The Value of Travel-Time: Estimates of the Hourly Value of Time for Vehicles in Oregon 2007

Similar documents
EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2007 GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: FOURTH QUARTER 2006 (ADVANCE)

State Highway 32 East TIGER Discretionary Grant Application APPENDIX C - BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS REPORT

Travel Time Savings Memorandum

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 2013 GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: FOURTH QUARTER AND ANNUAL 2012 (ADVANCE ESTIMATE)

Benefit Cost Analysis

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2014

STATISTICAL TABLES RELATING TO INCOME, EMPLOYMENT, AND PRODUCTION

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2015

Appendix B STATISTICAL TABLES RELATING TO INCOME, EMPLOYMENT, AND PRODUCTION

Bella Vista Bypass Benefit Cost Analysis

M E M O R A N D U M. Texas Department of Transportation Construction Division

JOB OPENINGS AND LABOR TURNOVER APRIL 2016

N ational Economic Trends

2012 Air Emissions Inventory

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 2014 GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: FOURTH QUARTER AND ANNUAL 2013 (ADVANCE ESTIMATE)

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, WEDNESDAY, JULY 30, 2014

Facts and Figures. October 2006 List Release Special Edition BWC National Benefits and Related Facts October, 2006 (Previous Versions Obsolete)

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, FRIDAY, JANUARY 30, 2015 GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: FOURTH QUARTER AND ANNUAL 2014 (ADVANCE ESTIMATE)

Gross Domestic Product: Second Quarter 2016 (Second Estimate) Corporate Profits: Second Quarter 2016 (Preliminary Estimate)

report Southeast Florida Road and Transit User Cost Study 2014 Update Florida Department of Transportation District Four Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

JOB OPENINGS AND LABOR TURNOVER DECEMBER 2017

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, THURSDAY, AUGUST 27, 2015

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 23, 2014

Parks and Transportation System Development Charge Methodology

2 VALUE PROPOSITION VALUE PROPOSITION DEVELOPMENT

New Zealand Transport Outlook. VKT/Vehicle Numbers Model. November 2017

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 22, 2015

Real GDP: Percent change from preceding quarter

Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter and Annual 2016 (Second Estimate)

The Economic Impact of Franchised New Vehicle Dealers on the Colorado Economy

Gross Domestic Product: Third Quarter 2016 (Third Estimate) Corporate Profits: Third Quarter 2016 (Revised Estimate)

Fueling Savings: Higher Fuel Economy Standards Result In Big Savings for Consumers

National Household Travel Survey Add-On Use in the Des Moines, Iowa, Metropolitan Area

Gross Domestic Product: First Quarter 2018 (Third Estimate) Corporate Profits: First Quarter 2018 (Revised Estimate)

Gross Domestic Product: Third Quarter 2016 (Advance Estimate)

Bob Costello American Trucking Associations

Table 1. INCIDENCE RATES 1 BY INDUSTRY AND CASE TYPES

BCA Benefits and Assumptions Summary

2011 Economic Impact Report

HAS MOTORIZATION IN THE U.S. PEAKED? PART 2: USE OF LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES

N ational Economic Trends

RIETI BBL Seminar Handout

The Boston South Station HSIPR Expansion Project Cost-Benefit Analysis. High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Technical Appendix

4 COSTS AND OPERATIONS

Department for Transport. Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) Unit Values of Time and Operating Costs

NEWS RELEASE EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2014

FINANCIAL AND OPERATING RATIOS. of Public Power Utilities

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Gross Domestic Product: First Quarter 2017 (Advance Estimate)

NON-FATAL ELECTRICAL INJURIES AT WORK

Gold Saskatchewan Provincial Economic Accounts. January 2018 Edition. Saskatchewan Bureau of Statistics Ministry of Finance

An Analytic Method for Estimation of Electric Vehicle Range Requirements, Electrification Potential and Prospective Market Size*

ENERGY INTENSITIES OF FLYING AND DRIVING

SOCIO-ECONOMIC and LAND USE DATA

The Economic Contributions of the Japanese-Brand Automotive Industry to the Canadian. Economy,

The Funding of Pupil Transportation In North Carolina March, 2001

N ational Economic Trends

Attachment C: Benefit-Cost Analysis Spreadsheet

Real GDP: Percent change from preceding quarter

Broward County Intermodal Center And People Mover. AASHTO Value Engineering Conference Presentation. September 1, 2009 San Diego, CA

STATISTICAL TABLES RELATING TO INCOME, EMPLOYMENT, AND PRODUCTION

United States Department of Labor. PRODUCTIVITY AND COSTS Second Quarter 1990

Automotive Repair Technician

The Cyclically Adjusted Federal Budget and Federal Debt: Revised and Updated Estimates

Federated States of Micronesia

Case Study Congestion Charges in Singapore

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EDT, FRIDAY, MARCH 25, 2016

Part C. Statistics Bank of Botswana

Use of National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) Data in Assessment of Impacts of PHEVs on Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions and Electricity Demand

HAS MOTORIZATION IN THE U.S. PEAKED? PART 9: VEHICLE OWNERSHIP AND DISTANCE DRIVEN, 1984 TO 2015

ESTIMATION OF VEHICLE KILOMETERS TRAVELLED IN SRI LANKA. Darshika Anojani Samarakoon Jayasekera

GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: FIRST QUARTER 2016 (THIRD ESTIMATE) CORPORATE PROFITS: FIRST QUARTER 2016 (REVISED ESTIMATE)

The Case for. Business. investment. in Public Transportation

Office of Transportation Bureau of Traffic Management Downtown Parking Meter District Rate Report

Travel Demand Modeling at NCTCOG

CHARACTERIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF TRUCK LOAD SPECTRA FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE PAVEMENT DESIGN PRACTICES IN LOUISIANA

CHAPTER 7: EMISSION FACTORS/MOVES MODEL

Audit Follow-up. Fleet Fuel Operations (Report #0801, Issued October 18, 2007) As of March 31, Summary. Report #0811 June 20, 2008

New Buck O Neil (U. S. 169) Crossing Benefit-Cost Analysis. Kansas City, Missouri

CONTRIBUTION OF THE BIODIESEL INDUSTRY TO THE ECONOMY OF THE UNITED STATES

An Evaluation of the Relationship between the Seat Belt Usage Rates of Front Seat Occupants and Their Drivers

STATISTICAL TABLES REAL SECTOR SECOND QUARTER 2018 Last updated August 17, 2018

Policy Note. Vanpools in the Puget Sound Region The case for expanding vanpool programs to move the most people for the least cost.

Bob Costello Chief Economist & Vice President American Trucking Associations. Intermodal Freight Transportation Institute October 30, 2012

Fleet Safety Initiative Status Summary

Statistical Annex. European Economic Forecast Autumn 2018

Autonomous Vehicle Implementation Predictions Implications for Transport Planning

Planning for Autonomous Vehicles

DRIVER SPEED COMPLIANCE WITHIN SCHOOL ZONES AND EFFECTS OF 40 PAINTED SPEED LIMIT ON DRIVER SPEED BEHAVIOURS Tony Radalj Main Roads Western Australia

Private industries. Construction Total

USDOT CMAQ Program. Southeast Diesel Collaborative Annual Conference September, 2017

May ATR Monthly Report

Statistical Annex. European Economic Forecast Spring 2018

Aaren Healy, 20 September 2017 / 1

Economics 53 Assignment: Interpreting the new GDP numbers.

TARIFF DECISION FOR SASOL OIL (PTY) LTD S SECUNDA TO NATREF INTEGRATED (SNI) PIPELINE

Planning for Future Mobility In a Performance-Based World Steven Gayle, PTP

CODE OF ORDINANCES. Title 2 ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL

Parking Management Element

Air Quality Impacts of Advance Transit s Fixed Route Bus Service

Transcription:

The Value of Travel-Time: Estimates of the Hourly Value of Time for Vehicles in Oregon 2007 Oregon Department of Transportation Long Range Planning Unit June 2008

For questions contact: Denise Whitney Oregon Department of Transportation Long Range Planning Unit 555 13th St. NE, Suite 2 Salem, OR 97301-4178 (503) 986-3517 Denise.D.Whitney@odot.state.or.us This project was funded in part by the Federal Highway Administration, U. S. Department of Transportation under the State Planning and Research funding program. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FHWA.

Executive Summary Changes to the transportation system or transportation polices have the potential to affect travel-time and related costs. The purpose of this paper is to provide estimated values of travel-time for vehicles driving on Oregon roads. User costs associated with travel are typically grouped into three primary types: traveltime costs, vehicle operating costs, and safety costs. Only one of the three primary transportation user cost categories is presented here: costs associated with travel-time. Some travel-time estimates include vehicle operating costs as a component of the time value estimate. This paper considers costs associated with time as separate from vehicle operating costs. Costs associated with travel-time fall within one of two categories, on-the-job or off-thejob (personal). Costs associated with on-the-job travel-time include employers costs such as wages and fringe benefits and in some instances the time value of the average payload. For driving outside of work hours, travel-time costs include the opportunity cost of people s time spent driving time that could be spent doing something else. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), and local governments have used a number of different estimates of the value of travel-time. Differences among these estimates exist because the value of travel-time depends on a number of elements: Type of vehicle Vehicle occupancy Purpose of the trip Costs included or excluded when building the estimates Underlying assumptions regarding input data Availability of detailed data The value of one hour of vehicle travel-time is estimated for three vehicle categories using Oregon wage data. The estimates are presented in Table 1. When using these estimates to make regulatory or investment decisions, a range of estimates of the value of travel-time should be used for sensitivity analyses. USDOT guidelines for plausible ranges are presented at the end of this paper. Table 1. Estimated Value of One Hour of Travel-Time by Vehicle Class, Oregon 2007 Vehicle Class Average Value Automobiles $17.58 Light Trucks $21.32 Heavy Trucks $30.93 Oregon Department of Transportation Page i Long Range Planning Unit

Table of Contents Executive Summary... i Introduction... 1 Variation in Estimates... 1 Oregon Value of Travel-Time Estimates... 2 Wages & Total Compensation... 2 On-the-Job Trips... 3 Off-the-Job Trips... 5 Total Weighted Average... 6 Sensitivity to Underlying Assumptions... 6 Plausible Ranges... 6 Conclusion... 7 List of Tables Table 1. Estimated Value of One Hour of Travel-Time by Vehicle Class, Oregon 2007... i Table 2. Details of Estimated Value of One Hour of Travel-Time by Vehicle Class, Oregon 2007... 3 Table 3. Effect of Changing Underlying Assumptions of Value of Travel-Time Estimates... 6 Table 4. Plausible Ranges for Values of Travel-Time Savings per Person Hour as Percentage of Average Wage Rate... 7

The Value of Travel-Time: Estimates of the Hourly Value of Time for Vehicles in Oregon 2007 Introduction Changes to the transportation system or transportation polices have the potential to affect travel-time and related costs. The purpose of this paper is to provide estimates of the value of travel-time for vehicles driving in Oregon. This paper is an updated version of a paper written in 2006. 1 User costs associated with travel are typically grouped into three primary types: traveltime costs, vehicle operating costs, and safety costs. 2 Only one of the three primary transportation user cost categories is presented here: costs associated with travel-time. Some travel-time estimates include vehicle operating costs as a component of the time value estimate. This paper considers costs associated with time as separate from vehicle operating costs. Costs associated with travel-time fall within one of two categories, on-the-job or off-thejob (personal). Costs associated with on-the-job travel-time include employers costs such as wages and fringe benefits and in some instances the time value of the average payload. For driving outside of work hours, travel-time costs include the opportunity cost of peoples time spent driving time that could be spent doing something else. Some analyses using value of travel-time estimates may be sensitive to the magnitude of the values. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) guidelines suggest using a range of plausible values to test the sensitivity of economic evaluations and conclusions. Plausible ranges identified by the USDOT for values of travel-time per person hour are included in this paper. Variation in Estimates National estimates of the value of travel-time vary from under $10 per hour to over $100 per hour. Studies within the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) have used a variety of estimates for the value of travel-time as well. Such differences exist because estimates of the value of travel-time depend on a number of elements: Type of vehicle Vehicle occupancy Trip purpose 1 The Value of Travel-Time: Estimates of the Hourly Value of Time for Vehicles in Oregon 2005 Policy & Economic Analysis Unit, Central Services Division, Oregon Department of Transportation, April 2006. 2 In addition, there are also agency costs, capital improvement costs, and external costs associated with use of the transportation system. External costs borne by users and non-users alike include air, water, and noise pollution, land use, property value, and aesthetic impacts. Oregon Department of Transportation Page 1 Long Range Planning Unit

Costs included and excluded when building the estimates Availability of detailed data Underlying assumptions Details on underlying assumptions, sources, and calculations used for the estimates of the 2007 hourly value of time for vehicles in Oregon are provided in the text and footnotes of this document. Oregon Value of Travel-Time Estimates Oregon data is used in conjunction with national trend data to build value of travel-time estimates for three vehicle categories. The methodology used in this paper is based on work done by the Federal Highway Administration in the Highway Economic Requirements System (HERS). 3 The estimates are followed by a discussion of the sensitivity of the estimates to different variables and the use of ranges of values as recommended by USDOT. Wages & Total Compensation The value of travel-time is conventionally based on either wages or total compensation. 4 The value of on-the-job time is a reflection of the total cost of the employee s time to the employer and so is a function of total compensation. Valuation of off-the-job (personal) time reflects the opportunity cost of time spent traveling vs. time that could be spent doing something else and is typically expressed as a fraction of wages exclusive of benefits. 5 Wage information used in these estimates comes from the Oregon Employment Department. 6 Benefits for auto drivers are estimated to be 30.1 percent of total compensation, compared to 33.3 percent of total compensation for light and heavy truck drivers. 7 The estimated average value of total compensation in Oregon for a single person in 2007 (by vehicle type) is listed on line 3 of Table 2. 3 Highway Economic Requirements System - State Version, Technical Report U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 2002. 4 Total compensation includes wages, fringe benefits (insurance, vacation, holidays, sick leave, other paid leave, etc.) and legally required benefits (unemployment insurance, Social Security, workers compensation, etc.). 5 The fractional values are the result of literature surveys conducted for HERS. 6 The statewide average wage used for autos was taken from preliminary Oregon Covered Employment data for the first through third quarters of 2007, provided by Oregon Employment Department staff. Truck driver wages come from Oregon Wage Information, 2007, which provides wages by occupation, also from the Oregon Employment Department. 7 The ratios of benefits to total compensation nationally are used to estimate the value of benefits in Oregon. Total compensation, annual wages and salaries, and benefits used are averages of values for the four quarters of 2007, identified for two national worker categories: all civilian workers and transportation and material moving occupations, from the National Compensation Survey - Compensation Cost Trends, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 2007, http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/home.htm. Note: BLS changed from Oregon Department of Transportation Page 2 Long Range Planning Unit

Table 2. Details of Estimated Value of One Hour of Travel-Time by Vehicle Class, Oregon 2007 Vehicle Class 8 # Category Auto Light Trucks Heavy Trucks 1 2007 Oregon Average Wage $18.71 $13.80 $17.16 2 2007 Value of Fringe Benefits $8.08 $6.88 $8.56 3 Total Compensation $26.79 $20.68 $25.72 On-the-Job Trips 4 Average Vehicle Occupancy 1.22 1.03 1.12 5 2007 Cost of Employees $32.57 $21.32 $28.80 6 2007 Freight Inventory value $0.00 $0.00 $2.13 7 Total "On-the-Job" Value $32.57 $21.32 $30.93 8 Miles "On-the-Job" % 9.1% 100.0% 100.0% 9 Weighted Value $2.98 $21.32 $30.93 Off-the-Job trips 10 Average Vehicle Occupancy 1.58 N/A N/A 11 Total "Off-the-Job" Value $16.07 $0.00 $0.00 12 Miles "Off-the-Job" % 90.9% 0.0% 0.0% 13 Weighted Value $14.60 $0.00 $0.00 14 Total Weighted Average $17.58 $21.32 $30.93 Note: Table values are rounded to two decimal places, but calculated values are not. As a result, calculations made by the reader will differ slightly from some values in the table. On-the-Job Trips On-the-job trips represent travel for work and do not include commute trips. In order to estimate the weighted value of travel-time for on-the-job trips by vehicle type, a number of other variables must be determined. These include the average number of occupants in SIC to NAICS & SOC basis. This makes exact consistency with previous data/reports impossible. Current data shows a lower level of benefits for the Transportation & Material Moving sector as a whole than was previously true for the blue collar segment (detail for this segment no longer available). So benefits for both truck classes drop for the 2007 estimate compared to 2003. Current data availability is consistent with the 2005 estimate. 8 Vehicle classes in this report vary from FHWA vehicle classifications. FHWA identifies light trucks as two-axle, four-tire vehicles other than passenger cars. In this report private passenger trucks fall into the automobile category and light trucks include single-unit two-axle four-tire trucks (in commercial use), other single-unit trucks, and single trailer trucks with four axles or less. Oregon Department of Transportation Page 3 Long Range Planning Unit

the vehicles, freight inventory value for trucks, and the proportion of travel miles spent on-the-job. The sections following discuss each of these variables in turn. Vehicle Occupancy In order to include all relevant employee time associated with on-the-job travel, it is necessary to know how many people occupy the vehicle during these trips. Oregonspecific vehicle occupancy data is not available, but there is no reason to expect Oregon to be very different from the nation as a whole. Average vehicle occupancy for on-the-job auto trips is estimated to be 1.22 persons. 9 Average vehicle occupancy for the light truck category is estimated using a combination of local and national data. HERS documentation identifies an average occupancy of 1.05 persons for six-tire vehicles, which include pick-up-and-delivery vehicles that sometimes carry a helper; while heavier single-unit trucks were assumed to have only one occupant. Using the proportion of average daily traffic on the state highway system in 2006 for each of the light truck categories, weighted average vehicle occupancy for light trucks in Oregon is estimated at 1.03 persons. HERS assumes average vehicle occupancy of 1.12 persons for four and five axle combination trucks. 10 This same average vehicle occupancy has been assigned to our heavy truck category. Line 4 of Table 2 lists on-the-job vehicle occupancy rates. Employee compensation for 2007 was multiplied by average vehicle occupancy to compute total per-vehicle cost to employers for one hour of work travel-time. Line 5 of Table 2 presents the 2007 cost of employees per vehicle. Freight Inventory Value The freight inventory value represents the time value of the average payload (i.e. the interest costs of cargo). Freight inventory values are based on HERS documentation and exclude costs for spoilage and/or depreciation. For heavy trucks, the freight inventory value per hour of travel-time is estimated to be $2.13. 11 HERS assumes inventory values for vehicles other than heavy trucks are negligible. This same assumption has been applied to these estimates. 9 The 2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS), U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2003, http://www.bts.gov/programs/national_household_travel_survey/. 10 This average vehicle occupancy number is based on Robin Hertz analysis of the frequency of the use of two driver teams in crash involved trucks: Sleeper Berth Use as a Risk Factor for Tractor Driver Fatality, 31 st Annual Proceedings, American Association for Automotive Medicine, September 1987, pp.215-227. 11 Guidebook for Assessing the Social and Economic Effects of Transportation Projects, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 456. Table 2.1 Value of One Hour of Travel Time identifies an updated HERS estimate of combination truck inventory values at $1.78 per hour (year 2000 dollars). The value included in Table 2 uses the implicit price deflator for US GDP to adjust the value to 2007 dollars. Oregon Department of Transportation Page 4 Long Range Planning Unit

Total On-the-Job Value Total on-the-job value is the sum of cost of the employees and freight inventory value for each vehicle category and is shown on Line 7 of Table 2. Miles On-the-Job It is estimated that on-the-job trips represent approximately 9.1 percent of miles driven in autos. There are two components in determining this number. The first is the proportion of registered autos that are in fleets (except rental vehicles) in other words those used 100 percent for work-related travel. The second component is the work-related proportion of total miles of travel for non-fleet autos. 12 Miles on-the-job are assumed to be 100 percent for both the light and heavy truck categories. Off-the-Job Trips Off-the-job trips include recreation, shopping, commuting, and other personal travel. Because light and heavy trucks are allocated on-the-job travel 100 percent of the time, autos are the only vehicle type for which off-the-job valuation assumptions have been determined. Vehicle Occupancy The 2001 Household Travel Survey identifies average personal vehicle occupancies for a number of trip purposes. The estimated average auto vehicle occupancy for off-the-job trips, approximately 1.58 persons, is the average vehicle occupancy for all trips not workrelated. 13 Total Off-the-Job Value The time spent on these non-work trips is not without value simply because people are not getting paid for their time. HERS assumes the value of off-the-job travel-time for auto drivers is 60 percent of the average wage rate exclusive of benefits. The value of auto passenger travel-time is estimated to be 45 percent of the average wage rate. Thus, the hourly value of travel-time for off-the-job auto trips in Oregon for 2007 is estimated to be $11.23 for drivers and $8.42 for passengers. Applying the average occupancy figure of approximately 1.58 persons (a driver and an average of 0.58 passengers) to the average hourly values for off-the-job travel-time and summing gives a total off-the-job traveltime value for autos of $16.07, as shown on line 11 of Table 2. Miles Off-the-Job As mentioned previously, 9.1 percent of miles traveled in autos are work-related. The remaining 90.9 percent of miles traveled represent off-the-job trips (line 12 of Table 2). 12 Sources include: National Transportation Statistics 2008, Table 1-14, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of Transportation. Their source is Automotive Fleet Fact Book (annual issues), Bobit Publishing Co.; The 2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS), U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2003, http://www.bts.gov/programs/national_household_travel_survey/. 13 The 2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS), U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2003, http://www.bts.gov/programs/national_household_travel_survey/. Oregon Department of Transportation Page 5 Long Range Planning Unit

Total Weighted Average The values of travel-time for on-the-job and off-the-job travel are weighted by each trip type s share of miles traveled (on lines 9 and 13 of Table 2). The total weighted average value of all travel-time is the sum of these two weighted values and is presented on line 14 of Table 2. These estimates represent the total statewide average values of travel-time for Oregon vehicles in the three vehicle classes. Sensitivity to Underlying Assumptions Changing the underlying assumptions used to build value of travel-time estimates will affect the resulting values. Table 3 presents effects of changing some of these underlying assumptions. For example, the estimated value of travel-time for a person driving an auto alone would be $12.65 rather than the 2007 auto estimate of $17.58 per hour. Table 3. Effect of Changing Underlying Assumptions of Value of Travel-Time Estimates Category Auto Light Trucks Heavy Trucks 2007 Estimates $17.58 $21.32 $30.93 Occupancy Rate of 1.0 $12.65 $20.68 $25.72 Miles On-the-Job Doubled $19.09 N/A N/A Miles On-the-Job Cut in Half $16.83 N/A N/A Value of Benefits Excluded $16.68 $14.22 $21.35 Drop Wage 10% $15.91 $19.89 $29.01 Increase Wage 10% $19.25 $22.74 $32.85 Doubling the assumed miles on-the-job for autos increases the value of travel time estimate from $17.58 to $19.09. Removing benefits from the total compensation calculation reduces the heavy truck estimate from $30.93 to $21.35. Increasing the assumed wage for light truck drivers by ten percent increases the value of travel time estimate from $21.32 to $22.74. These examples illustrate how estimates may vary because of the unique data or assumptions being applied. Plausible Ranges The value of travel-time may also vary due to differing purposes of travel, conditions under which it occurs, and possible alternative uses of time. Because of this, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) released departmental guidelines 14 describing the use of plausible ranges for travel-time savings estimates. The USDOT ranges are 14 U.S. Department of Transportation, The Value of Saving Travel Time: Departmental Guidance for Conducting Economic Evaluations, Office of the Secretary of Transportation, April 1997. Oregon Department of Transportation Page 6 Long Range Planning Unit

presented in Table 4. 15 For example, if the average wage for a region were $20 per hour, USDOT would calculate the plausible range of values for local travel to be $7.00 - $12.00 per person hour for personal trips and $16.00 - $24.00 for business trips. Table 4. Plausible Ranges for Values of Travel-Time Savings per Person Hour as Percentage of Average Wage Rate Category Surface Modes* Truck Drivers Local Travel Personal 35-60% -- Business 80-120% 100% Intercity Travel Personal 60-90% -- Business 80-120% 100% * Surface figures apply to all combinations of in-vehicle and other transit time. Walk access, waiting, and transfer time should be valued at 100% of the wage rate when actions affect only those elements of transit time. These guidelines suggest that analysts test the sensitivity of their analyses and conclusions. Even when quality data is available, uncertainty exists. This is best addressed by using a range of values to test how sensitive predicted outcomes are to the estimates used. Conclusion Time spent traveling is valuable. Estimates of the value of travel-time are needed to make informed investment and policy decisions affecting highway users. This update, like previous reports, provides an estimate of the value of travel time in Oregon for three vehicle categories: Automobiles, light trucks, and heavy trucks. It illustrates how the final value is sensitive to (and changes with) underlying assumptions regarding the share of miles traveled for work vs. non-work purposes, total number of people in the vehicle, and changes in wages. By providing regular updates and keeping values current, planning and project impact analysis is improved. 15 The subsequent February 2003 updates for The Value of Saving Travel Time: Departmental Guidance for Conducting Economic Evaluations, made no changes to this table originally published in 1997. Oregon Department of Transportation Page 7 Long Range Planning Unit