); and
7. Disassembly at Illinois line = $27.49.

Total Trip Toll/Assembly Cost Estimate = $460.75 – $371.06.

Total LCV Operations Cost = $3,764.28 (965 miles at $3.90 per mile).

The reduction in total costs ranges from 14.5 percent with a $1.00 per mile ETL toll to 16.3 percent with a $0.30 per mile ETL toll. The cost savings for trips between ports in Boston or New York/New Jersey to Chicago and the Midwest were made significantly lower by providing LCV access between the New York Thruway and Ohio Turnpike near Cleveland. Rail tonnage that would divert to LCV operations as a result of this cost savings are estimated below based on a rail ton-mile cross elasticity.

Because the above evaluation only applies to long-distance corridor trips (i.e., Boston to Chicago) to estimate rail diversion, the focus will be on rail shipments of a similar length. Through the analysis of FAF2 data for the corridor, in 2010 it is estimated that 25 percent of all rail tons in the corridor have trip ends in New York and the remainder of New England or Illinois and other Midwestern states.

Rail Ton-Mile Cross Elasticity = 0.35 (A Guidebook for Forecasting Freight Travel Demand, NCHRP Report 388, Exhibit G.3, TRB 1997.)

This lower cross elasticity, as compared to the high rail diversion elasticity, was applied to the three LCV trip cost scenarios in Table A.4. To convert from rail tons to the number of LCVs, the empty weight of a nine-axle LCV is 50,000 pounds, thus the average load is (127,000 – 50,000) = 77,000 pounds per LCV.

Additional Considerations

This study provides a sketch planning level of analysis to estimate order-of-magnitude costs, impacts, and benefits. A detailed engineering study would be required to develop more detailed assumptions to guide final determination of costs, impacts, and benefits. During the course of this investigation, the study team identified several issues worthy of additional consideration in future study of ETL feasibility on this or other corridors.

• I-271 Characteristics. This study does not take into account the recent investments of the Ohio DOT on the southern end of I-271 (near the junction with I-80), including:
  • The I-271 Cuyahoga River Bridge, which is currently being rebuilt with completion planned in 2009; and
  • Parallel added capacity to SR 8 from I-80 to I-271 is underway through an Ohio DOT project to relieve traffic demands in this corridor segment.

  Finally, I-271 in this area bisects portions of Cuyahoga River National Park. Any major addition to I-271 could generate community opposition to widening as well as NEPA issues.

• STTs. This study focuses on LCV utilization of the proposed ETL. The study does not estimate the share of STTs that would divert to the new ETL facility because of the assumed low likelihood of diversion. Because the corridor has low level of delay and congestion, the number of STTs that would divert would be limited, but could increase over time if congestion worsened. If all trucks were required to use the new ETLs, this could force trucks to divert to routes that might not be as safe for trucks to operate. Recent experience by the Ohio Turnpike Authority shows that lowering tolls and increasing speeds can increase STT utilization of toll facilities.

Impact Analyses Sensitivity Tests

Supplementing the Section 5.0 discussion of Impact Analysis Results, the following tables and text summarize findings of several sensitivity analyses conducted to show a range of outcomes to the impact measures.

Average Trip Distance

Tables A.5 and A.6 show sensitivity analyses in which estimates of benefits are developed using average trip lengths of 300 and 700 miles, respectively. Comparison of Tables A.5 and A.6 indicates that total benefits vary roughly in proportion to the assumed average trip length.

Mix of LCV Configurations: Doubles versus Triples

Based on observations of utilization on the Indiana and Ohio Turnpikes, triples were assumed to account for 30 percent of LCV VMT in developing the estimates of annual benefits shown in Table 5.1 and all other tables, except Tables A.4 and A.5. The remaining 70 percent of LCVs were assumed to be turnpike doubles with nine axles. Tables A.7 and A.8 show sensitivity analyses in which estimates of benefits are developed assuming 10 percent and 50 percent triples, respectively. Comparison of Tables 5.1, A.7, and A.8 indicates that total benefits do not vary greatly with changes in the assumed percent triples; and that the shift from single-trailer trucks to LCVs (regardless of the mix of doubles versus triples) is a more important factor in generating benefits.

Empty Backhaul

Empty backhaul travel was assumed to account for 20 percent of LCV VMT in developing the estimates of annual benefits shown in Table 5.1. Tables A.9 and A.10 show sensitivity analyses in which estimates of benefits are developed assuming 10 percent and 30 percent empty backhaul, respectively. Comparison of Tables 5.1, A.9, and A.10 indicate that total benefits do not vary greatly with changes in the assumed percent empty backhaul.

Fuel Costs

Average fuel prices for 2008 were used in the analysis. Tables A.11 and A.12 show sensitivity analyses in which 30 percent higher and 30 percent lower fuel prices are assumed. Changes in fuel prices affect transport cost savings and congestion cost savings.

Table A.5 Sensitivity Test: 300 Miles Average Trip Distance
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from: Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 300 miles
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes (in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger Payloads	44,838	8,968	97,222	19,356
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Higher Speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	44,906	8,981	99,618	19,830
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	1,771	359	70,396	14,285
Safety Benefits	1,806	375	4,001	839
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	2,475	501	5,403	1,094
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	119	25	359	76
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	381	80	1,144	241
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	1	0	4	1
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	501	105	1,508	318
Total Benefits	51,460	10,321	180,925	36,366

Table A.6 Sensitivity Test: 700 Miles Average Trip Distance
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 700 miles
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes (in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger Payloads	116,864	23,373	253,398	50,450
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Higher Speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	116,932	23,386	255,793	50,924
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	2,408	494	96,371	19,901
Safety Benefits	3,815	794	8,466	1,785
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	3,786	772	8,301	1,701
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	276	58	742	158
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	880	185	2,368	503
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	3	1	9	2
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	1,160	244	3,120	663
Total Benefits	128,102	25,691	372,051	74,973

Table A.7 Sensitivity Test: 10 Percent Triples Share of LCVs on ETL
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 500 miles
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger Payloads	80,611	16,122	174,789	34,799
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Higher Speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	80,679	16,136	177,184	35,273
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	2,097	428	83,678	17,159
Safety Benefits	2,813	585	6,239	1,314
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	3,956	803	8,649	1,759
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	194	41	544	115
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	619	130	1,734	368
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	2	0	7	1
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	816	172	2,284	485
Total Benefits	90,360	18,123	278,034	55,990

Table A.8 Sensitivity Test: 50 Percent Triples Share of LCVs on ETL
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 500 miles
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes (in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger Payloads	81,092	16,218	175,831	35,007
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Higher Speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	81,160	16,232	178,227	35,481
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	2,083	425	83,089	17,026
Safety Benefits	2,809	584	6,228	1,310
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	2,305	470	5,055	1,036
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	201	42	558	118
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	642	135	1,779	376
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	2	1	7	1
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	845	177	2,343	496
Total Benefits	89,202	17,888	274,942	55,349

Table A.9 Sensitivity Test: 10 Percent Empty Backhaul
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 500 miles
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes (in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger Payloads	80,950	16,190	175,524	34,946
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Higher Speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	81,018	16,204	177,920	35,419
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	2,120	433	84,610	17,351
Safety Benefits	2,856	594	6,333	1,333
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	3,507	713	7,675	1,565
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	196	41	548	116
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	624	131	1,748	371
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	2	1	7	1
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	822	173	2,303	489
Total Benefits	90,322	18,116	278,840	56,157

Table A.10 Sensitivity Test: 30 Percent Empty Backhaul
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 500 miles)
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes (in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger payloads	80,752	16,150	175,096	34,860
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Higher Speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	80,821	16,164	177,492	35,334
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	2,059	420	82,157	16,835
Safety Benefits	2,766	575	6,133	1,291
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	2,755	560	6,029	1,230
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	200	42	553	117
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	637	134	1,765	373
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	2	1	7	1
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	839	176	2,325	492
Total Benefits	89,240	17,895	274,136	55,181

Table A.11 Sensitivity Test: 30 Percent Higher Price for Fuel
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 500 miles
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes (in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger Payloads	86,799	17,360	188,208	37,471
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to higher speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	86,868	17,373	190,603	37,945
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	2,136	436	85,239	17,473
Safety Benefits	2,811	584	6,233	1,312
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	3,131	637	6,852	1,397
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	198	42	551	117
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	630	132	1,756	372
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	2	1	7	1
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	830	175	2,314	490
Total Benefits	95,776	19,205	291,242	58,618

Table A.12 Sensitivity Test: 30 Percent Lower Price for Fuel
LCV Volumes on Exclusive Truck Lanes (vehicles per day)

	2010		2040
	High	Low	High	Low
Diverted to LCVs from Single Trailer Trucks (STT)	443	89	963	193
Diverted to LCVs from Rail	29	5	58	9
Diverted to LCVs Total	472	94	1021	202
Average Trip Length for LCVs Using ETL is 500 miles
Benefits of Exclusive Truck Lanes (in thousands of 2008 $ per year)
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Larger Payloads	74,903	14,981	162,412	32,335
LCV Transport Cost Savings Due to Higher Speeds on ETL	68	14	2,396	474
LCV Transport Cost Savings Subtotal	74,971	14,994	164,808	32,809
Cost Savings to Other Vehicles Due to Less Congestion	2,043	417	81,527	16,712
Safety Benefits	2,811	584	6,233	1,312
Pavement Cost Savings on Other Roads	3,131	637	6,852	1,397
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in CO2 emissions	198	42	551	117
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in NOX emissions	630	132	1,756	372
Environmental Benefits: Reduction in PM emissions	2	1	7	1
Environmental Benefits: Subtotal	830	175	2,314	490
Total Benefits	83,786	16,807	261,734	52,721

You will need the Adobe Reader to view the PDFs on this page.