transportation statistics annual report · report on transportation statistics to the president and...
TRANSCRIPT
Transportation StatisticsAnnual Report
October 2003U.S. Department of TransportationBureau of Transportation Statistics
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
Bureau ofTransportation
Statistics
October 2003
U.S. Department of Transportation
Bureau of Transportation StatisticsOur mission: To lead in developing transportation data and informationof high quality and to advance their effective use in both public and private transportation decisionmaking.
Our vision for the future: Data and information of high quality willsupport every significant transportation policy decision, thus advancing the quality of life and the economic well-being of all Americans.
To obtain Transportation Statistics Annual Report and other BTS publicationsMail: Product Orders
Bureau of Transportation StatisticsU.S. Department of Transportation400 Seventh Street, SW, K-15Washington, DC 20590
Phone: 202-366-DATA [press 1]Fax: 202-366-3197Internet: www.bts.gov
BTS Information ServiceE-mail: [email protected]: 800-853-1351
Recommended citationU.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Transportation Statistics Annual Report, BTS03-06 (Washington, DC: 2003)
All material contained in this report is in the public domain and may beused and reprinted without special permission; citation as to source isrequired.
U.S. Department ofTransportation
Norman Y. MinetaSecretary
Bureau ofTransportationStatistics
Rick KowalewskiDeputy Director
William J. ChangAssociate Director for Information Systems
John V. WellsChief Economist
Jeremy WuActing Chief Statistician
Produced under the direction of:Wendell FletcherAssistant Director for Transportation Analysis
Project ManagerKirsten Oldenburg
EditorMarsha Fenn
Major ContributorsKathryn TsibulskyFelix Ammah-TagoeAnthony ApostolidesJonaki BoseDavid ChesserDavid ChienMartha CourtneyScott DennisKay DruckerRon DuychBingsong FangMary FieldChester FordLee GiesbrechtBruce GoldbergJason GoodfriendXiaoli HanElijah Henley
Other ContributorsBill BannisterDon BrightMichael CohenDorinda EdmondsonPat FlanaganAlpha GlassChip MoorePeg Young
Deborah JohnsonMaha KhanJanice LentWilliam MallettGetachew MekonnenJeffery MemmottCraig MorrisNagaraj NeerchalLong NguyenKen NotisLisa RandallElizabeth RobertoJoy SharpMatthew SheppardBrian SlobodaDeepak VirmaniJie Zhang
Report Layout,Production, and Cover DesignLorisa SmithAshton Alvis
Acknowledgments
Preface
Congress requires the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) toreport on transportation statistics to the President and Congress.
This Transportation Statistics Annual Report (TSAR) is the ninth suchreport prepared in response to this congressional mandate, laid out in49 U.S.C. 111 (j). In addition to presenting the state of transportationstatistics, the report focuses on transportation indicators related to 15topics. Most of these topics are specified in the Transportation EquityAct for the 21st Century.
The BTS publication, National Transportation Statistics (NTS), acompanion to this annual report, has more comprehensive and longertime series data than could be accommodated here. NTS is availableboth in print and online at www.bts.gov.
vii
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 SUMMARY Summary of Transportation Indicators (Chapter 2) ..........................................................3Summary of the State of Transportation Statistics (Chapter 3) ........................................14
CHAPTER 2 TRANSPORTATION INDICATORSIntroduction ..................................................................................................................21
Section 1: Productivity in the Transportation SectorLabor Productivity in Transportation ..............................................................................22Multifactor Productivity ..................................................................................................24
Section 2: Traffic FlowsPassenger-Miles of Travel ................................................................................................26Domestic Freight Ton-Miles ............................................................................................28Geography of Domestic Freight Flows ............................................................................30
Section 3: Travel TimesScheduled Intercity Travel Times ....................................................................................34Urban Highway Travel Times ..........................................................................................36U.S. Major Air Carrier On-Time Performance ................................................................38Amtrak On-Time Performance ........................................................................................40
Section 4: Vehicle WeightsHighway Trucks by Weight..............................................................................................42Vehicle Loadings on the Interstate Highway System ........................................................44Merchant Marine Vessel Capacity ..................................................................................46Railcar Weights................................................................................................................48
Section 5: Variables Influencing Traveling BehaviorDaily Passenger Travel ....................................................................................................50Travel by Purpose ............................................................................................................52Travel by Mode ..............................................................................................................54Vehicle Ownership and Availability ................................................................................56
Section 6: Travel Costs of Intracity Commuting and Intercity TripsHousehold Spending on Transportation ..........................................................................58Cost of Owning and Operating an Automobile ..............................................................60
Table of Contents
viii
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
Cost of Intercity Trips by Train and Bus ..........................................................................62Average Transit Fares ......................................................................................................64Commuting Expenses of the Working Poor ....................................................................66Airfare Index Research Data............................................................................................68
Section 7: Availability of Mass Transit and Number of Passengers ServedTransit Passenger-Miles Traveled ....................................................................................70Transit Ridership ............................................................................................................72Transit Ridership by Transit Authority ............................................................................74Lift- or Ramp-Equipped Buses and Rail Stations ............................................................76
Section 8: Frequency of Vehicle and Transportation Facility RepairsCommercial Motor Vehicle Repairs ................................................................................78Highway Maintenance and Repairs ................................................................................80Rail Infrastructure and Equipment Repairs......................................................................82Transit Vehicle Reliability ................................................................................................84Lock Repairs on the Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway System....................................86Intermittent Interruptions of Transportation Services ......................................................88
Section 9: AccidentsTransportation Fatality Rates ..........................................................................................90Years of Potential Life Lost from Transportation Accidents ............................................92Transportation Injury Rates ............................................................................................94Motor Vehicle-Related Injuries ........................................................................................96Economic Impacts of Motor Vehicle Crashes ..................................................................98
Section 10: Collateral Damage to the Human and Natural EnvironmentKey Air Emissions..........................................................................................................100Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................102Oil Spills into U.S. Waters..............................................................................................104Hazardous Materials Incidents and Injuries ..................................................................106
Section 11: Condition of the Transportation SystemTransportation Capital Stock ........................................................................................108Highway Condition ......................................................................................................110Bridge Condition ..........................................................................................................112Airport Runway Conditions ..........................................................................................114Age of Highway and Transit Fleet Vehicles ....................................................................116Age of Amtrak, Aircraft, and Maritime Vessel Fleets ....................................................118
Section 12: Transportation-Related Variables that Influence Global CompetitivenessRelative Prices for Transportation Goods and Services ..................................................120U.S. International Trade in Transportation-Related Goods ............................................122U.S. International Trade in Transportation-Related Services ..........................................124
ix
Table of Contents
Section 13: Transportation and Economic GrowthTransportation-Related Final Demand ..........................................................................126Transportation Services..................................................................................................128
Section 14: Government Transportation FinanceGovernment Transportation Revenues ..........................................................................130Government Transportation Expenditures ....................................................................132Government Transportation Investment ........................................................................134
Section 15: Transportation EnergyTransportation Sector Energy Use..................................................................................136Transportation Energy Prices ........................................................................................138Transportation Energy Efficiency ..................................................................................140
CHAPTER 3 STATE OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICSFreight Data ..................................................................................................................145Passenger Travel Statistics..............................................................................................153Air Transportation Statistics ..........................................................................................158Transportation Economic Data......................................................................................161Geospatial Data ............................................................................................................164Existing Geospatial Data and Data Programs ................................................................166Conclusion ....................................................................................................................167
APPENDICESAppendix A: Acronyms and Glossary ............................................................................171Appendix B: Tables........................................................................................................191
Chapter 1
Summary
In this edition of the Transportation Statistics Annual Report, theBureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) has focused on transportation
indicators related to 15 specific topics (chapter 2) and on the overall stateof transportation statistics (chapter 3).
SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION INDICATORS(CHAPTER 2)
Chapter 2 contains transportation data and information on the followingtopics:1
1. productivity in the transportation sector,
2. traffic flows,
3. travel times,
4. vehicle weights,
5. variables influencing traveling behavior,
6. travel costs of intracity commuting and intercity trips,
7. availability of mass transit and number of passengers served,
8. frequency of vehicle and transportation facility repairs,
9. accidents,
10. collateral damage to the human and natural environment,
11. condition of the transportation system,
12. transportation-related variables that influence global competitive-ness,
13. transportation and economic growth,
14. government transportation finance, and
15. transportation energy
Each of these topics is represented by a series of key indicators in chapter2. The indicators are presented graphically; supporting data tables are inappendix B (see box 1).
Summary
1 Topics 1 through 12 appear in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, under 49 USC111(c)(1). Some of the topic names, however, have been shortened in this report.
3
1. Productivity in the Transportation Sector
Labor productivity in the for-hire transportationservices and petroleum pipeline industriesincreased 20 percent between 1990 and 2000compared with all business, which increased 23percent. Among the modes, railroad and localtrucking increased the most, by 65 percent eachfrom 1990 to 2000. The labor productivity ofClass I bus carriers, which fluctuated over theperiod, increased the least (16 percent).
The multifactor productivity of all privatebusiness sectors combined increased 8 percentbetween 1990 and 1999, while the multifactorproductivity of the rail transportation subsectorincreased 30 percent.
These two indicators of economic productiv-ity—multifactor and labor productivity—differ.Labor productivity relates output to labor input,while multifactor productivity relates changes inoutput to changes in a set of inputs, such as cap-ital, labor, energy, materials, and services.Economists generally consider multifactor pro-ductivity to be a more comprehensive indicator
since it takes into account changes in several dif-ferent inputs, not just labor. Rail is the onlytransportation sector for which multifactor pro-ductivity estimates are currently available. BTShas a project underway, in consultation with theBureau of Labor Statistics to develop multifac-tor productivity indicators for all modal sectors.
2. Traffic Flows
Tracking the volume and geographic flow of traf-fic on America’s roads, rails, airports, and water-ways helps to ensure that transportationinfrastructure is properly maintained and hasadequate capacity to meet the demand. The vol-ume of passenger travel is measured by estimatingthe number of miles traveled per person for eachmode (see box 2). This method takes into accountthe distance traveled by a vehicle and the numberof people in the vehicle. Freight is measured inton-miles, the movement of one ton of cargo thedistance of one statute mile. Each of these volumemeasurements allows for comparisons acrossmodes, although these comparisons are affectedby data-collection methods and definitions.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
4
BOX 1About the Data in this Report
The data in this report come from a variety of sources—principally, from the Bureau of Transportation Statisticsand other operating administrations of the Department ofTransportation. However, other sources are federal gov-ernment agencies, such as the U.S. Census Bureau,Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, U.S. Coast Guard, and EnergyInformation Administration. To supplement governmentsources, the report occasionally uses data and informa-tion from trade associations, such as the Association ofAmerican Railroads and American Public TransportationAssociation. Data from any of these sources may besubject to omissions and errors in reporting, recording,and processing. Sample data are subject to samplingvariability. Documents cited as sources in this reportoften provide detailed information about definitions,methodologies, and statistical reliability.
To be consistent, when trend data are used in thisreport they are shown, if possible, for at least a 10-year
period. Because of the differing availability of dataamong all the indicators included, it has not been pos-sible to use the same span of 10 years for each indica-tor without sacrificing timeliness. Instead, the data spana decade up to the year of most recent data availablewhen this report was prepared. (More informationabout data in the report can be found in the introductionto chapter 2.)
In this summary chapter, full data sources are not pro-vided. However, the data here are from chapter 2,where full citations are given in the text and graphs.Corresponding tables in appendix B also containsource information. The data here are presented in thesame order—by topic section—as they appear in chap-ter 2 enabling easy access to data sources. Also notpresent in this chapter are complete definitions, whichcan vary across data sources.
Passenger miles of travel (pmt) in the UnitedStates totaled an estimated 4.7 trillion in 2000, orabout 17,000 miles for every man, woman, andchild. Over the decade, 1990 to 2000, pmtincreased 24 percent. Excluding gas pipelines, allmodes of freight transportation combined gener-ated nearly 4.0 trillion domestic ton-miles in2000, 20 percent more than in 1990.
In addition to studying freight and passengervolumes, it is also important to track changes inthe geographic and modal distribution of freightand passenger travel in order to anticipate andalleviate areas of high congestion. Truck, rail,and waterborne freight flow maps help plannersto pinpoint potential problem areas in the trans-portation system.
3. Travel Times
Most Americans experience some type of traveldelay while driving their personal vehicle ortraveling on a bus, train, or airplane. Thesedelays can be costly for individuals, businesses,and the transportation industry. A multitude offactors can affect travel times.
In a 2003 study, BTS found that between1995 and 2002, scheduled trip time (includingconnection time, where necessary) had increasedin 63 percent of 246 rail city-pairs, in 68 percentof 261 air city-pairs, and in 46 percent of 250intercity bus city-pairs.
For those using personal vehicles, highwaytravel times increased in 70 of 75 urban areas(93 percent) between 1990 and 2000. In 2000,it took 39 percent longer, on average, to make apeak period trip in urban areas compared withthe time it would take if traffic were flowingfreely.
Just over 82 percent of domestic air flightsarrived on time in 2002, compared with 75 per-cent in 1996. Late flights amounted to 16 per-cent of flights in 2002, down from 23 percent in1996. Over this period, late, canceled, ordiverted flights peaked at 1.6 million in 2000,declining to just below 942,000 in 2002.
Seventy-seven percent of Amtrak trains arrivedat their final destination on time in 2002, com-pared with 72 percent in 1993. Over these years,short-distance trains—those with runs of lessthan 400 miles—have consistently registered bet-ter on-time performance than long-distancetrains—those of 400 miles or more.
4. Vehicle Weights
Vehicle traffic affects the longevity of infrastruc-ture. Traffic, on a given highway segment, canbe measured by average weights and numbers ofvehicles. Another approach to assessing high-way pavement stress is by estimating vehicleloadings on the nation’s highways. Aircraft
Chapter 1: Summary
5
BOX 2Data on Passenger-Miles of Travel
Two national estimates of passenger-miles of travel(pmt) are available; they differ in coverage, method-ology, and other factors. The 2000 pmt data present-ed in this section come from the Bureau ofTransportation Statistics (BTS) publication, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (NTS). BTS compilesthese data for NTS annually, primarily using mode-by-mode data derived in various ways by BTS andothers. For instance, pmt for large air carriers andintercity trains are estimated from ticket sales andtrip lengths; for transit, the data are reported by tran-sit authorities. Each method used to estimate thesepmt has differing strengths and weaknesses, as dis-cussed in NTS in the Accuracy Profiles for table1–34 (available at http://www.bts.gov/).
Later, in the section on Variables Influencing TravelBehavior, is a presentation of 2001 pmt data from the2001 National Household Travel Survey, jointly con-ducted by BTS and the Federal HighwayAdministration. As survey data, they are collectedusing a single methodology. This provides a coher-ence and comparability not available with the NTSdata. However, these data are not collected annually,limiting their use for trend analyses. Another differ-ence between the NTS and NHTS data is the extentof their coverage among modes. It is to be expected,then, that because of methodological and coverageissues the NTS and NHTS data will differ.
landing weights can affect airport pavement, ascan the weight of rail equipment on rail tracks.For maritime infrastructure, especially ports,vessel size (often expressed in deadweight tons(dwt)—a measure of cargo capacity), ratherthan weight, can be of concern. As larger water-borne vessels are added to the worldwide mer-chant marine fleet, U.S. ports may have toexpand to accommodate larger ships or decideto specialize in handling cargoes that are notaffected by changes in vessel size.
The number of trucks in the U.S. truck fleetgrew 23 percent between 1992 and 1997.2 Inthe Heavy category (over 26,000 pounds), thenumber of trucks grew 37 percent during theperiod, while medium trucks (between 6,001and 19,500 pounds) increased 14 percent. Lighttrucks, which include sport utility vehicles(SUVs), minivans, vans, and pickup trucks, rep-resented 86 percent of the truck fleet in 1997.The number of light trucks increased by 24 per-cent between 1992 and 1997, however, thestrongest growth occurred among SUVs (93 per-cent) and minivans (61 percent).
Large combination trucks3 made up only 6percent of traffic volume in urban areas in 2001but accounted for 77 percent of urban Interstatehighway loadings. In rural areas, they repre-sented 17 percent of traffic and 89 percent ofrural Interstate loadings in 2001. Between 1991and 2001, large combination truck traffic vol-ume grew from 14 percent to 17 percent onrural roads, while remaining the same on urbanInterstate highways.
The average capacity of containerships callingat U.S. ports increased 9 percent to nearly40,000 dwt between 1998 and 2001.4
Meanwhile, the average capacity of all types ofvessels calling at U.S. ports grew 4 percent.
The average weight of each freight railcarremained fairly constant—ranging from 63 to67 tons—between 1991 and 2001. However,this relatively steady average weight of a loadedrailcar masks countervailing trends amongselected freight commodities. Between 1991 and2001, for instance, the average weight of a car-load of coal was 110 tons in 2001, up from 99tons in 1991. Coal represented 46 percent of railfreight tonnage in 2001.
5. Variables Influencing Traveling Behavior
Results from the 2001 National HouseholdTravel Survey,5 sponsored by BTS and theFederal Highway Administration, show that thedaily non-occupational travel of all people in theUnited States totaled about 4 trillion miles, anaverage of 14,500 miles per person per year. Ona daily basis, the average person traveled 40miles, 88 percent of it in a personal vehicle.6
Overall, people took 411 billion daily trips in2001, an average of 1,500 trips per personannually or about 4 trips per day. The largestnumber of daily trips (45 percent) were to shop,to visit doctors and dentists, and for other fam-ily and personal business. Commuting—tripsmade to and from work—accounted for 15 per-cent of all personal trips in 2001. The averagelength of these trips was 12 miles.
One key factor affecting travel behavior ishousehold vehicle availability. Slightly less thanone-third of households had one personal vehi-cle available for use in 2001. A little more thanone-third of households (40 million out of 107million households) had two vehicles and
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
6
5 See box 2 on page 5 for a discussion about pmt data. Fulldetails of the 2001 National Household Travel Survey are in chap-ter 2, section 5.6 Comprises cars, vans, SUVs, pickup trucks, other trucks, recre-ational vehicles, and motorcycles.
2 These data, from the Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey con-ducted every five years, were the most recent available when thisreport was prepared.3 Large combination trucks weigh more than 12 tons and have 5or more axles.4 1998 is the first year for which data are available.
slightly less than one-quarter had three or morevehicles available. Almost 8 percent of house-holds (8.5 million) had no vehicle available foruse. People in these households tend to takefewer trips and travel shorter distances eachyear than people in households with at least onevehicle available.
6. Travel Costs of Intracity Commuting andIntercity Trips
On average, U.S. households spent $7,406 (inchained 1996 dollars) on transportation in 2001.This represented 21 percent of all householdexpenditures. Only housing cost more (31 per-cent). On average (median), half of the workingpoor spent almost 10 percent of their income(based on current 1999 dollars) on commutingexpenses in 1999. This is over twice the percent-age of income that the median of the total popu-lation spent on commuting (4 percent).
Driving an automobile 15,000 miles per yearcost 50¢ per mile in 2001, or 16 percent morethan it did in 1991, when total costs were 43¢(in chained 1996 dollars). For those using tran-sit, the average fare remained about the samebetween 1990 and 2000 (in chained 1996 dol-lars). Increases in fares per passenger-mile forsome modes of transit were offset by lower faresper passenger-mile for other modes.
On average, intercity trips via Amtrak cost 20¢per revenue passenger-mile in fiscal year 2000, up33 percent from 15¢ per revenue passenger-milein fiscal year 1993 (in chained 1996 dollars).Meanwhile, average intercity Class I bus faresrose 27 percent, from $21 to $26, between 1990and 2000 (in chained 1996 dollars).
As these data show, it is not always possible tocompare the travel costs of intracity and intercitytrips because not all mode travel costs can cur-rently be measured in the same way. However,BTS statisticians, in collaboration with theBureau of Labor Statistics, are investigating a
new method of computing price indices for airtravel. Preliminary data from this research arepresented in chapter 2. This research might oneday serve as a model for producing price indicesfor other modes, enabling better cross-modalcomparisons.
7. Availability of Mass Transit and Numberof Passengers Served
There were approximately 7,500 transit agen-cies in the United States in 2001. However,about 70 percent of the U.S. population isserved by just 580 of these agencies. Transit usecontinues to be concentrated in specific markets,such as communities where households do notown cars, in certain large cities, and in lowerincome households. Approximately 40 percentof all daily transit trips are work related.7
There were 46.5 billion urban transit pmt in2001 compared with 37.5 billion in 1991, anincrease of 24 percent. As they have historically,buses had the largest pmt share in 2001, generating19.6 billion pmt or 42 percent of all transit pmt.
While transit ridership was somewhat stag-nant between 1991 and 1996, it grew steadilybetween 1996 and 2001 to 9 billion unlinkedtrips,8 an increase of 19 percent. Bus ridershipcomprised the majority of unlinked trips (5.2 bil-lion) in 2001. However, rail transit ridership,with almost 3.5 billion trips in 2001, posted thestrongest growth (39 percent). Since at least1996, approximately 77 percent of all unlinkedtransit passenger trips (6.9 billion trips in 2001)have been made within the service area of only
Chapter 1: Summary
7
7 The datum in this sentence is from the 2001 NationalHousehold Travel Survey (see section 5 in chapter 2 for more infor-mation). The balance of the data in this summary of section 7 arefrom the Federal Transit Administration’s National TransitDatabase and National Transit Summaries and Trends, 2002 draft.Full citations are available in chapter 2.8 For a discussion of linked vs. unlinked trips, see section 7 inchapter 2.
30 such authorities. New York City transit aloneaccounted for 30 percent of all trips in 2001.
The nationwide fleet of ADA9 lift- or ramp-equipped transit buses increased to 87 percent(to 58,785 buses) in 2001 from 52 percent ofthe bus fleet in 1993. In 2001, 50 percent or1,374 rail transit stations were ADA accessible.These stations serve passengers traveling viaautomated guideway transit, cable cars, com-muter rail, heavy rail, inclined plane, light rail,monorail, and the Alaska Railroad.
8. Frequency of Vehicle and TransportationFacility Repairs
Data are not readily available to properly char-acterize the frequency of repairs for vehicles andinfrastructure of all modes. Partly, this isbecause vehicle operations for many modes arein the private sector; and, as it affects profitabil-ity, this operational information can be confi-dential. For passenger cars, actual repairfrequency data and resultant disruptions are dis-persed among car owners. However, some pri-vate organizations do collect and analyze carrepair data on a model/year basis.
In some cases where repair data are available,making the link to service interruptions can beproblematic. In other cases, maintenance costdata are available (e.g., airlines and highways).But, again, the connection between costs andfrequency and, thus, interruptions of service arenot clear. Annual data are available on U.S.domestic vessel fleet capacity, but capacityresults from market and other factors as well asrepair downtime.
Most of the vehicle repair data for the trucksand buses operated by the nation’s nearly600,000 motor carriers are not public informa-tion. A surrogate measure is data on highway
truck inspections. Over 2.0 million roadsidetruck inspections were completed in 2001, up25 percent since 1990. The percentage ofinspected trucks taken out of service declinedfrom 34 percent in 1990 to 23 percent in 2001.
Work zones on freeways cause an estimated24 percent of the nonrecurring delays on free-ways and principal arterials. The level of fund-ing applied to highway maintenance is anindirect measure of the amount of maintenanceactivity and, thus, presence of work zones onhighways. Funding for highway maintenanceincreased by 15 percent (in constant 1987 dol-lars)10 between 1990 and 2001. Pavement resur-facing represented just over half (51 percent) ofthe miles of federal-aid roads undergoing feder-ally supported construction or maintenance in2001, up from about 42 percent in 1997.11
Class I railroad companies maintained nearly170,000 miles of track in 2001, down fromnearly 200,000 miles of track in 1991.Throughout the 1990s, rail companies replacedan average of 743,000 tons of rail and an aver-age of 12.2 million crossties each year. Railroadsalso periodically replace or rebuild locomotivesand freight cars. On average, new and rebuiltlocomotives made up 4 percent of Class I rail-road fleets between 1990 and 2001.
Transit service12 interruptions due to mechan-ical failures remained relatively level from 1995through 2000,13 averaging between 18 and 19mechanical problems per 100,000 revenue vehicle-miles.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
8
10 Instead of chained 1996 dollars, constant 1987 dollars are usedhere because the Federal Highway Administration publishes itsdata accordingly.11 1997 is the earliest year for which these data are available.12 See detailed definitions of the type of transit equipmentincluded in this section in chapter 2.13 Data prior to 1995 and later than 2000 were collected using dif-ferent definitions of what constitutes an interruption of service andare not comparable.
9 ADA refers to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of1990.
Natural disasters, accidents, labor disputes,terrorism, security breaches, and other unfore-seeable incidents can result in major disruptionsto the transportation system. Although a com-prehensive account of these unpredictable inter-ruptions has not been undertaken nor datacompiled on them, numerous studies and otheranalyses have sought to evaluate the effects ofindividual events on the transportation system.
Terrorist attacks and security alerts haveaffected transportation services for decades. Afterthe terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, allcommercial flights scheduled for September 12were canceled. Many flights were canceled duringthe remainder of the month and the months thatfollowed. Two years later, air passenger traffichas not fully recovered; however, other factors,such as an economic downturn, may have con-tributed to the decrease in traffic.
9. Accidents
Crashes involving motor vehicles and other trans-portation accidents in the United States result intens of thousands of fatalities and millions ofinjuries each year. The number of fatalities andinjuries per year represent a common means forevaluating the safety of each transportationmode. Dividing the number of fatalities by popu-lation and injuries by passenger-miles traveledcan enable useful comparisons across time andmodes. However, care must be taken in doing so,because definitions of fatalities and injuries varyby mode.
There were 45,130 fatalities related to trans-portation in 2001, almost 16 fatalities per100,000 U.S. residents. This is a decline of 11percent from 18 fatalities per capita in 1991,when there were 44,320 fatalities. Nearly 93percent of all transportation fatalities in 2001were highway-related.
An estimated 3.1 million people sufferedsome kind of injury involving passenger andfreight transportation in 2001. Most of theseinjuries, about 98 percent, resulted from high-way crashes. However, injury rates for mosthighway vehicle types declined between 1991and 2001. One exception was the rate for lighttruck occupants, which rose 15 percent, from 50per 100 million pmt in 1991 to 58 per 100 mil-lion pmt in 2001.
A BTS analysis of motor vehicle-related injurydata for 200114 shows that there were sharppeaks in injuries associated with youth. Formotor vehicle occupants and motorcyclists, thepeak spanned ages 15 to 24 years; for pedalcy-clists and pedestrians, the peak spanned ages 10to 14 years. Young males exhibited a substan-tially greater peak in serious injuries than youngfemales. In addition, the percentage of injuriesclassified as serious was greater for motorcy-clists (20 percent of all motorcyclist injurieswere serious), pedestrians (19 percent), and ped-alcyclists (10 percent) than it was for motorvehicle occupants (7 percent).
Motor vehicle crashes in the United Statescost an estimated $231 billion in 2000 (in cur-rent dollars), about $820 per person or 2 per-cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Thelargest components of the total cost (26 percenteach) are market productivity—the cost of fore-gone paid labor due to death and disability—and property damage.
While transportation accidents amounted toapproximately 6 percent of the deaths of thoseunder age 65 between 1991 and 2000, thesefatalities represented 10 percent of the total
Chapter 1: Summary
9
14 This analysis was based on data from the U.S. ConsumerProduct Safety Commission’s National Electronic InjurySurveillance System. Due to methodological differences, these dataare not necessarily consistent with other injury data in this reportthat come from the U.S. Department of Transportation, NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration’s National AutomotiveSampling System General Estimates System.
years of potential life lost (YPLL)15 during thisperiod. People who die from transportationaccidents tend to be younger on average thanvictims of other causes of death.
10. Collateral Damage to the Human andNatural Environment
As people travel and freight is transported, dam-age can occur to the human and natural environ-ment. Although most available environmentaldata is limited to these movements, transporta-tion’s impact on the environment is not. It can alsooccur when transportation equipment and fuelsare produced and infrastructure is built, duringrepair and maintenance of equipment and infra-structure, and when equipment and infrastructureare no longer usable and are discarded and dis-mantled. The extent of damage throughout theselife cycles of transportation fuel, equipment, andinfrastructure can vary by mode. In all cases,actual impacts on the human and natural environ-ment are dependent on ambient levels or concen-trations of pollutants and rates of exposure.
Transportation vehicles and vessels in 2001emitted 66 percent of the nation’s pollutionfrom carbon monoxide (CO), 47 percent ofnitrogen oxides (NOx), 35 percent of volatileorganic compounds (VOC), 5 percent of partic-ulates, 6 percent of ammonia, and 4 percent ofsulfur dioxide. Highway vehicles emitted almostall of transportation’s share of CO emissions in2001, 80 percent of the NOx, and 75 percent ofall VOC. With the exception of ammonia, trans-portation air emissions have declined since1991.
Transportation emissions of greenhouse gases(GHGs) grew 22 percent between 1990 and2001, while total U.S. emissions rose 13 percent
to 6,936 teragrams of carbon dioxide (CO2)equivalent (TgCO2Eq).16 Of this, 27 percentwere emitted by transportation. Nearly all (97percent) of CO2 emissions—the predominantGHG—are generated by the combustion of fos-sil fuels. Transportation was responsible for 31percent of all U.S. CO2 emissions in 2001.Transportation CO2 emissions grew 24 percentbetween 1991 and 2001.
Transportation-related sources typicallyaccount for most oil spills into U.S. watersreported each year to the U.S. Coast Guard. Forinstance, transportation’s share of the total vol-ume of oil spilled between 1991 and 2000 var-ied from a high of 97 percent (in 1996) to a lowof 77 percent (in 1992). The volume of eachspill varies significantly from incident to inci-dent. One catastrophic incident can, however,spill millions of gallons into the environment.
Transportation firms reported more than17,700 hazardous materials incidents in 2001.17
These incidents resulted in 7 deaths and 143injuries, compared with annual averages of 21deaths and 445 injuries between 1991 and2001. During that decade, the number ofreported hazardous material incidents increased.However, much of the increase may be attrib-uted to improved reporting and an expansion ofreporting requirements.
11. Condition of the Transportation System
Two major components of the transportationsystem—vehicles and infrastructure—are proneto deterioration due to wear, aging, and damage.Another component, capacity, is important tounderstand to aid planners in meeting thedemands for travel and shipping affected by, say,congestion. Measures of the net capital stock of
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
10
16 Including sinks, net U.S. emissions totaled 6,098 TgCO2Eq in2001. See section 10 in chapter 2 for more information on sinks.17 See this section in chapter 2 for a definition of a reported inci-dent.
15 YPLL, which is computed by adding up the remaining lifeexpectancies of all victims at their deaths, is a measurement thataccounts for the age distribution among different causes of injurymortality and other common causes of death.
the transportation system—the value in dollarsof vehicles, infrastructure, and other compo-nents—provide comprehensive indicators thatcombine system condition (quality) with capac-ity (quantity). This measure gives a sense of theamount of money invested in the system overtime and allows for comparisons across modes.
Highway-related capital stock (highwayinfrastructure, consumer motor vehicles, andtrucking and warehousing) represented themajority of the nation’s transportation capitalstock in 2000 (at $2,166 billion, in 1996chained dollars). Rail also represented a sub-stantial portion of transportation capital stock;although, it was still less than one-sixth of high-way-related capital stock. The combined valueof privately owned capital stock for other modesof the transportation system, including rail,water, air, pipeline, and transit, is less than thevalue of consumer motor vehicles alone. Allhighway-related capital stocks increasedbetween 1990 and 2000. In-house transporta-tion grew 81 percent, while transportation serv-ices (a component of all modes) rose 83 percent.
Individual data on vehicle and infrastructurecondition are collected by several operating administrations of the U.S. Department of Trans-portation, such as the Federal HighwayAdministration and the Federal AviationAdministration. These data reflect qualitative eval-uations of the pavement and associated structures.
The condition of highways, bridges, and air-port runways have all improved in recent years.The percentage of rural Interstate mileage inpoor or mediocre condition declined from 35percent in 1993 to 14 percent in 2001.Moreover, poor or mediocre urban Interstatemileage decreased from 42 to 28 percent duringthis same period. Of the nearly 600,000 road-way bridges in 2001, 14 percent were deemedstructurally deficient and 14 percent function-ally obsolete. Ten years earlier, about 40 percent
of bridges were either structurally deficient orfunctionally obsolete. At the nation’s commer-cial service airports, pavement in poor conditiondeclined from 5 percent of runways in 1990 to2 percent in 2001. For the larger group of sev-eral thousand National Plan of IntegratedAirport Systems airports, poor conditionsexisted at 5 percent of runways in 2001, downfrom 10 percent in 1990.
The age of various transportation fleets isanother measure of condition, although not avery precise one. The equipment in air, rail,highway, water, and transit transportation fleetsvaries widely in terms of scheduled mainte-nance, reliability, and expected life span.Additional information, such as fleet mainte-nance standards, actual hours of vehicle use,and durability, would provide a more thoroughmeans for analyzing the condition of a vehiclefleet and comparing fleets across modes.
Because of improvements in the longevity ofpassenger cars, the median age of the automo-bile fleet in the United States has increased sig-nificantly since 1992. The median age of thetruck fleet,18 by contrast, began to increase inthe early 1990s but has been declining since1997 as new purchases of light trucks haveincreased substantially.
The age of transit vehicles varies by transitand vehicle type. For instance, ferryboat fleetshave aged, while the average age of full-sizetransit buses has decreased between 1990 and2000. Similarly, the age of the U.S. maritime flagvessel fleet varies by vessel type. While 28 per-cent of the overall U.S. flag vessel fleet was 25years old or more in 2000, 50 percent of tow-boats and 43 percent of tank and liquid bargeswere 25 years old or older in 2000.
The average age of Amtrak locomotives andrailcars has declined by a year between 1990
Chapter 1: Summary
11
18 This includes all truck categories: light, heavy, and heavy-heavy.
and 2000. Of the 20,028 Class I freight locomo-tives in service in 2000, 37 percent were built in1990 or later. While these data on rail equip-ment are publicly available, data on the condi-tion of infrastructure are not released by thenation’s private railroads.
Finally, the average age of all U.S. commercialaircraft was 13 years in 2000, up from 11 yearsin 1991. While the average age of aircraftbelonging to the major airlines was also 11 yearsin 1991, it was a year younger than the fleetaverage in 2000.
12. Transportation-Related Variables ThatInfluence Global Competitiveness
Transportation contributes to economic activityand to a nation’s global competitiveness as aservice, an industry, and an infrastructure. Itaffects the price competitiveness of domesticgoods and services because final market pricesreflect transportation costs.
The United States had relatively lower pricesfor transportation goods and services in 199919
than 15 out of 25 Organization for EconomicCooperation and Development countries.However, the nation’s top two overall merchan-dise trade partners, Canada and Mexico, hadlower relative prices in 1999 than the UnitedStates.
The United States traded $300 billion worth(in current dollars)20 of transportation-relatedgoods (e.g., cars, trains, boats, and airplanesand their related parts) in 2002 with its part-ners, more than twice the nominal value of thesecommodities in 1990. As is the case with overallinternational trade, the United States had a mer-
chandise trade deficit in transportation-relatedgoods exports and imports, totaling $82 billionin 2002.
U.S. trade in transportation services in 2002totaled $105.4 billion (in current dollars). TheUnited States had a surplus in transportationservices from 1990 through 1997. Then,between 1997 and 1998, imports increased 7percent while exports decreased 5 percent,resulting in a $4.6 billion deficit. This deficitcontinued to grow, reaching $13.9 billion in2002.
Since competitiveness implies advantages inexporting certain products, these measures indi-cate the relative U.S. position in transportation-related goods and services. While thesemeasures are good indicators of export perform-ance, they only indirectly measure the relativecompetitive position of the United States,because several other factors besides trade influ-ence competitiveness. A central concept thatunderpins trade among nations, sectors, indus-tries, and firms is comparative advantage.Comparative advantage in trade occurs whentrading partners seek to benefit from the abilityto produce goods or services more efficiently orcost-effectively than other countries. The impli-cation of this concept is that no country has acomparative advantage in the production ofevery good and service. In this sense, competi-tiveness refers to the advantage one country mayhave over other nations in exporting certainproducts, with the ultimate goal being theimprovement of the country’s prosperity andstandard of living.
13. Transportation and Economic Growth
Transportation comprises a sizable segment ofthe U.S. economy. Total transportation-relatedfinal demand rose by 37 percent between 1990and 2001 (in 1996 chained dollars), from$719.8 billion to $984.1 billion. This meas-
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
12
19 1999 is the most recent year for which comparable interna-tional data were available at the time this report was prepared.20 All dollar amounts in this section are in current dollars. Whileit is important to compare trends in economic activity using con-stant or chained dollars to eliminate the effects of price inflation,it is not possible to do so in this instance (see notes on chapter 2figures and corresponding tables in appendix B).
ure—the value of transportation-related goodsand services sold to the final users—is a compo-nent of GDP and a broad measure of the impor-tance of transportation to the economy. In2001, the share of transportation-related finaldemand in GDP was 11 percent, the same as in1990.
The contribution of for-hire transportationindustries to the U.S. economy, as measured bytheir value-added (or net output), increased (in1996 chained dollars) from $181 billion in 1990to $270 billion in 2001. In the same time period,this segment’s share in GDP fluctuated slightly,increasing from 2.7 percent in 1990 to 3.0 per-cent in 1999 before declining to 2.9 percent in2001. This is also a component of GDP but can-not be added to transportation final demandbecause the two measures reflect differentapproaches (supply-side and demand-side) toassessing the relationship between transporta-tion and the economy.
14. Government Transportation Finance
Governments collect revenues and spend moneyon transportation-related infrastructure andequipment. Federal, state, and local governmenttransportation revenues targeted to financetransportation programs21 increased 38 percentfrom $82.2 billion in 1990 (in 1996 chaineddollars)22 to $113.6 billion in 2000.
Spending on building, maintaining, operat-ing, and administering the nation’s transporta-tion system by all levels of government totaled$149.0 billion in 2000 (in 1996 chained dol-lars). Among all modes of transportation, high-ways receive the largest amount of totalgovernment transportation expenditures. In
2000, this amounted to $93.6 billion andaccounted for nearly 63 percent of the total.
Gross government transportation investment,23
including infrastructure and vehicles, is a measureof the building of new public transportation capi-tal. As a major component of the nation’s totaltransportation capital stocks, gross investmenthas risen steadily over the last decade from $59.0billion in 1990 to $76.0 billion in 2000, anincrease of 29 percent (in 1996 chained dollars).
15. Transportation Energy
Transportation energy use rose 22 percentbetween 1991 and 2001, to 28 percent of thenation’s total energy consumption in 2001. Still,transportation energy use has grown moreslowly than GDP over the decade, indicatingthat the U.S. economy is gradually becomingless energy intensive and, thus, less vulnerable tochanges in energy prices. Highway vehicles con-sumed an estimated 81 percent of transporta-tion sector energy in 2001.
Transportation fuel prices experiencedshort-term fluctuations (in 1996 chained dol-lars) between 1992 and 2002. However, percapita vehicle-miles traveled (vmt) for allmodes of transportation increased in almostevery year. For instance, between 1991 and2001, per capita highway vmt rose about 1percent annually, while that of large air carri-ers grew 3 percent.
Passenger travel overall was 5 percent moreenergy efficient in 2000 than in 1990, mainlydue to gains by domestic commercial aviation.(Improved aircraft fuel economy and increasedpassenger loads resulted in a 32 percent gain incommercial air passenger energy efficiencybetween 1990 and 2000.) Freight energy effi-ciency (ton-miles/BTU) declined 7 percent from
Chapter 1: Summary
13
21 See this section in chapter 2 for detailed descriptions of the gov-ernment revenues included.22 All dollar values in the summary of this section are expressed in1996 chained dollars.
23 See this section in chapter 2 for detailed descriptions of trans-portation investments.
1990 to 2000. The decline in freight energy effi-ciency occurred as a result of a 2 percent aver-age annual growth rate in ton-miles paired witha relatively rapid average annual growth rate of3 percent in freight energy consumption.
SUMMARY OF THE STATE OFTRANSPORTATION STATISTICS(CHAPTER 3)
Chapter 3 presents an overview of the state oftransportation statistics. It focuses on five coreareas: freight, passenger travel, air transporta-tion, economic, and geospatial data. Each sec-tion provides an analysis of why these data areimportant, a review of existing data, and possi-ble options for filling crucial data gaps.
1. Freight Data
Changes in freight transportation reflect thedynamic nature of the national and globaleconomies and continuing improvements andinnovations in technology. Alterations in themix of manufactured products, shifts in globalproduction and trade patterns, and growingdomestic demands from industry and consumersall affect freight transportation and related dataneeds.
The consensus among the transportationcommunity on collected freight data is that theyare often too out of date to capture currentdevelopments and despite progress, there aremany missing pieces to the freight picture.Furthermore, data are often not comparableacross modes. Current data collections includethe Commodity Flow Survey and the CarloadWaybill Sample; data on waterborne commerce,air freight, and motor carriers; and data cover-ing international shipments. Despite the wealthof these data, important gaps remain in data onfreight flows, origins and destinations of ship-ments, commodities shipped, transit times,
shipment costs, the nodal connections throughwhich freight passes, and infrastructure andequipment used to sustain freight flows.
Options to improve freight data centeraround enhancing the Commodity Flow Survey.They include changing from the current five-year cycle to more frequent data collection andexpanding coverage. Other approaches focus onstandardizing the universal bill of lading andusing information technologies to aid in collect-ing data.
2. Passenger Travel Statistics
A much-valued feature of American life is theability to travel from place to place with relativeease, at a reasonable expense, and in a minimalamount of time, whether it is across town, crosscountry, or to a foreign destination. Americansaverage 1,500 trips annually, covering an aver-age of 14,500 miles per person.24
Many kinds of data are needed to evaluate(and forecast) this demand for passenger traveland how well the supply meets the demand.Data are needed for the different modes oftransportation and at various levels of detail,including geographic scale. Questions that helpevaluate the needs of current and future travel-ers include why people travel, how and whenthey travel, what their origins and destinationsare, how long travel takes, and how much itcosts. Travel data, in combination with othertypes of data, can also be used to assess the costsand benefits of travel, including transportationsafety and its environmental effects.
There are three main types of passenger traveldata: survey, regulatory/administrative, andoperations/industry data. Each type providesdifferent levels of detail in terms of coverage,periodicity, and geography; and each possesses
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
14
24 These data are from the 2001 National Household TravelSurvey. See chapter 2, section 5.
different strengths and weaknesses. The princi-pal survey—the National Household TravelSurvey (NHTS) and its precursors—has beenconducted periodically. The 2001 NHTS, con-ducted by BTS and the Federal HighwayAdministration (FHWA), asked 26,000 house-holds nationwide about their daily non-occupa-tional travel, as well as about long-distance trips(trips of 50 miles or more one way) taken dur-ing a 4-week period.
Other surveys that provide travel data includethe long form of the decennial census (U.S.Census Bureau), Survey of International AirTravelers (Department of Commerce), GeneralAviation and Air Taxi Activity Survey (FederalAviation Administration), airline passengerOrigin and Destination Survey (BTS), and VehicleInventory and Use Survey (FHWA). Regulatoryand administrative sources of passenger datainclude the National Transit Database (FederalTransit Administration) and the HighwayPerformance Monitoring System (FHWA). TheFederal Transit Administration collects data fromtransit authorities; FHWA, from state depart-ments of transportation. Industry sources thatrelease operations data include the AmericanPublic Transportation Association (transit),Amtrak, and airline associations.
Options to improve passenger travel datainclude: expanding coverage of key existingdatasets to additional modes, improving the speci-ficity of intercity bus and rail data, enhancing dataon rural transportation, collecting data on popu-lations with special needs, and working on thedetail and completeness of existing travel datasets.
3. Air Transportation Statistics
Airline traffic and financial statistics were firstcollected by the federal government in the 1930sfor use in monitoring and promoting the fledg-ling air transport industry. Today, the U.S.Department of Transportation (DOT) collects avariety of air passenger and freight statistics
from more than 240 domestic and foreign air-lines serving the United States.
The federal government’s use of air transportdata supports policy initiatives and interna-tional air service negotiations, monitoring of aircarrier fitness, allocating airport improvementfunds, ensuring the provision of essential airservices, setting international and intra-Alaskamail rates, and safety and security analysis.Other agencies’ uses of the data vary. Forinstance, the Department of Labor uses aviationdata in their computation of productivity andconsumer price indices. The Department ofJustice uses data to monitor the collection ofcustoms service fees and for anti-trust cases.Other uses range from airport planning, trafficforecasting, and development of tourism initia-tives by state and local governments; travelplanning by the general public; planning andmarketing by the travel and tourism industry;and forecasting and analysis by airlines.
The four main categories of airline statisticsthat now exist, financial, operational and traffic,pricing and fees, and safety, provide different lev-els of detail in terms of coverage, periodicity, andfocus. The federal government collects the major-ity of publicly available aggregated airline statis-tics directly from air carriers. The Air TransportAssociation reports member data on a quarterlyand monthly basis on airfares, a cost index, andpassenger and cargo traffic. The InternationalCivil Aviation Organization collects internationalair data covering 188 countries.
Options to improve air transportation datainclude implementation of current BTS researchon computing price indices for air travel, com-bining traffic data on air taxis and corporate jetswith information from the NationalTransportation Safety Board for conductingexposure/risk analysis, expanding the collectionof on-time statistics to smaller carriers and inter-national flights, and allowing collection offlight-specific air transportation data.
Chapter 1: Summary
15
4. Transportation Economic Data
Transportation economics refers to industry per-formance on key economic measures such asprices, quantities, productivity, and externalities.It looks at not only how the industry performsdirectly in meeting the needs of its customers, butalso how it affects the economy as a whole, basedon, for example, measures of employment, out-put, and international competitiveness.
Currently available economic data fall intoseveral categories: prices, quantities, investment,productivity, externalities and regulation, andimpacts of the economy. Price may be the meas-ure on which customers most often focus. Goodpassenger travel price data exist for some modesbut not for others. Some data are available forfreight movement but are limited in a number ofways. Quantity data measure the level of mobil-ity that transportation enables. Again, the avail-ability of these data vary between passengertravel and freight and among modes.
Investment data relate to both the capacity andcondition of the system. Capital stock data areavailable for the private transportation sectorsbut not for publicly owned sectors. Productivitymeasures how effectively economic inputs areconverted into output. Two forms are used: laborand multifactor productivity. While data for theformer are widely available, only railroad indus-try multifactor productivity data are available.
Measures of the costs of external effects oftransportation (e.g., on safety, congestion, andthe environment) are important in determiningwhether various kinds of regulation of trans-portation are appropriate. Data on the physicalquantity of most of these externalities are avail-able. Exact locations, costs, actual impacts, andother data are less available.
Options for improving transportation economicdata include: further development of the BTS air-fare price index, expansion of the TransportationSatellite Accounts data to additional modes andservices, augmentation of capital stock data, anddevelopment of multifactor productivity measuresfor modes other than railroads.
5. Geospatial Data
Geospatial information technologies havebecome increasingly useful decisionmaking toolsfor the transportation industry and agenciesresponsible for transportation planning and assetmanagement. Previously used only by expertoperators on specialized mainframe systems, theyare now available for desktop systems and dis-tributed computing services that give nontechni-cal users access to spatial analytical tools.
BTS creates, maintains, and distributesgeospatial data (on rail and highway networks,airports and runways, ports, and Amtrak sta-tions) by state, county, congressional district,and metropolitan statistical area boundaries.The National Bridge Inventory maintained byFHWA contains information describing loca-tions and conditions that can be displayed car-tographically and analyzed. In partnership withthe DOT Office of Intermodalism and FHWA,BTS developed GeoFreight,25 a tool enablinganalyses of the intensity of infrastructure use forintermodal facilities (e.g., airports, seaports, andtruck-rail interchanges).
Key areas for future geospatial data and stan-dards development critical for transportationanalysis include land-use planning, employee-based travel pattern analysis, and fine-graineddata on infrastructure and operations critical totransportation safety and security analysis.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
16
25 In earlier versions, this tool was called the IntermodalBottleneck Evaluation Tool (IBET).
Specific areas include: integration of bridge, tun-nel, and transit data in the NationalTransportation Atlas Database; development ofa North American Transportation AtlasDatabase; and expansion of a current web-based mapping center to enable customers togenerate interactive maps and spatial analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
While a wealth of data exist to inform stake-holders about the state of transportation, muchwork remains to be done. Data need to be col-lected or collected differently, relevant linkagesamong datasets need to be established, and dataneed to be analyzed and offered in ways usefulfor stakeholders at all levels of government andthe private sector.
Chapter 1: Summary
17
Chapter 2
TransportationIndicators
21
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21stCentury1 charged the Bureau of Transpor-
tation Statistics (BTS) with compiling, analyzing,and publishing a comprehensive set of transporta-tion statistics, including information on:
■ productivity in various parts of the trans-portation sector;
■ traffic flows;■ travel times;■ vehicle weights;■ variables influencing traveling behavior,
including choice of transportation mode;■ travel costs of intracity commuting and
intercity trips;■ availability of mass transit and the number
of passengers served by each mass transitauthority;
■ frequency of vehicle and transportation facil-ity repairs and other interruptions of trans-portation service;
■ accidents;■ collateral damage to the human and natural
environment;■ the condition of the transportation system; and■ transportation-related variables that influ-
ence global competitiveness.
For this report, BTS has added three additionaltopics: transportation and economic growth, gov-ernment transportation finance, and transporta-tion energy. Each of these topics is represented bya series of key indicators. Data tables supporting
all the indicators are in appendix B at the end ofthe report. Appendix table numbers correspondto the figures numbers in this chapter.
1 49 U.S. Code 111(c)(1).
About the Data in the Report
For consistency, most trend indicator data are shownover at least a 10-year period. Because of the differingavailability of data among all the indicators included, ithas not been possible to use the same span of 10years for each indicator without sacrificing timeliness.Instead, the data span a decade up to the year of mostrecent data available when this report was prepared.There are some instances where less than 10 years ofdata are presented—either because the data are notcomparable over the period or are not available.
With a few exceptions, trend data involving costs havebeen converted to 1996 chained (“real”) dollars to elim-inate the effect of inflation over time. Appendix B pro-vides both 1996 chained dollar and current dollar valuetables. Throughout the report, results of percent calcu-lations have been rounded up or down, as appropriate,to a whole number. Average annual percentagechange calculations have been made using a logarith-mic formula to account for compounding over time.1
Data in this report come from a variety of sources:principally, from the Bureau of TransportationStatistics and other operating administrations of theDepartment of Transportation. However, othersources are federal government agencies, such asthe U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of EconomicAnalysis, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S.Coast Guard, and Energy Information Administration.To supplement government sources, the report occa-sionally uses data and information from trade associ-ations, such as the Association of American Railroadsand American Public Transportation Association. Datafrom any of these sources may be subject to omis-sions and errors in reporting, recording, and process-ing. Sampling data are subject to sampling variability.Documents cited as sources in this report often pro-vide detailed information about definitions, method-ologies, and statistical reliability.
1 The formula is: Average annual rate = Exp [(LnY–LnX)/ (n–m)] –1,where Y is the end year value; X is the initial year value, n is the endyear, and m is the initial year.
Introduction
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
22
Sec
tio
n 1
:P
rod
uct
ivit
y in
th
e Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n S
ecto
r
Labor productivity (output per hour) in thefor-hire transportation services and petro-
leum pipeline industries increased by 20 percentfrom 1990 to 2000. This compares with anincrease of 45 percent for all manufacturing and23 percent for the overall business sector (figure1). Labor productivity, a common and basic pro-ductivity measure, is calculated as the ratio ofoutput to hours worked or to the number of full-time employees.
The growth of individual transportation sub-sector labor productivity between 1990 and2000 varied (figure 2). Compared with the over-all business sector, several transportation modeshad considerably higher rates of increases inlabor productivity, and some lower, over thesame period. Railroad labor productivityincreased 65 percent, as did local trucking, whilepipeline productivity grew 38 percent. On theother hand, labor productivity in air transporta-tion increased 19 percent, “trucking except
local” increased 18 percent, and Class I bus car-riers rose 16 percent.
Comparing annual growth rates is anotherway to interpret changes of labor productivityover time. For overall business, labor productiv-ity grew at an average annual rate of 2 percentbetween 1990 and 2000. Labor productivity inrail transportation—where productivity hasbeen affected by consolidation of companies,more efficient use of equipment and lines,increased ton-miles (output), and labor forcereductions—increased by 5 percent annually.Labor productivity of local trucking also grew at5 percent annually.
The lowest annual labor productivity growthrates were for pipelines (3 percent), truckingexcept local subsector (1.7 percent), and airtransportation (1.8 percent). Bus carriers’ pro-ductivity grew 1.5 percent but with considerablefluctuation over the period of analysis.
Labor Productivity in Transportation
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
23
Sectio
n 1:
Pro
du
ctivity in th
e Transp
ortatio
n S
ector
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 200090
110
130
150
170
Manufacturing
Transportation
All business
Index: 1990 = 100
100
120
140
160
FIGURE 1 Labor Productivity of Major Sectors: 1990–2000 Output per hour
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 200090
110
130
150
170Index: 1990 = 100
Local trucking
RailroadPetroleum pipeline
Trucking,except local
Bus carriers, Class I
Air100
120
140
160
FIGURE 2 Labor Productivity of For-Hire TransportationIndustries:1990–2000
NOTES: Labor productivity for transportation measures quality-adjusted ton- and passenger-miles per hour. Quality adjustmentcorrects for differences in services and handling, e.g., the differ-ence between flying first class and coach or differences in thehandling requirements of high- and low-value commodities.Pipeline labor productivity is measured by output per employee.No data are available for water transportation.
Local trucking includes establishments that generally providetrucking services within a single municipality, contiguous munici-palities, or a municipality and its suburban areas. Trucking,except local, includes common or contract carriers that gener-
ally provide trucking service beyond a single municipality, con-tiguous municipalities, or a municipality and its suburban areas
SOURCES: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, calculation based on data from U.S.Department of Labor (USDOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics(BLS), Office of Productivity and Technology, "IndustryProductivity Database," available at http://www.bls.gov, as ofFebruary 2003. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, "Gross Domestic Product by Industry,"February 2003. Manufacturing and business—USDOL, BLS,Office of Productivity and Technology, "Industry ProductivityDatabase," available at http://www.bls.gov, as of February 2003.
Multifactor productivity (MFP) in railtransportation increased by 30 percent
between 1990 and 1999 (an average annual rateof 3 percent), while in the overall private busi-ness sector, MFP increased by 8 percent (lessthan 1 percent annually) (figure 3). Thus, therail industry has contributed positively toincreases in MFP in the business sector and tothe U.S. economy over this period.
While MFP measures are difficult to con-struct, they provide a much more comprehensiveview of productivity than labor productivitymeasures. The conventional methodology forcalculating multifactor productivity, which isused here, employs growth rates of inputsweighted by their income shares. This methodol-ogy has been developed and used by various aca-demic researchers and government agencies,such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics.1
Transportation MFP data are currently avail-able from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for therail sector only. The Bureau of TransportationStatistics is developing MFP measures for othertransportation industries, such as air, pipelines,and so on. The objective is to provide informa-tion on the relative importance of changes in theinputs and on the productivity of the inputs rel-ative to changes in transportation output. Thisresearch should also provide information on therelative importance of transportation in increas-ing the productivity of the U.S. economy and,hence, transportation’s contribution to the eco-nomic growth of the country.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
24
Sec
tio
n 1
:P
rod
uct
ivit
y in
th
e Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n S
ecto
r
1 See, for instance, discussion on MFP by the Bureau of LaborStatistics in the BLS Handbook of Methods, available athttp://www.bls.gov/opub/hom/homch11_a.htm.
Multifactor Productivity
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
25
Sectio
n 1:
Pro
du
ctivity in th
e Transp
ortatio
n S
ector
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 200190
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135Index: 1990 = 100
Railroad
Private business sector
FIGURE 3 Multifactor Productivity: 1990–2001
NOTE: Rail productivity data are only available through 1999.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, available athttp://www.bls.gov/mfp, as of February 2003. Business sector—"Multifactor ProductivityTrends," table 1. Rail—"Industry Multifactor Productivity Data Table by Industry,1987–1999."
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
26
Sec
tio
n 2
:Tra
ffic
Flo
ws
Estimated passenger-miles of travel (pmt) inthe United States increased 24 percent
between 1990 and 2000 (see box). Pmt totaledan estimated 4.7 trillion in 2000,1 about 17,000miles for every man, woman, and child [2, 3].
Just over 85 percent of passenger travel in2000 was made in personal vehicles (passengercars and light trucks, including sport utility vehi-cles, pickups, and minivans) (figure 4). Most ofthe balance (11 percent) occurred by air.Passenger travel in light trucks accounted for alittle under one-third of all pmt. Transit, exclud-ing bus transit, made up less than 1 percent ofpmt in 2000; with transit bus included, itaccounts for 4 percent.
Travel increased every year between 1990 and2000 at an annual average rate of 2 percent [3].Pmt by air and by light truck grew the fastestover this period, at 4 percent per year on aver-age (figure 5). Pmt by intercity train (Amtrak)declined, although there has been modestgrowth since 1996. Likewise, transit pmt hasgrown since the mid-1990s.
Passenger travel has increased during the1990s for a variety of reasons. The resident pop-ulation of the United States grew by nearly 33million people over this period [2]. Moreover,the economy also grew significantly. GrossDomestic Product (GDP) increased by 37 per-cent2 and GDP per capita grew 21 percentbetween 1990 and 2000 (figure 6) [1].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, National Income and ProductAccounts, summary GDP table, available athttp://www.bea.doc/bea/dn1.htm, as of May 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. CensusBureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States:2002 (Washington, DC: 2003), for populationdata.
3. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2003),table 1-34, also available at http://www.bts.gov/.
Passenger-Miles of Travel
1 This calculation excludes travel in heavy trucks, by bicycle, bywalking, and by boat (including recreational boat). Pmt in heavytrucks is excluded because such travel is assumed to be incidentalto the hauling of freight, the main purpose of such travel. Bicycle,pedestrian, and boat travel are excluded because there are nonational estimates available on an annual basis. 2 Calculation is based on chained 1996 dollars.
Data on Passenger-Miles of Travel
Two national estimates of passenger-miles of travel(pmt) are available; they differ in coverage, methodol-ogy, and other factors. The 2000 pmt data presentedin Section 2 come from the Bureau of TransportationStatistics (BTS) publication, National TransportationStatistics 2002 (NTS). BTS compiles these data forNTS annually, primarily using mode-by-mode dataderived in various ways by BTS and others. Forinstance, pmt for large air carriers and intercity trainsare estimated from ticket sales and trip lengths; fortransit, the data are reported by transit authorities.Each method used to estimate these pmt has differingstrengths and weaknesses, as discussed in theAccuracy Profiles for table 1-34 in NTS 2002, avail-able at http://www.bts.gov/.
Section 5, Variables Influencing Traveling Behavior,presents 2001 pmt data from the 2001 NationalHousehold Travel Survey, jointly conducted by BTSand the Federal Highway Administration. As surveydata, they are collected using a single methodology.This provides a coherence and comparability notavailable with the NTS data. However, these data arenot collected annually, making them unsuitable foryear-to-year trend analyses. Another differencebetween the NTS and NHTS data is the extent oftheir coverage among modes. It can be expected,then, that because of methodological and coverageissues the NTS and NHTS data will differ.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
27
Sectio
n 2:Traffic F
low
s
Motorcycle <1%
Bus 3%
Transit1%
Light truck 31%
Passenger car 54%
Air carrier 11%
Amtrak <1%
General aviation <1%
FIGURE 4 Share of Passenger-Miles by Mode: 2000
NOTES: Transit includes motor bus, heavy rail, commuter rail,light rail, ferryboat, trolley bus, demand responsive, and others.Motor bus and demand responsive figures are also included inthe bus figure for highway.
SOURCES: Passenger-miles—U.S. Department ofTransportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), table 1-34, also available at http://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003.
Gross Domestic Product—Based on chained 1996 dollar datafrom U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, National Income and Product Accounts,summary GDP table, available at http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/,as of May 2003. Population—USDOC, U.S. Census Bureau,National Intercensal Estimates 1990-2000, available athttp://census.gov/popest/data/national/tables/intercensal/US-EST90INT-01.php, as of May 2003.
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6Index: 1990 = 1.0
Light truck
Air carrier Bus
Transit
Passenger car
Amtrak
FIGURE 5 Change in Passenger-Miles by Selected Mode: 1990–2000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6Index: 1990 = 1.0
GDP
Population
GDP per capita
FIGURE 6 Total U.S. Population and Gross Domestic Product (GDP): 1990–2000
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
28
Sec
tio
n 2
:Tra
ffic
Flo
ws
Excluding gas pipelines, all modes of freighttransportation, combined, generated nearly
4 trillion domestic ton-miles in 2000, 20 percentmore than in 1990. This represents an averagegrowth rate of almost 2 percent per year duringthe decade [1].
Domestic ton-miles for all modes, exceptwater, grew during this decade (figure 7). On anaverage annual basis, air grew the fastest (5 per-cent per year), followed by rail and truck (4 per-cent each). Rail and truck accounted for themajority of domestic traffic, representing 39 per-cent and 30 percent of domestic ton-miles,respectively, in 2000 (figure 8). Truck data,however, do not include retail and governmentshipments and some imports and, therefore,understate total truck traffic.
Water transportation and oil pipelines1
accounted for 16 and 15 percent of domesticton-miles, respectively, in 2000. Althoughdomestic waterborne ton-miles decreased 23percent between 1990 and 2000, waterbornevessels continued to play a prominent role ininternational trade [1, 2]. Ships transported 78percent (by ton) of U.S. imports and exports in2000.
Air freight tends to transport high value, rela-tively low weight goods. Thus, on a ton-milesbasis, air freight accounted for less than 1 per-cent of domestic freight in 1998, whereas on avalue basis, this mode accounted for 12 percentof domestic freight2 [3].
Ton-miles is the primary physical measure offreight transportation output. A ton-mile isdefined as one ton of freight shipped one mileand, therefore, reflects both the volume shipped(tons) and the distance shipped (miles). Ton-miles provides the best single measure of thephysical volume of freight transportation serv-ices. This, in turn, reflects the overall level ofactivity in the economy.
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington DC: 2002),table 1-44, also available at http://www.bts.gov/.
2. _____, U.S. International Trade and FreightTransportation Trends (Washington, DC: 2003).
3. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration, The Freight Story(Washington, DC: 2002).
Domestic Freight Ton-Miles
1 The Bureau of Transportation Statistics developed data for gaspipelines in 2003 but not in time to include in this report.
2 The most recent year for which freight value basis data areavailable is 1998.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
29
Sectio
n 2:Traffic F
low
s
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 20000.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8Index: 1990 = 1.0
Air
Rail
Truck
Oil pipeline
Water
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999
FIGURE 7 Change in Domestic Freight Ton-Miles by Mode: 1990–2000
Air
Truck
Rail
Water
Oil pipeline15%
<1%
30%
39%
16%
FIGURE 8 Modal Shares of Domestic Freight Ton-Miles: 2000
SOURCES: Air, pipeline, and water—U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT),Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), National Transportation Statistics 2002(Washington, DC: 2002), table 1-44. Truck—BTS calculation based on USDOT, BTS,Transportation Statistics Annual Report 2000 (Washington, DC: 2001), p. 124; andUSDOT, Federal Highway Administration, Highway Statistics 2001 (Washington, DC:2002), table VM-1. Rail—BTS calculation based on Surface Transportation Board, CarloadWaybill Sample; Transport Canada, Transportation in Canada (Ottawa, Ontario: Annualissues), table 12-1; American Association of Railroads, Railroad Facts (Washington, DC:1991–2001 issues), p. 36.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
30
Sec
tio
n 2
:Tra
ffic
Flo
ws
The U.S. transportation system carried 20percent more ton-miles of domestic freight
in 2000 than in 1990 [1]. This growth wasunevenly distributed in terms of geography andmode. The Federal Highway Administrationdeveloped the Freight Analysis Framework(FAF) to estimate geographic freight flows onthe nation’s infrastructure [2]. These results canbe depicted on maps like those on the followingpages.
Nearly one-third of urban Interstate highwayscarried more than 10,000 trucks each day onaverage in 1998,1 according to FAF estimates.By 2020, the portion of heavily used urbanInterstates is expected to rise to 69 percent [2].Rail freight flows appear to be more concen-trated than trucking flows. In addition togrowth in domestic freight shipments, increasedtrade with Mexico and Canada has altered thedistribution of freight movement within theUnited States, creating high traffic areas nearborders [3].
For waterborne freight, domestic flows arehighly concentrated along the Mississippi andOhio Rivers. Domestic waterborne ton-milesdecreased 23 percent between 1990 and 2000 [1].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT),Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), calcu-lation based on USDOT, BTS, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC:2002), table 1-44, also available at http://www.bts.gov.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration, Freight AnalysisFramework website, available at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/adfrmwrk/ index.htm, as ofMarch 2003.
3. _____, The Freight Story (Washington, DC:November 2002), also available at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/, as of March2003.
Geography of Domestic Freight Flows
1 At the time this report was prepared, 1998 was the most recentyear for which data were available.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
31
Sectio
n 2:Traffic F
low
s
Network flows (tons)
500,000–2,000,0002,000,001–5,000,0005,000,001–10,000,00010,000,001–50,000,000> 50,000,000
FIGURE 9 Truck Freight Flows in the United States: 1998
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office ofFreight Management and Operations, Operations Core Business Unit, Freight AnalysisFramework (FAF).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
32
Sec
tio
n 2
:Tra
ffic
Flo
ws
> 20 million
Network flows (tons)
5 million–20 million
< 5 million
FIGURE 10 Rail Freight Flows in the United States: 1999
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Policy, personal communication, August 2003.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
33
Sectio
n 2:Traffic F
low
s
Network flows (tons)
1–30,000,000
30,000,001–80,000,000
> 80,000,000
FIGURE 11 Domestic Freight Flows by Waterborne Transportation: 1998
NOTE: The thinnest lines shown in the oceans represent routes on the domesticwaterborne freight network, not tonnage flowing on those routes.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,Office of Freight Management and Operations, Operations Core Business Unit,Freight Analysis Framework (FAF).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
34
Sec
tio
n 3
:Tra
vel T
imes
Intercity air, bus and rail schedules in manymajor intercity markets are tending to grow
longer. Between February 1995 and February2002, advertised travel times in selected city-pairs experienced varying degrees of schedulelengthening in most service categories.
A Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS)study in 2003 found that the extent of changes inscheduled travel time differed by mode (figure12). In at least half of the direct service city-pairs(no transfer en route) studied for each mode,scheduled travel times were longer. Scheduledtrip time increased in 177 of 261 nonstop airlinecity-pairs studied (68 percent), 44 of 72 directrail service city pairs (61 percent), and 67 of 129direct service intercity bus city-pairs (52 percent).For rail, 108 of 174 city-pairs (62 percent) withan en route transfer experienced longer traveltimes in 2002 compared with several years ear-lier. Although slightly more than half of directservice bus markets experienced longer scheduledtravel times, 73 of 121 connecting bus city-pairs(60 percent) experienced equal or shorter traveltimes. Overall 46 percent of the intercity buscity-pairs had longer schedules.
BTS weighted the city-pair results by the num-ber of scheduled frequencies to quantify thedegree of scheduled travel time change in themarkets studied. Overall, intercity bus scheduledtrip time decreased by 1.2 percent while airlineschedule times increased by 3.2 percent. While amajority of rail markets saw longer trip times, a7.8 percent decrease in scheduled trip time in thehigh-frequency Northeast Corridor (NEC) mar-kets resulted in an overall 0.4 percent decreasein weighted average Amtrak city-pair scheduledtravel time.
A variety of factors contribute to scheduledtravel time change, and more than one factormay affect the same mode. For example, sched-uled trip times for direct intercity bus serviceincreased, but in city-pairs involving an en routetransfer, scheduled trip times decreased as greaterfrequencies compared to 1995 resulted in short-ened transfer times. For rail service, routechanges, breaking of direct connections betweentrains, introduction of mail and express packagehandling at intermediate stations, and congestionor changes in track conditions on routes sharedwith freight trains all resulted in longer scheduledtimes. On the other hand, technology and infra-structure improvements in conjunction with thestart of Amtrak’s Acela Express helped decreaseintercity rail scheduled travel time in NEC city-pairs. The largest percentage increases in airlinetrip times came in the shorter distance city-pairs.This is likely due to airport congestion, whichaffects all flights but has a greater proportionalimpact on shorter flights.
Sources
1. National Railroad Passenger Corp. (Amtrak),National, Northeast and Schedule ChangeTimetables, 1994/1995 and 2001/2002 issues.
2. Greyhound Lines, System Timetable (Dallas, TX:January 1995).
3. OAG Worldwide Limited, OAG Flight Schedulesdatabase (Downer’s Grove, IL: February 1995and February 2002)
4. Russell’s Guides, Russell’s Official NationalMotor Coach Guide (Cedar Rapids, IA: January1995 and February 2002).
Scheduled Intercity Travel Times
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
35
Sectio
n 3:Travel T
imes
For airline city-pairs, the Bureau of TransportationStatistics (BTS) selected only nonstop flights. Sinceground transportation modes operate linear routesserving many intermediate cities, BTS selected directrail or bus service whether or not intermediate stopswere scheduled. In the event that direct service was notavailable from the rail or bus carriers, BTS used the sin-gle fastest connecting schedule as the basis for theanalysis. In some city-pairs, rail/bus connections spon-sored by Amtrak (“Amtrak Thruway”) were consideredas rail service except where the bus portion represent-ed more than half of the travel miles.
The number of rail and bus city-pairs is lower than thenumber of air city-pairs because the air analysis insome cases considered multiple airports in the samecity. Also, some rail city-pairs were not used becausethe only possible routing is so impractical that service iseffectively not available. For example, a traveler usingAmtrak for the 300-mile trip between Pittsburgh and
Cincinnati would have to travel 800 miles via Chicagowith a 12-hour layover.
While the city-pairs in the study encompass many ofthe nation’s major intercity travel markets, the lack ofpublicly available data on specific city-pair traffic vol-umes for all three modes prevented BTS from con-structing reliable samples of markets to represent theentirety of each mode. Therefore, the results of thisstudy cannot be generalized for the industry as a wholeand are applicable only to the markets considered.
BTS recognizes that there is variability in scheduledtravel times, especially for airline schedules, on both amonth-to-month and year-to-year basis. The lack of busand rail data for prior years in an electronic format pre-cluded current consideration of additional time periodsin this analysis. BTS will analyze additional time periodsand look at the variability of scheduled travel times forall three modes in future work on this subject.
Air Rail Bus0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200Number of city-pairs
Increased schedule time Decreased or unchanged schedule time
FIGURE 12 Changes in Average City-Pair Schedule Time:February 1995 and February 2002
NOTE: Air data cover non-stop service only. Bus and rail data include direct and connect-ing service.
SOURCES: National Passenger Railroad Corp. (Amtrak), National, Northeast andSchedule Change Timetables (Washington, DC: 1994/1995 and 2001/2002 issues);Russell’s Guides, Official National Motor Coach Guides (Cedar Rapids, IA: January 1995and February 2002 editions); Greyhound Lines, System Timetable (Dallas, TX: January1995).
City-Pairs Analysis
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
36
Sec
tio
n 3
:Tra
vel T
imes
Highway travel times increased between 1990and 2000 in 70 of the 75 urban areas stud-
ied by the Texas Transportation Institute. Theaverage Travel Time Index (TTI) for these areas in2000 was 1.39, an increase from 1.31 in 1990 [2].This means that in 2000, it took 39 percentlonger, on average, to make a peak period trip inurban areas compared with the time it would takeif traffic were flowing freely (see box).
Travel times tend to deteriorate as urban areasize increases (figure 13). For instance, LosAngeles, California, had the highest TTI (1.90)in 2000, while Anchorage, Alaska, and CorpusChristi, Texas, had the lowest (each 1.04). Ofthe urban areas with the highest index in 2000,only three had a population under 1 million:Austin, Texas (1.27); Charlotte, North Carolina(1.27); and Albuquerque, New Mexico (1.26).At the other end of the spectrum, urban areas ofover 1 million people with low indices includeBuffalo-Niagara Falls, New York (1.08) andOklahoma City, Oklahoma (1.09).
Between 1990 and 2000, the greatest increasesin TTI generally occurred in small- and medium-sized metropolitan areas, while the increases weremore moderate in the very large and small areas1
(figure 14). Overall, the average index for largeurban areas increased by 10.2 percent, while thatfor medium urban areas was up by 8.3 percent. Insmall and very large areas, the increases were 4.7percent and 4.1 percent, respectively.
The Texas Transportation Institute analyzedcongestion for the Federal Highway Admin-istration (FHWA) for almost 400 urban areas
between 1987 and 2000 [3]. In 2000 for thoseareas, an average peak period trip required 51percent longer than the same trip under non-peak, noncongested conditions, equivalent to anindex of 1.51. The values in the FHWA reportdiffer from those in the Texas TransportationInstitute annual study, due to differences in thescope of the two analyses.
In urban areas, where highway infrastructureis typically well developed, the principal factoraffecting travel times is highway congestionresultings from both recurring and nonrecurringevents. Recurring delay is largely a phenomenonof the morning and evening commute, althoughin some places congestion may occur all day andon weekends. National estimates, based onmodel simulations, of the effect of nonrecurringevents on freeways and principal arterials sug-gest that about 38 percent are due to crashes,followed by weather (27 percent), work zoneson freeways (24 percent), and breakdowns (11percent) [1].
Sources
1. Chin, S.M., O. Franzese, D.L. Greene, H.L.Hwang, and R. Gibson, “Temporary Losses ofHighway Capacity and Impacts onPerformance,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory,2002.
2. Texas A&M University, Texas TransportationInstitute, 2002 Urban Mobility Report (CollegeStation, TX: 2002).
3. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration and Federal TransitAdministration, 2002 Status of the Nation’sHighways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions &Performance, Report to Congress (Washington,DC: January 2003).
Urban Highway Travel Times
1 Very large urban areas have a population of over 3 million; largeurban areas, 1 million to 3 million population; medium urban areas,500,000 to 1 million; and small urban areas, less than 500,000.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
37
Sectio
n 3:Travel T
imes
Travel Time Index
Developed by the Texas Transportation Institute, theTravel Time Index is the ratio of peak period travel timeto free-flow travel time. A value of 1.0 indicates thattraffic is moving freely. A value of 1.3 indicates that ittakes 30 percent longer to make a trip than in free-flow
conditions. If, say, a trip takes 20 minutes in free-flowconditions and the index is 1.3, then the trip would take,on average, 6 minutes longer to complete during apeak period.
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000
TTI
Metro area population (000)
FIGURE 13 Travel Time Index by Metro Area Population for 75 Metro Areas: 2000
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000
Change in TTI
0.00
–0.05
Metro area population (000)
FIGURE 14 Change in Travel Time Index by Metro Area Population for 75 Metro Areas: 1990–2000
NOTE: The Travel Time Index is the ratio of peak period traveltime to free-flow travel time. It expresses the average amount ofextra time it takes to travel during the peak period relative tofree-flow travel.
SOURCE: Texas A&M University, Texas Transportation Institute,2002 Urban Mobility Report (College Station, TX: 2002), alsoavailable at http://tti.tamu.edu/, as of May 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
38
Sec
tio
n 3
:Tra
vel T
imes
Just over 82 percent of domestic air flightsarrived on time in 2002, compared with 75
percent in 1996. Late flights totaled 16 percentin 2002, down from 23 percent in 1996 (figure15). Over this period, late, cancelled, or divertedflights peaked at 1.6 million in 2000, decliningto just below 942,000 in 2002.
The total number of flight operations at thenation’s airports decreased by 5 percent, to 64.9million, between 2000 and 2002 after havingincreased by 8 percent, from 63.0 million to67.7 million, between 1992 and 2000 [2]. Thedecrease in flight operations due to the airsystem shutdown on September 11, 2001, andthe aftermath, along with the consequences of aweak economy, affected overall airline perform-ance. However, a trend to improved on-time per-formance began in early 2001 when the FederalAviation Administration (FAA) and major air-lines began implementing the National AirspaceSystem Operational Evolution Plan [1].
Air carriers with at least 1 percent of totaldomestic scheduled service passenger revenuesare required to report these on-time perform-
ance data to the Bureau of TransportationStatistics (BTS).1 A flight has an “on-time depar-ture” if the aircraft leaves the airport gate lessthan 15 minutes after its scheduled departuretime, regardless of the time the aircraft actuallylifts off from the runway. An arriving flight iscounted as on-time if it arrives less than 15 min-utes after its scheduled gate arrival time. Mostdelays take place while a plane is on the ground,although the actual cause of a delay may occurelsewhere in the system. Weather, usually themost common cause of delays, was responsiblefor 72 percent of FAA-recorded delays in 2002[2]. BTS began collecting causes of delays andcancellations in June 2003 (see chapter 3).
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalAviation Administration, NAS OperationalEvolution Plan, available at http://www2.faa.gov/programs/oep/index.htm, as of May2003.
2. _____, OPSNET database, as of May 2003 (notpublicly available).
U.S. Air Carrier On-Time Performance
1 Alaska Airlines, America West Airlines, American Airlines,American Eagle Airlines, Continental Airlines, Delta Air Lines,Northwest Airlines, Southwest Airlines, United Airlines, and USAirways were required to report in 2002. Beginning in January2003, reports were also required from Atlantic Southeast Airlines,AirTran Airways, ATA (formerly doing business as AmericanTrans Air), Atlantic Coast Airlines, ExpressJet Airlines, andSkyWest Airlines. In addition, JetBlue Airways started voluntarilyfiling on-time performance data in 2003.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
39
Sectio
n 3:Travel T
imes
25
20
15
10
5
0
Percent
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Late arrivals
Diverted flights
Canceled flights
FIGURE 15 U.S. Air Carrier On-Time Performance: 1996–2002
SOURCES: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, AirlineOn-Time Performance Database; and personal communication (for November2000–November 2002 data).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
40
Sec
tio
n 3
:Tra
vel T
imes
Seventy-seven percent of Amtrak trainsarrived at their final destination on time in
2002 [1]. While this represented a 2 percentimprovement compared with 2001, it still fellshort of the system’s performance during the1998 to 2000 period (figure 16). Amtrak countsa train as delayed only if it arrives more than 10to 30 minutes beyond the scheduled arrival time,depending on the distance the train has trav-eled.1 Amtrak on-time data are based on atrain’s arrival at its final destination and do notinclude delay statistics for intermediate points.2
In addition to the system total, Amtrakreported the performance for short- and long-distance trains through 2000.3 Over the years,short-distance trains—those with runs of lessthan 400 miles—have consistently registeredbetter on-time performance than long-distancetrains—those of 400 miles or more. Annual on-time performance for short-distance trainsreached as high as 81 percent in recent years,while the peak for long-distance trains was 61percent on time in 1999 [2].
Amtrak collects data on the cause and cumu-lative hours of delay (figure 17). (A change inreporting methodology in 2000 has resulted indata that cannot be compared with data from1999 and earlier years.) Since 1995, freight-related delays have consistently represented thecause of about half of total Amtrak delay time.In addition to interruptions in service due tofreight trains, freight-related delays also stemfrom signal problems, trackwork, and speedrestrictions while Amtrak trains are using tracksof other railroads. Amtrak trains operate overtracks owned primarily by private freight rail-roads except in most of the Northeast Corridor,along a portion of the Detroit-Chicago route,and in a few other short stretches across thecountry [2].
Sources
1. National Passenger Railroad Corp. (Amtrak),personal communication, Mar. 3, 2003.
2. _____, Amtrak Annual Report (Washington, DC:2000 and 2001 issues), statistical appendix.
Amtrak On-Time Performance
1 Amtrak trips of up to 250 miles are considered on time if theyarrive less than 10 minutes beyond the scheduled arrival time;251–350 miles, 15 minutes; 351–450 miles, 20 minutes; 451–550miles, 25 minutes; and greater than 550 miles, 30 minutes.2 Accordingly, a train traveling between Chicago and St. Louis(282 miles), for example, could arrive 15 minutes late at all inter-mediate points, yet arrive 12 minutes late at St. Louis and bereported as “on time.”3 Amtrak is no longer reporting short- and long-haul data sepa-rately.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
41
Sectio
n 3:Travel T
imes
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20020
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100Trains arriving on time (%)
Short-distance train routes
Combined short- and long-distance routes
Long-distance train routes
FIGURE 16 Amtrak On-Time Performance: 1993–2002
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 19990
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000Hours
Amtrak Freight Other1 2 3
4
FIGURE 17 Amtrak Hours of Delay by Cause: 1993–1999
1 Includes equipment malfunctions, train servicing in stations, and passenger-relateddelays.2 Includes delays for track repairs/track conditions, freight train interference, and signaldelays.3 Includes passenger train interference, waiting for connections, running time, weather-related delays, and miscellaneous.4 Amtrak changed its method for reporting delays in 2000. Therefore, data after 1999 arenot comparable to previous years and are not used in this figure.
SOURCE: National Passenger Railroad Corp. (Amtrak), Amtrak Annual Report(Washington, DC: 2000 and 2001 issues), statistical appendix.
NOTES: Short distance is less than 400 miles; long distance is > 400 miles. As of 2001,Amtrak no longer reports short- and long-haul data separately.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
42
Sec
tio
n 4
:Veh
icle
Wei
gh
ts
The United States truck fleet grew 23 percentbetween 1992 and 1997, according to the
Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey conductedonce every five years [1, 2]. The fleet includes avariety of vehicles, ranging from large 18-wheelcombination trucks used to transport freight tosmall pickup trucks, often used for personaltravel.
The fleet of medium and heavy trucks grew18 percent between 1992 and 1997 (figure 18).However, the number of trucks in one of theheaviest subcategories (those weighing 100,001to 130,000 pounds) grew 46 percent, from12,300 trucks to 17,900. Overall, the number oftrucks in the heavy category (over 26,000pounds) grew 37 percent between 1992 and1997.
Light trucks, which include sport utility vehi-cles (SUVs), minivans, vans, and pickup trucks,represented 86 percent of the truck fleet in1997.1 Within the light truck category, pickuptrucks outnumbered minivans and SUVs.
However, the number of SUVs and minivansincreased by 93 percent and 61 percent, respec-tively, over the previous five years—much fasterthan the growth rate for pickup trucks (8 per-cent). Light trucks represent a growing propor-tion of auto industry sales; consumers purchasedmore light trucks than passenger cars for thefirst time in 2001 [3].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. CensusBureau, 1997 Economic Census: VehicleInventory and Use Survey: United States,EC97TV-US (Washington, DC: 1999).
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),table 1-21, also available at http://www.bts.gov/,as of April 2003.
3. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration, Highway Statistics2001 (Washington, DC: 2002), table MV-9, alsoavailable at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohpi/hss/index.htm, as of April 2003.
Highway Trucks by Weight
1 Here, light trucks include trucks less than 6,001 lbs. In the orig-inal source of the data (the Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey),trucks between 6,001 lbs and 10,000 lbs are also categorized aslight trucks. See figure 18 for further explanation.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
43
Sectio
n 4:V
ehicle W
eigh
ts
1992 19970
10
20
30
40
50
60
70Millions of trucks
Light trucks< 6,001 lb
Medium trucks 6,001–19,500 lb
Light-heavy trucks 19,501–26,000 lb
Heavy trucks > 26,000 lb
0.7 0.7
FIGURE 18 Number of Trucks by Vehicle Weight: 1992 and 1997
NOTES: Weight is the empty weight of the vehicle plus the average vehicle load.
Excludes vehicles owned by federal, state, or local governments; ambulances; buses;motor homes; farm tractors; unpowered trailer units; and trucks reported as sold, junked, orwrecked prior to July 1 of the year preceding the survey.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), table 1-21, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003.
The original source of these data are the Census Bureau’s Vehicle Inventory and UseSurvey (VIUS). The truck categories in National Transportation Statistics 2002 and thisreport differ from those in the VIUS, which has the following categories: light trucks—10,000 lbs or less; medium trucks—10,001 lbs–19,500 lbs; light-heavy trucks—19,501lbs–26,000 lbs; and heavy-heavy trucks—26,001 lbs or more.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
44
Sec
tio
n 4
:Veh
icle
Wei
gh
ts
Large combination trucks1 represent a smallportion of traffic on the U.S. Interstate
Highway System [1]. However, because they areheavier and have more axles than other vehicles,they may cause more pavement damage, a meas-urement that is estimated in terms of vehicleloadings (see box). In urban areas, these trucksmade up only 6 percent of traffic volume, butaccounted for 77 percent of loadings in 2001(figure 19). These trucks also make up a greaterportion of the vehicles on rural segments of theInterstate Highway System, representing 17 per-cent of traffic volume and 89 percent of loadingsin 2001 (figure 20).
Between 1991 and 2001, large combinationtruck traffic volume grew from 14 percent to 17percent on rural roads, while remaining thesame on urban Interstate highways [1].Concurrently, their share of loadings decreasedon both rural and urban Interstate highways.Passenger cars, buses, and light trucks, whichthe Federal Highway Administration aggregatesinto one category, followed a different trend—representing a declining percentage of trafficvolume but a growing percentage of loadings inurban areas [1].
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration, Highway Statistics2001, table TC-3, available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohpi/hss/index. htm, as of Feb. 26,2003.
Vehicle Loadings on the Interstate Highway System
1 Large combination trucks weigh more than 12 tons and have 5or more axles.
Measuring Vehicle Loadings
Planning agencies design roadways to have a spe-cific lifespan based on the expected volume andweight of vehicle traffic [1]. Since traffic streams arecomposed of a variety of vehicles of different weightsand axle configurations, an equivalent unit of pave-ment damage is used to calculate the wear causedby different types of vehicles. An equivalent single-axle load (ESAL) is a standard unit of pavementdamage and is based on the amount of force appliedto pavement by an 18,000-pound axle, which isroughly equivalent to a standard truck axle. This unitmay be used to calculate the cumulative damagecaused to a roadway by an expected traffic stream.
Source
1. American Association of State Highway and TransportationOfficials, Guide for Design of Pavement Structures(Washington, DC: 1993), p. I-10 and appendix D.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
45
Sectio
n 4:V
ehicle W
eigh
ts
Heavy single-unit trucks 5%
3- and 4-axle combination trucks
14%
Passenger cars,buses, and light
trucks3%
5-axle or more combination trucks 77%
FIGURE 19 Share of Loadings on Urban Interstate Highways by Vehicle Type: 2001
Heavy single-unit trucks 4%
3- and 4-axlecombination trucks
6%
Passenger cars,buses, and light
trucks2%
5-axle or more combination trucks 89%
FIGURE 20 Share of Loadings on Rural Interstate Highways by Vehicle Type: 2001
NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
Loadings are based on equivalent single-axle loads (ESALs), a standard unit of pavementdamage based on the amount of force applied to pavement by an 18,000-pound axle,which is roughly equivalent to a standard truck axle.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Adminstration, HighwayStatistics 2001 (Washington, DC: 2002), table TC-3.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
46
Sec
tio
n 4
:Veh
icle
Wei
gh
ts
Merchandise trade valued at over $718 bil-lion moved by maritime vessels between
U.S. and foreign seaports in 2001 [2]. Containershipments increased 71 percent between 1992and 20011 [3].
The average capacity of containerships callingat U.S. ports increased 9 percent to nearly40,000 deadweight tons (dwt)2 between 19983
and 2001 (figure 21). The world’s largest con-tainerships, built primarily during the late 1990sand early 2000s, are over 3 football fields long(1,138 ft), 140 feet wide, and 50 feet deep [1].
Containership capacity increased faster thanthe average capacity of all types of vessels call-ing at U.S. ports, which grew 4 percent between1998 and 2001. The average capacity of all ves-
sels is larger than the average capacity of con-tainerships because it includes tankers, whichcarry nearly 90,000 dwt on average and dock atspecialized ports. Excluding tankers, averagevessel capacity was just over 32,000 dwt in2001.
Sources
1. Maersk-Sealand, Vessels web page, available athttp://www.maersksealand.com/, as of April2003.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, U.S. InternationalTrade and Freight Transportation Trends(Washington, DC: 2003).
3. _____, Maritime Trade and Transportation 2002(Washington, DC: 2002).
Merchant Marine Vessel Capacity
1 1992 is the first year for which data are available. Percentagechange was calculated in terms of 20-foot equivalent units (TEUs).2 Deadweight tons is an expression of vessel capacity. It is the lift-ing capacity of a vessel expressed in long tons (2,240 lbs), includ-ing cargo, commodities, and crew.3 1998 is the first year for which data are available.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
47
Sectio
n 4:V
ehicle W
eigh
ts
1998 1999 2000 20010
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50Containerships All vessels
Deadweight tons(Thousands)
FIGURE 21 Average Capacity of Vessels Calling at U.S. Ports: 1998–2001
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, calcula-tion based on U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, Vessel Calls atU.S. Ports (Washington, DC: Annual issues), tables H-6 and H-8.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
48
Sec
tio
n 4
:Veh
icle
Wei
gh
ts
The volume of freight carried by railroadsincreased 26 percent (in tons) and 30 percent
(by carload) on railcars between 1991 and 2001(figure 22). However, on average, the weight ofeach railcar remained fairly constant. The averageweight of a loaded railcar ranged from 63 to 67tons during the same period (figure 23).
The relatively steady average weight of aloaded railcar masks countervailing trendsamong selected freight commodities. The averageweight of a carload of coal, which represented 46percent of rail freight tonnage in 2001, was 110tons in 2001, up from 99 tons in 1991 (figure24). Farm products, food and kindred products,nonmetallic minerals, and chemicals and alliedproducts, which together represented 29 percentof tonnage in 2001, were also shipped in heavieraverage carloads in 2001 than in 1991 [2].
Miscellaneous mixed shipments is the onlycategory of goods that was transported in lighteraverage carloads [2]. Miscellaneous mixed ship-
ments are primarily intermodal freight com-posed of shipping containers on flatbed railcars[1]. The containers, which are primarily used tomove manufactured goods that tend to be lighterand more valuable than raw materials, may betransported by waterborne vessel and truck, aswell. Miscellaneous mixed shipments increasedby 54 percent in terms of tonnage and by 79percent in terms of carloads between 1991 and2001, resulting in carloads that were 14 percentlighter in 2001 [2].
Sources
1. Association of American Railroads, RailroadFacts 2001 and 2002 (Washington, DC: 2001and 2002).
2. Calculations based on Association of AmericanRailroads, Railroad Ten-Year Trends, 1990–1999(Washington, DC: 2000).
Railcar Weights
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
49
Sectio
n 4:V
ehicle W
eigh
ts
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
CarloadsTons
Tons (millions) Carloads (millions)
FIGURE 22 Measures of U.S. Railroad Freight Volume: 1991–2001
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
10
20
30
40
50
60
70Tons
FIGURE 23 Average Loaded U.S. Railcar Weight: 1991–2001
Farmproducts
Coal Nonmetallic minerals
Food and kindred
products
Chemicalsand alliedproducts
Transportationequipment
Miscellaneousmixed
shipments
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1401991 2001
Tons per carload
FIGURE 24 Average Loaded U.S. Railcar Weight for SelectedCommodities: 1991 and 2001
NOTES: Figure 23—Average railcar weight is total tons transported divided by total car-loads transported. Figure 24—Miscellaneous mixed shipments is mostly intermodal traffic.Some intermodal traffic is included in commodity-specific categories instead.
SOURCES: All except noted—Association of American of Railroads, Railroad Facts 2001and 2002 (Washington, DC: 2001 and 2002 issues). Figure 24, 1991 data—U.S.Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics calculations based onAssociation of American Railroads, Railroad Ten-Year Trends 1990–1999 (Washington,DC: 2000).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
50
Sec
tio
n 5
:Var
iab
les
Infl
uen
cin
g T
rave
ling
Beh
avio
r
In their daily nonoccupational travel, people inthe United States journeyed about 4 trillion
miles in 2001, or 14,500 miles per person peryear1 [1]. On average, people traveled 40 milesper day, 88 percent of it (35 miles) in a personalvehicle2 such as an automobile (figure 25). Thetotal number of vehicle-miles for this passengertravel in 2001 was nearly 2.3 trillion.
Americans took 411 billion daily trips annu-ally, or an average of 1,500 trips per person peryear. On a daily basis, individuals averagedabout four trips per day (figure 26) [1].
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics and Federal HighwayAdministration, 2001 National HouseholdTravel Survey, Preliminary Data Release Ver-sion 1 (day trip data only), available athttp://nhts.ornl.gov/, as of January 2003.
Daily Passenger Travel
2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS)
The 2001 NHTS was sponsored by the Bureau ofTransportation Statistics and the Federal HighwayAdministration of the U.S. Department of Transpor-tation. Households were asked about all the trips1
they took on a specific day (daily travel), known asthe “travel day,” and about trips of 50 miles or moretaken from home in the 27 days preceding andincluding the travel day, a period known as the “trav-el period.” Detailed characteristics were collected foreach trip including, among other things, the mode oftransportation, the purpose of the trip, and the dis-tance traveled. Additionally, households were askedto provide information about their social and demo-graphic characteristics including income, vehicleownership, as well as the age, sex, education level,and so forth of household members.The 2001 NHTScollected information from 26,000 householdsnationally.
The NHTS combines two previous surveys—theNationwide Personal Transportation Survey (NPTS),a survey of daily travel, and the American TravelSurvey (ATS), a survey of long-distance travel. TheNPTS and ATS both were last conducted in 1995.Because of methodological changes, comparisonsbetween the 2001 NHTS and the 1995 NPTS andATS are not attempted here. Analysts need moretime to study the effects of the methodologicalchanges before meaningful comparisons can bemade. The information presented here, therefore, islimited to preliminary data from the 2001 survey.
Moreover, data from the travel period component(i.e., long-distance travel) of the NHTS had not yetbeen released when this report was prepared. As aresult, the information presented here is about thetravel reported on the travel day, which is predomi-nantly, though not exclusively, local travel. Withoutthe long-distance travel data, vacation trips and trav-el by air tend to be underrepresented.
1 A trip is defined as traveling from one address toanother, whether it is down the street, across town, or crosscountry.
1 These data differ from those in section 2, Passenger-Miles ofTravel. See the box on page 26 for a discussion on differencesbetween these two datasets.2 Personal vehicles are cars, vans, sport utility vehicles, pickuptrucks, other trucks, recreational vehicles (not including water-craft), and motorcycles.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
51
Sectio
n 5:V
ariables In
fluen
cing
Traveling
Beh
avior
Average miles per person, all modes
Average miles per person in personal vehicles
0
10
20
30
40
50Miles
FIGURE 25 Miles Traveled per Day: 2001
Average trips per person, all modes
Average trips per person in personal vehicles
0
1
2
3
4
5Number of trips
FIGURE 26 Trips Completed per Day: 2001
NOTE: Data are from the daily travel segment of the 2001National Household Travel Survey. Long-distance travel data(i.e., trips of 50 miles or more collected during a 4-week travelperiod) are not included here.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics and Federal Highway Administration,2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS), PreliminaryData Release Version 1, available at http://nhts.ornl.gov/, as ofJanuary 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
52
Sec
tio
n 5
:Var
iab
les
Infl
uen
cin
g T
rave
ling
Beh
avio
r
Commuting—trips made to and fromwork—accounted for 15 percent of all per-
sonal trips in 2001. In addition, other work-related trips (e.g., travel to meetings and confer-ences) accounted for 3 percent of all trips. Theaverage length of a commuting trip was 12miles,1 whereas the average length of a work-related trip was just under 30 miles (figure 27).
People made the greatest number of daily trips,45 percent, to shop, to visit doctors and dentists,and for other family and personal business suchas using professional or personal services, attend-ing a wedding or funeral, walking the dog,attending meetings, and dropping off or pickingup someone else (figure 28). Most family and per-sonal business trips tended to be relatively short,averaging about 7 miles, although visits to doc-tors and dentists averaged 10 miles each [1].
Social and recreational reasons for dailytravel, including visits to friends and relatives,motivated just over one-quarter of all trips in
2001. These trips included going to the gym,exercising, or playing sports and going to themovies, a restaurant, or a public place, such as apark. The average distance of these trips was 8miles, with trips to visit friends and relativesbeing longer than average at about 14 miles [1].
Trips to school and church accounted for 10percent of trips in 2001 and averaged 6 miles inlength. By contrast, vacation trips (includingthose for rest and relaxation) are taken relativelyrarely but far from home. In 2001 (for daily tripreporting),2 they accounted for less than 1 per-cent of trips but averaged 37 miles in length [1].
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics and Federal HighwayAdministration, 2001 National HouseholdTravel Survey, Preliminary Data Release Ver-sion 1 (day trip data only), available athttp://nhts.ornl.gov, as of January 2003.
Travel by Purpose
1 The 2001 National Household Travel Survey defined a trip aseach time a person went from one address to another. “Commute”trips were defined as those trips made for the purpose of going toor returning from work. However, given the definition of a trip,those reported as commuting trips were not necessarily anchoredby the home or workplace (for return commutes). Therefore, careshould be taken in analyzing work trips, recognizing that the dis-tance for these trips is often, but not always, the distance fromhome to work.
2 The 2001 National Household Travel Survey “travel period”data were not available when this report was prepared. Withoutthese data, vacation trips and travel by air tend to be underrepre-sented.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
53
Sectio
n 5:V
ariables In
fluen
cing
Traveling
Beh
avior
Vacati
on1
Work-re
lated
bus
iness
Visit fr
iends
/
rela
tives
To/fr
om w
ork
Medica
l/den
tal
Total
repo
rted
Other s
ocial
/
recrea
tiona
l
Other fa
mily/
pers
onal Sho
pping
Schoo
l/chu
rch0
10
20
30
40Miles
FIGURE 27 Average Trip Distance by Purpose: 2001
To/from work 15%
Work-related business 3%
Shopping 19%
Other family/personal business 23%
Medical/dental 2%
School/church 10%
Vacation1 1%
Visit friends/relatives 8%
Other social/recreational 19%
Other 1%
FIGURE 28 Share of Person Trips by Purpose: 2001
1 “Vacation” includes rest and relaxation.
NOTE: The 2001 National Household Travel Survey defined a trip as each time a personwent from one address to another. “Commute” trips were defined as those trips made forthe purpose of going to or returning from work. However, given the definition of a trip,those reported as commuting trips were not necessarily anchored by the home or work-place (for return commutes). Therefore, care should be taken in analyzing to/from worktrips, recognizing that the distance for these trips is often, but not always, the distancefrom home to work. Excluded from work-related business trips are trips made by peoplewho are directly providing the transportation of passengers or goods, such as bus or truckdrivers, delivery persons, etc.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics andFederal Highway Administration, 2001 National Household Travel Survey, Preliminary DataRelease Version 1 (day trip data only), available at http://nhts.ornl.gov/, as of January2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
54
Sec
tio
n 5
:Var
iab
les
Infl
uen
cin
g T
rave
ling
Beh
avio
r
Personal vehicles1 are the predominant meansby which people travel in the United States
on a daily basis. In 2001, 87 percent of persontrips and 88 percent of person-miles were madein personal vehicles (figures 29 and 30). Walkingand riding a bicycle accounted for almost 10percent of trips and less than 1 percent of miles.Both transit and school bus trips accounted for2 percent each of trips and 1 percent each ofmiles, whereas only 0.1 percent of all daily tripsbut 8 percent of miles were made by air2 [1].
Within the personal vehicle category, in 2001passenger cars were still the most widely used,accounting for 59 percent of person trips and 55percent of person-miles. Vans and sport utilityvehicles were used for 27 percent of trips andmiles. Pickup trucks accounted for 15 percent ofmiles and 13 percent of trips. Together, othertrucks, recreational vehicles, and motorcycleswere used for almost 1 percent of trips and 3percent of miles [1].
In the 2001 National Household TravelSurvey, the definition of transit includes buses
(but excludes charter, tour, and intercity buses,school buses, and shuttle buses), subway orelevated rail, street car and trolley car, commutertrain, and waterborne passenger lines andferries. Buses were the most widely used transitvehicle (67 percent of transit person trips and 53percent of transit person-miles). Subway orelevated rail was the second most widely used,accounting for about one-quarter of these tripsand miles. Commuter trains were used for only6 percent of transit trips but because of therelatively long trip distances involved, accountedfor 18 percent of the transit person-miles.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics and Federal HighwayAdministration, 2001 National HouseholdTravel Survey, Preliminary Data Release Ver-sion 1 (day trip data only), available athttp://nhts.ornl.gov, as of January 2003.
Travel by Mode
1 Personal vehicles include passenger cars, vans, sport utility vehi-cles, pickup trucks, other trucks, recreational vehicles (not includ-ing boats), and motorcycles.2 The 2001 National Household Travel Survey “travel period”data were not available when this report was prepared. Withoutthese data, vacation trips and travel by air tend to be underrepre-sented.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
55
Sectio
n 5:V
ariables In
fluen
cing
Traveling
Beh
avior
Personal vehicle 87%Air
<1%
Transit 2%
School bus 2%
Bicycle/walk 9%
Other 1%
FIGURE 29 Modal Share of Person Trips: 2001
Personal vehicle 88%
Air 8%
Transit 1% School bus
1%
Bicycle/walk 1% Other
1%
FIGURE 30 Modal Share of Person-Miles: 2001
NOTE: The 2001 National Household Travel Survey “travel period” data were not availablewhen this report was prepared. Without these data, vacation trips and travel by air tend tobe underrepresented.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics andFederal Highway Administration, 2001 National Household Travel Survey, Preliminary DataRelease Version 1 (day trip data only), available at http://nhts.ornl.gov/, as of January2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
56
Sec
tio
n 5
:Var
iab
les
Infl
uen
cin
g T
rave
ling
Beh
avio
r
Slightly less than one-third of households saidthey had one personal vehicle1 available for
use in 2001. A little more than one-third ofhouseholds (40 million out of 107 millionhouseholds) had 2 vehicles and slightly less thanone-quarter had 3 or more vehicles available(figure 31). Almost 8 percent of households (8.5million) had no vehicle available [1].
The amount of travel people do and the waythey travel is strongly related to the availabilityof personal vehicles in their household. Forinstance, persons in households without vehiclestook approximately 1,000 trips per person in2001, while persons in households with at least1 vehicle took 1,500 trips each. Persons inhouseholds without a vehicle traveled about6,900 miles annually, less than half the 14,900person-miles traveled by those in householdswith at least 1 vehicle. In addition, persons inhouseholds with at least 1 household vehiclemade nearly 9 of every 10 trips by personal vehi-cle compared with less than 4 of 10 for those inhouseholds without a vehicle. Persons in house-holds without access to vehicles made 37 percentof their trips on foot and another 20 percent bytransit. This compares with 8 percent and 1 per-cent by foot and transit, respectively, by house-holds with at least one vehicle [1].
Households without vehicles tend to havecharacteristics different from households withvehicles. For instance, households with totalincomes of less than $25,000 are almost 10times more likely not to have a vehicle whencompared with those with incomes greater than$25,000 (figure 32). Though related to income,households in rented residences are five timesmore likely not to have a vehicle. Householdvehicle ownership is also closely related to thenumber of people living in the household.Eighteen percent of single-person householdshave no vehicle, as compared with only 4 per-cent of multiperson households. Furthermore,the unavailability of vehicles in households inurban areas is almost twice that of households inrural areas [1].
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics and Federal HighwayAdministration, 2001 National HouseholdTravel Survey, Preliminary Data Release Ver-sion 1 (day trip data only), available athttp://nhts.ornl.gov, as of January 2003.
Vehicle Ownership and Availability
1 Personal vehicles include passenger cars, vans, sport utility vehi-cles, pickup trucks, other trucks, recreational vehicles (not includ-ing boats), and motorcycles.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
57
Sectio
n 5:V
ariables In
fluen
cing
Traveling
Beh
avior
None ≥ 50
10
20
30
40
50
1 2 3 4
Millions of households
Number of vehicles
FIGURE 31 U.S. Households by Number of Vehicles: 2001
Household income ≥ $25,000Household income < $25,000
Residence is owned/otherResidence is rented
Residence is not a condo/apt.Residence is a condo/apt.
Multiperson householdsSingle-person households
Households in rural areasHouseholds in urban areas
All households
10 15 20 250 5Percent
FIGURE 32 Proportion of Households Without Vehicles by Household Type: 2001
KEY: apt. = apartment; condo = condominium.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics andFederal Highway Administration, 2001 National Household Travel Survey, Preliminary DataRelease Version 1 (day trip data only), available at http://nhts.ornl.gov/, as of January2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
58
Sec
tio
n 6
:Tra
vel C
ost
s o
f In
trac
ity
Co
mm
uti
ng
an
d In
terc
ity
Trip
s
On average, households spent $7,406 (inchained 1996 dollars1) on transportation in
2001. This represented 21 percent of all house-hold expenditures that year. Only housing costhouseholds more (31 percent) [1].
Over the last 10 years, consumer spending onprivate transportation (mainly motor vehiclesand related expenses) increased (figure 33). Onaverage, households spent nearly $3,600 on newand used motor vehicles in 2001, up 47 percentfrom about $2,500 in 1991. Spending on othervehicle expenses, including insurance, financingcharges, maintenance, and repairs, alsoincreased from about $1,720 to nearly $2,400
(14 percent). Meanwhile, gasoline and oilexpenditures rose 3 percent, to nearly $1,100 in2001. On average, households spent almost$400 on “other transportation”2 in 2001, anincrease of 6 percent between 1991 and 2001.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of LaborStatistics, Consumer Expenditure Survey, avail-able from http://www.bls.gov/cex/home.htm, asof February 2003. Note: the survey data are col-lected in terms of consumer units rather thanhouseholds. There are an average of 2.5 personsin each consumer unit.
Household Spending on Transportation
2 In its survey, the Bureau of Labor Statistics uses the term “pub-lic transportation,” rather than “other transportation.” This cate-gory includes both local transit, e.g., bus travel, and long-distancetravel, e.g., airplane trips.
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
59
Sectio
n 6:Travel C
osts o
f Intracity C
om
mu
ting
and
Intercity Trip
s
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Vehicle purchases (net outlays)
Other vehicle expenses
Gasoline and motor oil
Other transportation
Chained 1996 $
FIGURE 33 Average Household Transportation Expenditures: 1991–2001
NOTES: Data are based on survey results.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics uses the term consumer unit rather than household. Thereare an average of 2.5 persons in each consumer unit. A consumer unit is defined as mem-bers of a household related by blood, marrige, adoption, or other legal arrangement; a sin-gle person living alone or sharing a household with another but who is financially inde-pendent; or two or more persons living together who share responsibility for at leasttwo-thirds of major types of expenses—food, housing, and other expenses.
Other transportation includes both local transit (e.g., bus and taxi travel) and long-distancetravel (e.g., airplane trips).
All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars, unless otherwise specified.Current dollar amounts (which are available in appendix B of this report) were adjusted toeliminate the effects of inflation over time.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer ExpenditureSurvey data query, November 2002.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
60
Sec
tio
n 6
:Tra
vel C
ost
s o
f In
trac
ity
Co
mm
uti
ng
an
d In
terc
ity
Trip
s
Driving an automobile 15,000 miles per yearcost 50¢ per mile in 2001, or 16 percent
more than it did in 1991, when total costs were43¢ (figure 34). These data, which are expressedin 1996 chained dollars,1 include fixed costs(e.g., depreciation, insurance, finance charges,and license fees) and variable costs (e.g., gasolineand oil, maintenance, and tires). Over thedecade, fixed costs have consistently representedabout 75 percent of total per-mile costs.Gasoline and oil, a component of variable costs,represented 14 percent of driving costs per milein 2001, up from 12 percent in 2000 [1].
About 87 percent of the daily trips Americanstook in 2001 occurred in highway vehicles,
including their own automobiles [2]. The other13 percent traveled via public transportation orair, rode bicycles, walked, or traveled by othermeans.
Sources
1. American Automobile Association, Your DrivingCosts (Heathrow, FL: 2000 and 2001 issues).
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics and Federal HighwayAdministration, 2001 National HouseholdTravel Survey, Preliminary Data Release Ver-sion 1 (day trip data only), available athttp://nhts.ornl.gov, as of January 2003.
Cost of Owning and Operating an Automobile
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
61
Sectio
n 6:Travel C
osts o
f Intracity C
om
mu
ting
and
Intercity Trip
s
1991 19921993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6Chained 1996 $
Total
Fixed costs
Variable costs
FIGURE 34 Average per Mile Cost of Owning and Operatingan Automobile: 1991–2001
NOTES: Assumes 15,000 miles driven per year. All dollar amounts are expressed inchained 1996 dollars, unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which are avail-able in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminate the effects of inflation overtime.
SOURCES: 1991–1998—U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of TransportationStatistics, National Transportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), table 3-14, alsoavailable at http://www.bts.gov. 1999–2002—American Automobile Association, YourDriving Costs (Heathrow, FL: 1999–2002 issues).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
62
Sec
tio
n 6
:Tra
vel C
ost
s o
f In
trac
ity
Co
mm
uti
ng
an
d In
terc
ity
Trip
s
Amtrak collected an average of 20¢ per rev-enue passenger-mile in fiscal year (FY)
2000 (in chained 1996 dollars1), up 33 percentfrom 15¢ per revenue passenger-mile in FY19932 (figure 35). During the 1990s, Amtrakshifted its focus to urban routes in the northeastand west. When Amtrak reduced its number ofroute-miles by 3 percent in 1995, revenue perpassenger-mile increased by 13 percent the fol-lowing fiscal year. When track operationallength was further reduced by 7 percent in 1999,revenue per passenger-mile increased 7 percentthe following fiscal year [1, 2].
Average intercity Class I bus fares rose 27 per-cent, from $21 to $26 (in chained 1996 dollars),
between 1990 and 2000 (figure 36). The averagebus fare is based on total intercity passenger rev-enues and the number of intercity bus passengertrips, as reported by carriers to the Bureau ofTransportation Statistics. Since passenger-miledata are not reported, average bus fare per pas-senger-mile cannot be calculated and comparedwith similar Amtrak fare data.
Sources
1. Association of American of Railroads, RailroadFacts (Washington, DC: 1994–2002 issues).
2. National Railroad Passenger Corp. (Amtrak),Amtrak 2000 Annual Report, StatisticalAppendix (Washington, DC: 2001).
Cost of Intercity Trips by Train and Bus
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.2 Amtrak published ticket yield data for FY 1991 through FY2000 in its 2000 Annual Report. The 2001 Annual Report, pub-lished online in February 2003, contains consolidated financialstatements only.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
63
Sectio
n 6:Travel C
osts o
f Intracity C
om
mu
ting
and
Intercity Trip
s
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25Chained 1996 $
FIGURE 35 Amtrak Average Revenue per Revenue Passenger-Mile: 1993–2001
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
5
10
15
20
25
30Chained 1996 $
FIGURE 36 Average Class I Intercity Bus Fares: 1990–2000
NOTES: Amtrak data are not available prior to 1993. All dollar amounts are chained 1996dollars. Current dollar amounts are available in appendix B and were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
SOURCES: Figure 35—American Association of Railroads, Railroad Facts (Washington,DC: 1994–2002 issues). Figure 36—U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),table 3-15b, also available at http://www.bts.gov.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
64
Sec
tio
n 6
:Tra
vel C
ost
s o
f In
trac
ity
Co
mm
uti
ng
an
d In
terc
ity
Trip
s
Transit fares remained relatively stable dur-ing the 1990s (figure 37). Increases in fares
per passenger-mile for some modes of transitwere offset by lower fares per passenger-mile forother modes.
Local transit bus service, which accounts for60 percent of public transportation ridership (bynumber of unlinked passenger trips1), is slightlymore expensive than it was 10 years ago (figure38). Transit bus service cost 20¢ per mile in2000, up from 18¢ per mile in 1990 (in chained1996 dollars).2 Bus ridership, which dropped byabout 15 percent during the mid-1990s,rebounded by 2000. Rail transit—heavy, com-muter, and light rail—was less expensive in 2000
than in 1990, with light-rail fares dropping themost, at 30 percent.
Heavy rail comprises most of the nation’s sub-way systems. It is the second most heavily usedform of transit with over 30 percent of totaltransit ridership. The cost of using heavy raildeclined from 19¢ to 18¢ per passenger-milebetween 1990 and 2000 [1].
Source
1. American Public Transportation Association,Public Transportation Fact Book 2001, Tables 18 and 26, available at http://www.apta.com/stats/fares/faremode.htm, as of February2003. Data for 2000 are preliminary.
Average Transit Fares
1 See Urban Transit Ridership in section 7, “Availability of MassTransit,” for a discussion of unlinked trips. 2 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
65
Sectio
n 6:Travel C
osts o
f Intracity C
om
mu
ting
and
Intercity Trip
s
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25Chained 1996 $
FIGURE 37 Average Transit Fare per Passenger-Mile:Fiscal Years 1990–2000
Modes included are heavy, commuter, and lightrail; bus; demand responsive; trolley bus; ferry-boat; vanpool; tramway; monorail; automatedguideway; and inclined plane.
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25Chained 1996 $
Heavy rail
Commuter railLight rail
Bus
FIGURE 38 Average Transit Fare per Passenger-Mile for Selected Service Types: Fiscal Years 1990–2000
NOTES: Data for 2000 are preliminary. Beginning in 1991, faresinclude subsidies formerly classified as "Other" operating funding.Commuter rail: Urban/suburban passenger train service forshort-distance travel between a central city and adjacent sub-urbs run on tracks of a traditional railroad system. Does notinclude heavy- or light-rail transit service.Heavy rail: High-speed transit rail operated on rights-of-waythat exclude all other vehicles and pedestrians.Light rail: Urban transit rail operated on a reserved right-of-waythat may be crossed by roads used by motor vehicles andpedestrians.
Demand responsive: A nonfixed-route, nonfixed-schedule formof transportation that operates in response to calls from passen-gers or their agents to the transit operator or dispatcher.All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars.Current dollar amounts (which are available in appendix B ofthis report) were adjusted to eliminate the effects of inflationover time.SOURCES: American Public Transportation Association, PublicTransportation Fact Book 2001, tables 18 and 26, available athttp://www.apta.com/stats/fares/faremode.htm, as of February2003. Modal definitions—U.S. Department of Transportaton,Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Pocket Guide toTransportation 2003 (Washington, DC: 2003), glossary.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
66
Sec
tio
n 6
:Tra
vel C
ost
s o
f In
trac
ity
Co
mm
uti
ng
an
d In
terc
ity
Trip
s
The U.S. working poor1 totaled more than 9million (6 percent of all workers) in 1999
[1]. Half of these workers spent almost 10 per-cent of their income on commuting expenses inthat year2 (figure 39). This is over twice the per-centage of income that the median of the totalpopulation spent on commuting (4 percent).This disparity grows to four times when com-pared with the median for workers earning$45,000 or more per year (2 percent of income).
Half of all workers who use their own vehiclesspent 5 percent or more of their income in 1999on commuting (figure 40). However, among theworking poor using their own vehicle, half spentat least 21 percent of their income on commut-ing. For all workers taking public transit, halfspent 3 percent or more of their income, com-pared with the median for the working poor of13 percent of their income.3 Most workers usedtheir own vehicle to commute in 1999; however,the working poor were more likely than othergroups to use alternative commuting modes. Forinstance, 87 percent of workers earning $22,000or more per year used their own vehicle to com-mute, compared with 66 percent of the workingpoor. A substantial number of the working poor
used the less expensive options of carpool or van-pool (12 percent), public transit (6 percent), bik-ing or walking (11 percent), or commuted someother way (8 percent).
Source
1. U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. CensusBureau and U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau ofLabor Statistics, Annual Demographic Survey,March Supplement, table 10, available athttp://ferret.bls.census.gov/macro/032000/pov/new10_001.htm, as of March 2003.
Commuting Expenses of the Working Poor
Commuting Expenses Data
The data presented here are based on an analysis bythe Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) of theU.S. Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and ProgramParticipation (SIPP) (available at http://www.sipp.census.gov/sipp). BTS plans to publish a full report inlate 2003 on how the percentage of workers’ incomespent on commuting varies by race, gender, age,location, household, and income definition covering1996 to 1999.
For this study, BTS selected only those with a paidjob during the reference period from the SIPP sam-ple. Workers’ commuting expenses included feesand fares, for those who did not use their own vehi-cle to commute, and mileage expenses, parkingfees, and tolls for those who used their own vehicle.The income figures represent cash income beforetaxes.
The percentage of income data presented here is inmedian values. A median is the middle value in a distri-bution, above and below which lie an equal number ofvalues. For example, when the median spending oncommuting by all workers who own their own vehiclesis 5 percent of their income, half of all workers spendmore than 5 percent of their income on commuting andthe other half spend less than 5 percent.
Source
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of TransportationStatistics, Commuting Expenses: Disparity for the WorkingPoor, Issue Brief (Washington, DC: 2003).
1 The official government poverty line for a single adult with nodependents was $8,501 in 1999. (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002,http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/threshld/thresh99.html) Here,the working poor are defined as workers with an annual personalincome of less than $8,000. 2 Data are in current 1999 dollars. For further information, seeU.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of TransportationStatistics, Commuting Expenses: Disparity for the Working Poor,Issue Brief (Washington, DC: 2003).3 In this analysis, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics foundthat 0.5 percent of workers reported using both their own vehicleand public transit to commute. Overall, 2 percent of workersreported using multiple modes.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
67
Sectio
n 6:Travel C
osts o
f Intracity C
om
mu
ting
and
Intercity Trip
s
0
2
4
6
8
10
Income group
Median of total population = 3.9%
Percent1
< $8,000 $8,000– $14,999
$15,000– $21,999
$22,000– $29,999
$30,000– $44,999
$45,000>–
FIGURE 39 Share of Personal Income Spent on Commuting by Income Group: 1999
0
5
10
15
20
25
Income group
Use own vehicle Use public transit
All using own vehicle = 4.9%All using public transit = 3.3%
< $8,000 $8,000– $14,999
$15,000– $21,999
$22,000– $29,999
$30,000– $44,999
$45,000
Percent1
>–
Median of total population:
FIGURE 40 Share of Personal Income Spent on Commuting byIncome Group and Transportation Mode: 1999
1 Percent represents median of income group. The median is the point where half theincome group spends more and half spends less than the specified percentage.
NOTE: All dollar amounts are in current 1999 dollars.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, calcula-tions based on data from U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Survey ofIncome and Program Participation (Hyattsville, MD: 2001), also available athttp://www.bls.census.gov/sipp/, as of April 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
68
Sec
tio
n 6
:Tra
vel C
ost
s o
f In
trac
ity
Co
mm
uti
ng
an
d In
terc
ity
Trip
s
Commercial airlines offer a variety of discountfares to fill their flights, but these special
discount airfares, facilitated by internet com-merce and “frequent flyer” programs, complicateefforts to measure changes in the prices peoplepay for commercial air travel. To improve thesemeasurements, the Bureau of TransportationStatistics (BTS) and the Bureau of Labor Statistics(BLS) have research underway to develop anOrigin and Destination (O&D) Survey AirfareIndex (see box). Some data from this ongoingresearch are presented here.
The O&D Survey index research data can beused to compare changes in prices among variouscities. In one comparison of three medium-sizecities, a dip appears between 1995 and 1998 forflights originating in Colorado Springs, Colorado(figure 41). This is a time during which the dis-count carrier Western Pacific operated flightsfrom Colorado Springs and indicates the effect ithad on bringing airfares down before it withdrewfrom the market. The O&D Survey index can beused to compare prices for international travel, aswell. The third quarter spikes in a comparison oftravel originating in Frankfurt, London, andTokyo indicate that a high percentage of passen-gers traveling to the United States from thesecities pay peak fares July through September (fig-ure 42). These types of specific domestic and for-eign points of origin comparisons are possiblebecause of the size of the O&D Survey sample onwhich the index is based.
The O&D Survey index can be comparedwith the official BLS Airline fare index (figure43). As the BLS index covers only itinerariesoriginating in the United States, it is most com-parable to the O&D Survey “U.S. Origin Only”
series. However, these two indices give differentresults. For instance, between the fourth quarterof 1998 and the fourth quarter of 2000, the BLSindex increased 17 percent, while the similarO&D Survey index increased only 13 percent.This difference is probably due mainly to theO&D Survey index’s inclusion of special dis-count fares combined with consumers’ increas-ing use of special discount tickets during thisperiod. The more comprehensive O&D Surveyindex, which combines U.S. and foreign flightorigin data, rose even less (11.6 percent). The“foreign origin only” component increased just4.1 percent but fluctuates more over the period.
Airfare Index Research Data
Origin and Destination (O&D) SurveyAirfare Index Data
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) quarter-ly Passenger Origin and Destination (O&D) Surveyprovides the data for the O&D Survey Airfare Index.Through this passenger survey, BTS collects data ona 10 percent sample of airline itineraries. Each sam-ple observation comprises a fare value (actual farepaid, including tax), a sequence of airports and carri-ers, and other details of an itinerary traveled by a pas-senger or group of passengers.
The O&D Survey Index data presented here weredeveloped only for research purposes by BTS statis-ticians, in consultation with researchers from theBureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). This ongoing BTSresearch1 is aimed at developing a new method ofcomputing price indices for air travel, based on trans-action prices. The current official U.S. ConsumerPrice Index for commercial air travel is the BLSAirline Fare Index, but it does not reflect the fullrange of fares consumers pay.2
1 For a description of the experimental index estimationmethodology, see Lent and Dorfman, “A Transaction PriceIndex for Air Travel,” 2003, available on request from theBureau of Labor Statistics.2 A description of the BLS estimation method is availableon the BLS website at http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpifacaf.htm.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
69
SSeeccttiioonn 66:: TT
rraavveell CCoossttss ooff IInnttrraacciittyy CC
oommmm
uuttiinngg aanndd IInntteerrcciittyy TTrriippss
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q460
80
100
120
140
Des Moines, IACharleston, SC
Colorado Springs, CO
Index: Q1 1995 = 100
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
FFIIGGUURREE 4411 OOrriiggiinn aanndd DDeessttiinnaattiioonn SSuurrvveeyy IInnddeexx11 bbyy CCiittyy ooff OOrriiggiinn ffoorrTThhrreeee MMeeddiiuumm--ssiizzeedd UU..SS.. CCiittiieess:: 11999955––22000000(All classes of service)
60
80
100
120
140Index: Q1 1995 = 100
London, England
Frankfurt, Germany
Tokyo, Japan
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q41995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
FFIIGGUURREE 4422 OOrriiggiinn aanndd DDeessttiinnaattiioonn SSuurrvveeyy IInnddeexx11 bbyy CCiittyy ooff OOrriiggiinn ffoorrTThhrreeee LLaarrggee IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall CCiittiieess:: 11999955––22000000(All classes of service)
60
80
100
120
140Index: Q1 1995 = 100
BLS Airline Fare CPI
O&D Survey, foreign origin only
O&D Survey, all origins
O&D Survey, U.S. origin only
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q41995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
FFIIGGUURREE 4433 CCoommppaarriissoonn ooff AAiirrffaarree IInnddiicceess:: 11999955––22000000 (Not seasonally adjusted)
1 The O&D Survey indices are computed using the Fisher Indexformula, which differs from the formulas used to compute theBureau of Labor Statistics Airline Fare Consumer Price Index.
NNOOTTEE:: These data were developed for research purposes onlyand are not official BTS data.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics (BTS) and U.S. Department of Labor,Bureau of Labor Statistics, calculations based on data fromBTS's quarterly Passenger Origin & Destination Survey, March2003. FFiigguurree 4411—U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of LaborStatistics, Airline Fare Consumer Price Index, available athttp://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm#data, as of March 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
70
SSeecc
ttiioonn
77:: AA
vvaaiillaa
bbiilliitt
yy ooff
MMaass
ss TT
rraannss
iitt aann
dd NN
uummbbee
rr ooff
PPaass
sseenngg
eerrss
SSeerr
vveedd
Transit passenger-miles traveled (pmt) grew24 percent between 1991 and 2001, from
37.5 billion pmt to 46.5 billion pmt [1, 2]. Asthey have historically, buses had the largest pmtshare in 2001, generating 19.6 billion pmt or 42 percent of all transit pmt (figure 44). Also in2001, heavy-rail pmt totaled 14.2 billion or 31 percent, commuter rail reached 9.5 billionpmt or 20 percent, light rail had 1.4 billion pmtor 3 percent, and other modes of transit, such asferryboat and demand responsive,1 generated1.8 billion pmt or 4 percent [2].
The top 30 transit authorities (ranked byunlinked passenger trips) logged 35.1 billionpassenger-miles in 2001 or 76 percent of alltransit pmt that year [2]. In 2001, people riding
New York City Transit traveled 10.1 billion pas-senger-miles (or 22 percent of all passenger-milesout of the top 30 authorities) and the ChicagoTransit Authority generated 1.8 billion pmt or 5 percent [3].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalTransit Administration, National TransitSummaries and Trends, 1996, available athttp://www.ntdprogram.com, as of May 2003.
2. _____, “National Transit Summaries andTrends,” 2002 draft, available at http://www.ntdprogram.com, as of February 2003.
3. _____, National Transit Database, available athttp://www.ntdprogram.com, as of March 2003.
Transit Passenger-Miles Traveled
1 Demand-responsive transit operates on a nonfixed route and anonfixed schedule in response to calls from passengers or theiragents to the transit operator or dispatcher.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
71
SSeeccttiioonn 77:: AA
vvaaiillaabbiilliittyy ooff MMaassss TT
rraannssiitt aanndd NNuumm
bbeerr ooff PPaasssseennggeerrss SS
eerrvveedd
19910
5
10
15
20
2001200019991998199719961995199419931992
Passenger-miles (billions)
Bus
Heavy rail
Commuter rail
OtherLight rail
FFIIGGUURREE 4444 PPaasssseennggeerr--MMiilleess bbyy TTyyppee ooff SSeerrvviiccee:: 11999911––22000011
NNOOTTEE:: Other includes modes such as demand responsive, automated guideway, AlaskaRailroad, cable car, ferryboat, inclined plane, monorail, trolleybus, and vanpool.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: 11999911––11999944—U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal TransitAdministration, 1994 National Transit Summaries and Trends (Washington, DC: 1996);11999955—U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, 1997 NationalTransit Summaries and Trends (Washington, DC: 1999); 11999966––22000011—U.S. Department ofTransportation, Federal Transit Administration, National Transit Database, Data Tables(Washington, DC: 1996-2001 issues).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
72
SSeecc
ttiioonn
77:: AA
vvaaiillaa
bbiilliitt
yy ooff
MMaass
ss TT
rraannss
iitt aann
dd NN
uummbbee
rr ooff
PPaass
sseenngg
eerrss
SSeerr
vveedd
Transit ridership has grown steadily since1996, reaching 9.0 billion unlinked trips
(see box) in 2001, an increase of 19 percent (fig-ure 45). This represents an annual change of 4percent compared with the growth in U.S. resi-dent population of 1 percent over the sameperiod. Between 1991 and 1996, transit rider-ship did not grow appreciably [1].
Among the various types of transit service,bus ridership comprised the majority ofunlinked trips (5,215 million) in 2001, havinggrown 16 percent between 1996 and 2001.However, rail transit ridership, with almost3,480 million trips in 2001, posted stronger
growth (39 percent). Among the rail compo-nents, light rail grew 29 percent; heavy rail, 27percent; and commuter rail, 19 percent (figure46). Heavy-rail ridership posted 2,728 milliontrips; commuter rail, 418 million trips; and lightrail, 334 million trips in 2001. Other modes,such as ferryboats and demand responsive,posted a combined 313 million trips [1].
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal TransitAdministration, “National Transit Summaries andTrends,” 2002 draft, available at http://www.ntprogram.com, as of February 2003.
Transit Ridership
Transit authorities reporting to the Federal TransitAdministration (FTA) provide the number of passengerswho board public transportation vehicles rather thanthe number of passengers they serve. Passengerboardings are called unlinked and linked passengertrips. Unlinked trips are total boardings on an individualvehicle. Linked trips refers to the total number of ridersand measures the actual number of complete trips fromorigin to destination, including transfers. Unlinked tripsare viewed as a measure of transit utilization (at thesystem, route, or subroute level), while linked trips areused to measure revenue passengers. The ratio ofunlinked to linked trips indicates the relative usage oftransfers in the transit system [2]. Determining the actu-al number of passengers using a transit system can bea significant task because of the tracking requirementsfor the number of transfers from one vehicle or mode tothe next, from one agency to another, and from the useof day passes and cash.
Because FTA does not have an official methodology forestimating the actual number of passengers that ridetransit systems, individual transit agencies developtheir own passenger counting and estimation method-ology based on their resources and local attributes.Individual transit agencies may estimate the actual
number of passengers based on a variety of methodsand data-collection tools to help control for doublecounting, such as, automatic passenger counting units,on-board surveys, manual people counters, video cam-era tracking, and fare box analysis.
The American Public Transportation Association (APTA)made an estimate, based on an average weekday, ofthe actual number of passengers carried by memberauthorities in 2000. APTA concluded that the number ofpeople using the national transit system is 45 percent ofthe number of total unlinked trips reported or 14 millionpeople, based on 32 million daily unlinked trips. Thisestimate reflects the average travel patterns of approxi-mately 50 percent of all transit riders who take 2 tripsper day between home and employment and thosedependent on transit who could take up to 10 trips perday [1].
SSoouurrcceess1. American Public Transportation Association, 2002 Public
Transportation Fact Book (Washington, DC: February2002).
2. Boyle, D.B., “Passenger Counting Technologies andProcedures,” TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 29(Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, 1998).
LLiinnkkeedd aanndd UUnnlliinnkkeedd TTrriippss vvss.. NNuummbbeerr ooff PPaasssseennggeerrss
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
73
SSeeccttiioonn 77:: AA
vvaaiillaabbiilliittyy ooff MMaassss TT
rraannssiitt aanndd NNuumm
bbeerr ooff PPaasssseennggeerrss SS
eerrvveedd
1991 1993 1995 1997 19990
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2001
Total (all services)
Bus
Heavy rail
Commuter railLight rail
Unlinked trips (billions)
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
FFIIGGUURREE 4455 TTrraannssiitt RRiiddeerrsshhiipp bbyy SSeelleecctteedd TTyyppee ooff SSeerrvviiccee:: 11999911––22000011
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 20010
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Commuter rail
Light rail
Unlinked trips (millions)
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
FFIIGGUURREE 4466 TTrraannssiitt RRiiddeerrsshhiipp bbyy SSeelleecctteedd TTyyppee ooff SSeerrvviiccee:: 11999911––22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: Total includes other modes not shown, such as ferryboats, demand responsive,inclined planes, and trolley buses. See the Glossary for definitions of heavy rail, light rail,and commuter rail.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, NationalTransit Summaries and Trends, 2002 draft, available at http://www.ntdprogram.com, as ofFebruary 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
74
SSeecc
ttiioonn
77:: AA
vvaaiillaa
bbiilliitt
yy ooff
MMaass
ss TT
rraannss
iitt aann
dd NN
uummbbee
rr ooff
PPaass
sseenngg
eerrss
SSeerr
vveedd
Approximately 77 percent of all unlinkedtransit passenger trips since at least 1996
have been made within the service area of just 30transit authorities. These 30 top authoritieslogged 6.9 billion unlinked trips in 20011 (figure47). New York City Transit alone reported 2.7 billion, or 30 percent, of all unlinked passen-ger trips. The Chicago Transit Authority followedwith 485 million or 5 percent of all trips [2].
The top 30 transit authorities served a popu-lation of about 101 million in 2001 [2]. All tran-sit authorities reporting to the National TransitDatabase determine their population-serveddata using definitions of bus and rail service inthe Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 andtheir own local criteria for other service such asferryboat and vanpool. Some double counting ofpopulations served occurs, especially among
authorities operating in the largest metropolitanareas such as New York City, Los Angeles,Chicago, and San Francisco [2].
According to a Bureau of TransportationStatistics survey,2 an average of 71 percent ofhousehold respondents indicated they had publictransportation available in their area [1].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, Omnibus Survey,Summer 2002, available at http://www.bts.gov,as of June 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalTransit Administration, National TransitDatabase, 1996 and 2001 issues, available athttp://www.ntdprogram.com/, as of March 2003.
Transit Ridership by Transit Authority
1 In 2001, 602 transit authorities submitted data to the FederalTransit Administration. However, due to reporting omissions, only580 transit authorities are reflected in that year’s database.
2 In the summer of 2002, BTS’s Omnibus Survey collected dataon public transportation in June, July, and August.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
75
SSeeccttiioonn 77:: AA
vvaaiillaabbiilliittyy ooff MMaassss TT
rraannssiitt aanndd NNuumm
bbeerr ooff PPaasssseennggeerrss SS
eerrvveedd
Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority, CA
Orange County Transportation Authority, CA
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, OH
Dallas Area Rapid Transit, TX
Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, CA
City and County of Honolulu, HI
Milwaukee County Transportation System, WI
NE IL Regional Commuter Railroad, IL
Metro North Rail Road, NY
Metro Transit, MN
Port Authority Allegheny, PA
Denver Regional Transportation District, CO
Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation, NJ
Green Transit Jamaica Corporation, NY
Miami-Dade Transit Agency, FL
Metro Transit Authority Harris County, TX
Oregon Tri-County District, OR
King County DOT, Metro Transit District, WA
Long Island Rail Road, NY
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit, CA
Maryland Transit Administration, MD
Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, GA
New Jersey Transit, NJ
San Francisco Municipal Railway, CA
SE Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, PA
Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority, MA
Washington-Metro Area Transit Authority, DC
LA County Metro Transportation Authority, CA
Chicago Transit Authority, IL
New York City Transit, NY
Total, top 30 authorities
Total, all authorities
4 6 8 1020
57
57
60
61
71
71
71
72
73
73
75
80
82
82
84
88
91
101
102
104
111
164
226
235
318
364
379
398
485
2,667
6,904
9,008
Trips (millions)
FFIIGGUURREE 4477 TToopp 3300 TTrraannssiitt AAuutthhoorriittiieess bbyy UUnnlliinnkkeedd PPaasssseennggeerr TTrriippss:: 22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: Oregon Tri-County is a municipal corporation of theState of Oregon. Green Transit Jamaica Corporation is a con-tractor for the New York City Department of Transportation.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal TransitAdministration, National Transit Database, available athttp://www.ntdprogram.com, as of February 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
76
SSeecc
ttiioonn
77:: AA
vvaaiillaa
bbiilliitt
yy ooff
MMaass
ss TT
rraannss
iitt aann
dd NN
uummbbee
rr ooff
PPaass
sseenngg
eerrss
SSeerr
vveedd
The nationwide fleet of lift- or ramp-equippedtransit buses increased to 87 percent (58,785
buses) in 2001 from 52 percent of the bus fleet(29,088 buses) in 1993 (figure 48). Whileincreased compliance with Americans withDisabilities Act (ADA) requirements (see box)occurred from 1993 to 2001, the rate of compli-ance has differed among bus types (figure 49).The large bus fleet had the highest level of com-pliance in 1993 and articulated buses the lowest.By 2001, the large bus fleet continued to have thehighest rate (95 percent, or 40,501 vehicles), fol-lowed by medium buses with 94 percent (7,337vehicles). Meanwhile, small buses had the lowestlevel of compliance (85 percent, or 9,176 vehi-cles). Articulated bus compliance fell in the mid-dle at 89 percent, or 1,771 vehicles [2].
Rail transit infrastructure consists of track andstations. In 2001, 50 percent (1,374) stationswere ADA accessible, serving automated guide-way transit, cable cars, commuter rail, heavy rail,inclined plane, light rail, monorail, and theAlaska Railroad. In 2001, light-rail riders enjoyed76 percent accessibility (408 stations), followedby commuter-rail riders with 50 percent accessi-bility (583 stations) and heavy-rail riders with 35percent accessibility (352 stations) [1].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalTransit Administration, National Transit Database2001, available at http://www.ntdprogram.com, asof March 2003.
2. _____, National Transit Summaries and Trends,2002 draft, available at http://www.ntdprogram.com, as of February 2003.
Lift- or Ramp-Equipped Buses and Rail Stations
TTrraannssiitt AAcccceessssiibbiilliittyy UUnnddeerr tthhee AADDAA
While the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of1990 requires public transit services, under specificconditions, to be accessible to persons with specialneeds, it did not impose a statutory deadline for fleetaccessibility. The ADA did require all key stations tobe accessible by July 1993, but allowed the FederalTransit Administration to grant an extension up toJuly 2020 for stations requiring structural modifica-tions to bring them into compliance [1].
The ADA was enacted in 1990; data have been col-lected since 1993.
SSoouurrccee
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal TransitAdministration, FY 2002 Performance Plan(Washington, DC: 2003), also available at http://www.fta.dot.gov/performfy2001/pg2.html, as of February2003.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
77
SSeeccttiioonn 77:: AA
vvaaiillaabbiilliittyy ooff MMaassss TT
rraannssiitt aanndd NNuumm
bbeerr ooff PPaasssseennggeerrss SS
eerrvveedd
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
20
40
60
80
100Percent
FFIIGGUURREE 4488 SShhaarree ooff TTrraannssiitt BBuusseess tthhaatt aarree LLiifftt-- oorr RRaammpp--EEqquuiippppeedd:: 11999933––22000011
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
20
40
60
80
100
Small busesMedium buses
Large buses
Articulated buses
Percent
FFIIGGUURREE 4499 SShhaarree ooff TTrraannssiitt BBuusseess tthhaatt aarree LLiifftt-- oorr RRaammpp--EEqquuiippppeedd bbyy BBuuss TTyyppee:: 11999933––22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: Large buses have more than 35 seats, medium buses have 25–35 seats, andsmall buses have less than 25 seats. Articulated buses are extra-long buses that measurebetween 54 and 60 feet.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, "NationalTransit Summaries and Trends," 2002 draft, available at http://www.ntdprogram.com, as ofFebruary 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
78
SSeecc
ttiioonn
88:: FF
rreeqquu
eennccyy
ooff
VVeehh
iiccllee
aanndd
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFaacc
iilliittyy
RReepp
aaiirrss
In the United States, there were nearly 600,000motor carriers—common, contract, or pri-
vate—using buses or trucks to provide commer-cial transportation of passengers or freight in2000 [2]. These companies accounted for 28percent of the nation’s freight ton-miles and 3percent of passenger-miles that year1 [1]. Repairdata for most of this fleet are not public infor-mation.
Over 2.0 million roadside truck inspectionswere completed in 2001, up from 1.6 million in1990, to ensure that trucks are in compliancewith federal safety regulations and standards(figure 50). Nearly one-quarter of thoseinspected in 2001 were taken out of service forrepairs (figure 51). Although the number ofinspected trucks taken out of service for repairshas remained fairly constant, the proportion ofthose trucks as a percentage of all inspectedtrucks has declined from 34 percent in 1990 to23 percent in 2001.
The downtime for a truck undergoing aninspection can vary from 30 to 60 minutes.Trucks that are placed out-of-service for repairsmay be delayed from a few minutes to severaldays, depending on circumstances.
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transporta-tion Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),tables 1-34 and 1-44, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalMotor Carrier Safety Administration data, ascited in American Trucking Associations,American Trucking Trends 2002 (Washington,DC: 2002).
Commercial Motor Vehicle Repairs
1 Ton-miles are calculated by multiplying the weight in tons ofeach shipment transported by the miles hauled. Passenger-milesare calculated by multiplying the number of passengers trans-ported by the number of miles traveled.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
79
SSeeccttiioonn 88:: FF
rreeqquueennccyy ooff VVeehhiiccllee aanndd TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFaacciilliittyy RR
eeppaaiirrss
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Inspected Trucks taken out of service
Inspections (millions)
FFIIGGUURREE 5500 RRooaaddssiiddee TTrruucckk IInnssppeeccttiioonnss:: 11999900––22000011
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
5
10
15
20
25
30
35Percent
FFIIGGUURREE 5511 IInnssppeecctteedd TTrruucckkss TTaakkeenn OOuutt ooff SSeerrvviiccee ffoorr RReeppaaiirrss:: 11999900––22000011
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin-istration, Motor Carrier Management Information System, available at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov, as of June 2003. 11999999––22000011 ddaattaa ((ffiigguurree 5500)) aanndd 22000011 ddaattaa ((ffiigguurree 5511))—personalcommunication, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Aug. 11, 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
80
SSeecc
ttiioonn
88:: FF
rreeqquu
eennccyy
ooff
VVeehh
iiccllee
aanndd
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFaacc
iilliittyy
RReepp
aaiirrss
Work zones on freeways cause an estimated24 percent of the nonrecurring delays on
freeways and principal arterials [1]. Accordingto the Federal Highway Administration, the pur-pose of maintenance—which includes restora-tion, resurfacing, minor widening, and recon-struction—is to keep highways in usablecondition not to extend service life. Pavementresurfacing represented just over half (51 per-cent) of the miles of federal-aid roads undergo-ing federally supported construction or mainte-nance in 2001 (figure 52), up from about 42percent in 1997.1
The level of funding applied to highway main-tenance is an indirect measure of the amount ofmaintenance activity and, thus, presence ofwork zones on highways. Although well-main-tained roads are vital to a smoothly functioningtransportation system, the maintenance activitymay temporarily disrupt the flow of vehicles,causing traffic delays and congestion.
Funding for highway maintenance increasedby 15 percent (in constant 1987 dollars)2
between 1990 and 2001 (figure 53). Theamount of funds disbursed by federal, state, andlocal governments for maintenance activitiestotaled $20.3 billion in 2001. This represented24 percent of total disbursements for highwaysin 2001 [2].
Sources
1. Chin, S.M., O. Franzese, D.L. Greene, H.L.Hwang, and R. Gibson. “Temporary Losses ofHighway Capacity and Impacts on Perfor-mance,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, May2002.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration, Highway Statistics2001 (Washington, DC: 2002), table HF-2, alsoavailable at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim, as ofFebruary 2003.
Highway Maintenance and Repairs
1 1997 is the earliest year for which these data are available.
2 Instead of chained 1996 dollars, constant 1987 dollars are usedhere because the Federal Highway Administration publishes itsdata accordingly.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
81
SSeeccttiioonn 88:: FF
rreeqquueennccyy ooff VVeehhiiccllee aanndd TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFaacciilliittyy RR
eeppaaiirrss
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 200116.0
16.5
17.0
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0Constant 1987 $ (billions)
FFIIGGUURREE 5533 FFeeddeerraall,, SSttaattee,, aanndd LLooccaall GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt HHiigghhwwaayy MMaaiinntteennaannccee EExxppeennddiittuurreess:: 11999911––22000011
Restor
ation
Resurf
acing
Minor
widenin
g
Recon
struc
tion
Major
widenin
g
Reloca
tion
New ro
ute0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000Miles
FFIIGGUURREE 5522 FFeeddeerraall--AAiidd RRooaaddwwaayy PPrroojjeeccttss UUnnddeerrwwaayy bbyy IImmpprroovveemmeenntt TTyyppee:: 22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: Maintenance includes any work required to keep highways in usable condition thatdoes not extend the service life of the roadway beyond the original design. Restorationincludes renovation. Although the following categories are not generally considered mainte-nance, they are included for comparison: major widening, relocation, and new route.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, HighwayStatistics 2001 (Washington, DC: 2002), "Miles of Federal-Aid Roadway Projects Underway byImprovement Type" chart, also available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim, as of June 2003.
NNOOTTEE:: Although dollar values in most other sections of this book have been converted tochained 1996 dollars, these data are presented in constant 1987 dollars. The FederalHighway Administration, which collects the data, adjusts current dollar data to constant1987 dollars using an index it designed for that purpose.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, HighwayStatistics 2001 (Washington DC: 2002), "Highway Expenditures by Government Type, Currentand Constant Dollars" chart, also available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim, as of June 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
82
SSeecc
ttiioonn
88:: FF
rreeqquu
eennccyy
ooff
VVeehh
iiccllee
aanndd
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFaacc
iilliittyy
RReepp
aaiirrss
Class I railroads1 provide vital freight trans-portation services—carrying more than
one-third of domestic freight ton-miles2 eachyear [2]. In order to provide efficient and timelyservices, these companies maintained nearly170,000 miles of track in 2001, down fromnearly 200,000 miles in 1991 [1]. Class I trackmileage has been declining for many decadesespecially on lower density lines, in part becauseownership and maintenance is expensive. Assuch, rail companies have focused more onreplacing worn rails and crossties than on layingnew track.
Throughout the 1990s, rail companiesreplaced an average of 743,000 tons of rail eachyear (figure 54). The yearly replacements, whichcan vary substantially because of the long life ofrails, ranged from a high of 875,000 tons in1992 to a low of 643,000 tons in 1997. Usingthe most common rail weight (130 to 139 lbsper yard), it would take approximately 120 tonsof rail to cover one mile [1].
There was some growth in the amount of newrails added to the Class I system in the late1990s as firms increased capacity to handlegrowing amounts of coal traffic and reconfig-ured their systems as a result of mergers. Over200,000 tons of new rail were added both in1998 and 1999, up from 19,000 in 1990.
Railroads also replace crossties periodically inorder to ensure the integrity of their tracks.
Throughout the 1990s, railroads replaced anaverage of 12.2 million crossties each year (fig-ure 55). The yearly replacements ranged from ahigh of 14.1 million crossties in 1990 to a low of10.4 million in 1998. There was some growth inthe number of new crossties added to the Class Isystem in the late 1990s as firms increasedcapacity or reconfigured their systems. In 1998,1.8 million new crossties were added; but by2001, the number of new crossties addeddeclined to almost the level seen a decade earlier.
Railroads also periodically replace or rebuildlocomotives and freight cars. On average, newand rebuilt locomotives made up 4 percent ofClass I railroad fleets between 1990 and 2001(figure 56). The number of locomotives thatwere new or rebuilt varied from a low of 3 per-cent in 1992 to a high of 7 percent in 1994.Likewise, the number of freight cars that werenew or rebuilt varied from 3 percent in 1992 to6 percent in 1998.
Sources
1. Association of American Railroads, RailroadFacts 2002 Edition (Washington, DC: 2002).
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),table 1-44 and appendix D, also available athttp://www.bts.gov.
Rail Infrastructure and Equipment Repairs
1 Rail companies with annual operating revenues of $266.6 mil-lion or more in 2001.2 Ton-miles are calculated by multiplying the weight in tons ofeach shipment transported by the miles hauled.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
83
SSeeccttiioonn 88:: FF
rreeqquueennccyy ooff VVeehhiiccllee aanndd TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFaacciilliittyy RR
eeppaaiirrss
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
200
400
600
800
1,000Tons (thousands)
Replacement rail Installation of new rail
FFIIGGUURREE 5544 RRaaiill IInnssttaalllleedd oorr RReeppllaacceedd bbyy UU..SS.. CCllaassss II RRaaiillrrooaaddss:: 11999900––22000011
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16Millions
Replacement crossties Installation of new crossties
FFIIGGUURREE 5555 CCrroossssttiieess IInnssttaalllleedd oorr RReeppllaacceedd bbyy UU..SS.. CCllaassss II RRaaiillrrooaaddss:: 11999900––22000011
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
2
4
6
8
10
Freight cars
Locomotives
Fleet (%)
FFIIGGUURREE 5566 NNeeww oorr RReebbuuiilltt LLooccoommoottiivveess aanndd FFrreeiigghhtt CCaarrss:: 11999900––22000011
NNOOTTEE:: Locomotive data are for Class I railroads only. Freight car data cover Class I rail-roads, other railroads, and private car owners.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: EExxcceepptt aass nnootteedd—Association of American Railroads, Railroad Ten-YearTrends, 1990–2000 (Washington, DC: 2000); 22000000––22000011 ddaattaa—Association of AmericanRailroads, Analysis of Class I Railroads (Washington, DC: 2000 and 2001). FFiigguurree 5566—Association of American Railroads, Railroad Facts (Washington, DC: 1999 and 2002).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
84
SSeecc
ttiioonn
88:: FF
rreeqquu
eennccyy
ooff
VVeehh
iiccllee
aanndd
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFaacc
iilliittyy
RReepp
aaiirrss
Transit service1 interruptions due to mechan-ical failures remained relatively level from
1995 through 2000,2 averaging between 18 and19 mechanical problems per 100,000 revenuevehicle-miles [1, 2] (figure 57).
Among transit vehicles, buses and light railhad the highest rates of mechanical failure in2000. Buses broke down an average of 28 timesper 100,000 revenue vehicle-miles, while light-rail vehicles broke down 15 times per 100,000revenue vehicle-miles. Light-rail vehicle break-downs have changed the most since 1995. Inthat year, there were 32 mechanical failures per100,000 revenue vehicle-miles. However,
between 1995 and 2000, the number of light-rail authorities rose to 25, up from 22 in 1995[1, 2].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalTransit Administration, National Summaries andTrends (Washington, DC: Annual issues), alsoavailable at http://www.ntdprogram.com/, as ofApril 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),table 1-32 and Transit Profile, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003.
Transit Vehicle Reliability
1 Here transit service includes:Light rail—streetcar-type vehicles operated on city streets, semi-exclusive rights-of-way, or exclusive rights-of-way. Service may beprovided by step-entry vehicles or by level boarding. Commuter rail—urban passenger train service for short-distancetravel between a central city and adjacent suburb.Heavy rail—electric railways with the capacity to transport aheavy volume of passenger traffic and characterized by exclusiverights-of-way, multicar trains, high speed, rapid acceleration,sophisticated signaling, and high-platform loading. Also known as“subway,” “elevated (railway),” or “metropolitan railway(metro).” Demand responsive—nonfixed-route, nonfixed-schedule vehiclesthat operate in response to calls from passengers or their agents tothe transit operator or dispatcher.2 Data prior to 1995 and later than 2000 were collected using dif-ferent definitions of what constitutes an interruption of service andare not comparable.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
85
SSeeccttiioonn 88:: FF
rreeqquueennccyy ooff VVeehhiiccllee aanndd TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFaacciilliittyy RR
eeppaaiirrss
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Motor bus
Light rail
Average
Heavy railCommuter railDemand responsive
Number per 100,000 revenue vehicle-miles
FFIIGGUURREE 5577 IInntteerrrruuppttiioonnss ooff SSeerrvviiccee bbyy TTyyppee ooff TTrraannssiitt:: 11999955––22000000
NNOOTTEE:: Interruptions of service include major and minor mechnical failures. If the vehicleoperator was able to fix the problem and return the vehicle to service without assistance,the incident is not considered an interruption of service. For modal definitions, see table 57in appendix B.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, NationalTransit Library, 2001 Reporting Manual, available at http://www.ntdprogram.com/, as ofApril 2003; and American Public Transportation Association, Maintenance data tables,available at http://www.apta.com/research/stats/maint/index.cfm, as of April 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
86
SSeecc
ttiioonn
88:: FF
rreeqquu
eennccyy
ooff
VVeehh
iiccllee
aanndd
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFaacc
iilliittyy
RReepp
aaiirrss
Great Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway System(the Seaway) locks are usually closed dur-
ing the winter for several months due to ice.Excluding the winter closure, the 2001 seasonconsisted of 277 days. The lock system of theportion of the Seaway operated and maintainedby the United States experienced 111 hours(about 4½ days) of downtime during the 2001season. Lock equipment malfunctions causedonly seven hours of delay during the 2001 sea-son, 6 percent of all downtime. Weather-relatedpoor visibility, high winds, and ice caused overhalf of all lock downtime. Vessel incidentscaused another 45 percent of delays. Over thelast decade, weather has been the cause of mostdelays (figure 58). Exceptions occurred in 1993when water level/flow caused 124½ hours ofdelay and in 1998 and 1999 when vessel inci-dents caused over 40 hours of delay.
The Seaway is a waterway operated jointly bythe United States and Canada. It encompassesthe Saint Lawrence River, the five Great Lakes,and the waterways connecting the Great Lakes.It extends 2,300 miles—from the Gulf of theSaint Lawrence at the Atlantic Ocean in the eastto Lake Superior in the west [1]. The U.S. SaintLawrence Seaway Development Corporation(the Corporation) operates and maintains theU.S. portion of the Saint Lawrence Seaway,which includes two locks.
Operations and maintenance represent thebulk of the Corporation’s expenditures. Over 80percent of Corporation expenditures wenttoward personal services and benefits—mainlyfor staffing the locks—during fiscal year 2000.Maintenance and engineering cost $3.3 million.In December 1999, the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers surveyed the two lock structures oper-ated and maintained by the United States. Theyconcluded that the locks were generally wellmaintained but recommended maintenance andcapital improvements [2]. The Corporation hasdeveloped five-year capital and maintenanceplans for the years 2001 through 2005 thatinclude $6 million in capital expenditures.
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, Maritime Administra-tion, and U.S. Coast Guard, Maritime Trade &Transportation 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002).
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, SaintLawrence Seaway Development Corp., Fiscal2000 Annual Report, Great Lakes Seaway SystemMoves Forward in the 21st Century (Washington,DC: 2001), also available at http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/pdf/fy2000ar.pdf, as of February2003.
Lock Repairs on the Great Lakes Saint LawrenceSeaway System
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
87
SSeeccttiioonn 88:: FF
rreeqquueennccyy ooff VVeehhiiccllee aanndd TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFaacciilliittyy RR
eeppaaiirrss
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
50
100
150
200
250Delay (hours)
Weather-related causes
All other causes
FFIIGGUURREE 5588 SSaaiinntt LLaawwrreennccee SSeeaawwaayy LLoocckk DDeellaayyss bbyy CCaauussee:: 11999900––22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: “Weather-related” includes poor visibility and high wind/ice; “All other” includesvessel incidents, lock equipment malfunction, civil interference, and water level/flow.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Saint Lawrence Seaway DevelopmentCorporation, Annual Reports (Washington, DC: various years). Reports for years1993–2000 available at http://www.greatlakes-seaway.com/en/aboutus/slsdc_annrept.html,as of April 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
88
SSeecc
ttiioonn
88:: FF
rreeqquu
eennccyy
ooff
VVeehh
iiccllee
aanndd
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFaacc
iilliittyy
RReepp
aaiirrss
Natural disasters, accidents, labor disputes,terrorism, security breaches, and other
unforeseeable incidents can result in major dis-ruptions to the transportation system. Althougha comprehensive account of these unpredictableinterruptions has not been undertaken nor datacompiled on them, numerous studies and otheranalyses have sought to evaluate the effects ofindividual events on the transportation system.
Terrorist attacks and security alerts haveaffected transportation services for decades.However, efforts to increase transportation secu-rity have grown markedly since the attacks ofSeptember 11, 2001. The short- and long-termeffects of September 11 on transportation andancillary services are still being assessed. In theshort-term, airport enplanements and flightactivity were substantially lower immediatelyafter September 11 (figure 59). In fact, all flightsscheduled for September 12 were canceled, andmany other flights were canceled during theremainder of the month and the months that fol-lowed. Air passenger traffic has not fully recov-ered two years after the attacks, however otherfactors, such as an economic downturn, mayalso be part of the cause.
Vehicle accidents are a common cause oftransportation delays. National estimates, basedon model simulations, suggest that nearly 40percent of nonrecurring delays on freeways andprincipal arterials are due to crashes. Weather,another unpredictable factor, accounts for 27percent of highway delays. Relatively fewerdelays resulted from road work-zones (24 per-cent) and vehicle breakdowns (11 percent) [1].Although motor vehicle accidents are, by far, the
most frequent type of transportation accident,other modes also experience major disruptionsdue to accidents. A freight train carrying haz-ardous materials derailed in a Baltimore tunnelin 2001 [2]. The resulting fire lasted several daysand forced the city to close some highways andrail passages. Freight and passengers weredelayed as trains were diverted hundreds ofmiles throughout the Middle Atlantic region.
The United States, because of its size and var-ied geography, is vulnerable to many types ofnatural disasters that can affect transportation.The flooding of the Mississippi River in 1993shut down large portions of the inland water-way system, washed out rail track, damaged railbridges, and closed an estimated 250 highwaysegments and bridges [3]. The following year,the Northridge earthquake had a major impacton the Los Angeles metropolitan area trans-portation system. Measuring 6.8 on the Richterscale, the earthquake knocked out four free-ways, caused the collapse of parking structures,and ruptured numerous natural gas distributionlines [4, 5].
Disputes initiated by labor or business andother business adjustments can disrupt the pas-senger and freight transportation system. Forexample, a strike by San Francisco Bay AreaRapid Transit employees caused huge trafficjams on bridges and highways in 1997; a strikeby United Parcel Service employees stalled ship-ments of goods later that year; and a labor lock-out by terminal operators shut down west coastports for 10 days in 2002 [6, 7]. A different typeof business-related disruption caused problemson the Union Pacific Railroad in 1997.
Intermittent Interruptions of Transportation Services
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
89
SSeeccttiioonn 88:: FF
rreeqquueennccyy ooff VVeehhiiccllee aanndd TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFaacciilliittyy RR
eeppaaiirrss
Following a merger with Southern PacificRailroad in 1996, accidents and congestionoverwhelmed the expanded railroad, resulting infederal intervention [6].
Sources
1. Chin, S.M., O. Franzese, D.L. Greene, H.L.Hwang, and R. Gibson. “Temporary Losses ofHighway Capacity and Impacts on Perfor-mance,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, May2002.
2. National Transportation Safety Board, “Updateon July 18, 2001 CSXT Derailment in BaltimoreTunnel,” press release, Dec. 4, 2002, available athttp://www.ntsb.gov/, as of April 2003.
3. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, TransportationStatistics Annual Report 1994 (Washington, DC:1994).
4. _____, Transportation Statistics Annual Report1995 (Washington, DC: 1995).
5. _____, Journal of Transportation and Statistics:Special Issue on the Northridge Earthquake 1(2),May 1998.
6. _____, Transportation Statistics Annual Report1998 (Washington, DC: 1998).
7. _____, U.S. International Trade and FreightTransportation Trends (Washington, DC: 2003).
5 6 7 8 90
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Flights Cancellations
151413121110 1716
Number of flights (thousands)
Date in September 2001
FFIIGGUURREE 5599 UU..SS.. DDoommeessttiicc FFlliigghhtt OOppeerraattiioonnss:: SSeepptteemmbbeerr 55––1177,, 22000011
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Form234 Delay Data for September 2001, tabulated Nov. 5, 2001.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
90
SSeecc
ttiioonn
99:: AA
cccciidd
eennttss
There were 45,130 fatalities related to trans-portation in 2001, almost 16 fatalities per
100,000 U.S. residents [1, 2, 3, 5]. This is adecline of 11 percent from 18 fatalities per100,000 residents in 1991, when there were44,320 fatalities. Nearly 93 percent of all trans-portation fatalities in 2001 were highway-related (figure 60). Most of these people whodied were occupants of passenger cars or lighttrucks (including pickups, sport utility vehicles,and minivans). Air, rail, transit, water, andpipeline transportation result in comparativelyfew deaths per capita (see box). Transit, forinstance, led to about 0.11 deaths per 100,000residents in 2001.
Highway safety improved between 1991 and2001. Highway-related fatalities declined from16 fatalities per 100,000 U.S. residents to 15fatalities per 100,000 residents (or 6 percent)over the period. The decline in highway fatali-ties is most apparent for occupants of passengercars (figure 61). During the period, only fatali-ties per 100,000 residents of occupants of lighttrucks rose, from 3 to 4 per 100,000 residents.(This is a period during which the number ofregistered light trucks increased from 53 millionto 84 million [4].) Motorcyclist fatalities per100,000 residents have been rising since 1997.
Similar trends in highway fatality rates areapparent when the rate is based on vehicle-milestraveled (vmt). Passenger car occupant fatalitiesper 100 million vmt declined 25 percentbetween 1991 and 2001, while light truck occu-pant fatalities per 100 million vmt rose slightly(figure 62). Motorcyclist fatalities grew 59 per-
cent by 2001 after falling from 30.6 fatalitiesper 100 million vmt in 1991 to 21.0 fatalitiesper 100 million vmt in 1997.1
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. CensusBureau, Census 2000, available at http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html, as of June2003.
2. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S.Coast Guard, Data Administration Division, per-sonal communication, June 6, 2003.
3. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transport-ation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),table 2-1, also available at http://www.bts.gov/,as of April 2003.
4. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration, Highway Statistics1991 and Highway Statistics 2001 (Washington,DC: 1991 and 2001), table VM-1, 2001 editionavailable at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohpi/hss/index.htm, as of June 2003.
5. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalTransit Administration, National Trends andSummary 2001 (Washington, DC: 2002).
Transportation Fatality Rates
FFaattaalliittyy DDaattaa
Each transportation mode tends to define fatality dif-ferently and may generate its fatality data using different methods. Therefore, comparisons acrossmodes should be viewed very carefully. For furtherinformation on modal fatality definitions, see theglossary section of this report.
1 These motorcycle data are not shown in figure 62 but appear intable 62 in appendix B.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
91
SSeeccttiioonn 99:: AA
cccciiddeennttss
Air Highway Railroad Transit Waterborne Pipeline0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16Per 100,000 U.S. residents
0.32
14.79
0.34 0.11 0.29 0.002
FFIIGGUURREE 6600 TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFaattaalliittyy RRaatteess bbyy MMooddee:: 22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010123456789
10Number
Passenger car occupants
Light truck occupants
Motorcycle occupantsLarge truck occupants
FFIIGGUURREE 6611 HHiigghhwwaayy FFaattaalliittiieess ppeerr 110000,,000000 RReessiiddeennttss ffoorr SSeelleecctteeddVVeehhiiccllee TTyyppeess:: 11999911––22000011
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
1991 2001200019991998199819961995199419931992
Large truck occupants
Light truck occupants
Passenger car occupants
Number
FFIIGGUURREE 6622 HHiigghhwwaayy FFaattaalliittiieess ppeerr 110000 MMiilllliioonn VVeehhiiccllee--MMiilleess ffoorr SSeelleecctteedd VVeehhiiccllee TTyyppeess:: 11999911––22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: Air includes commercial and general aviation.Waterborne includes commercial and recreational vessels. Seenote on table 60 for complete information on inclusions by modeand definitions of light and large trucks for figures 61 snd 62.Commercial aviation data for 2001 do not include fatalities thatresulted from the terrorist attacks on New York City andWashington, DC.
Figure 62 excludes the motorcycle occupant fatality rate data,because the rate is much higher than for the other selected high-way modes. Those data are available on table 62 in appendix B.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: EExxcceepptt aass nnootteedd—U.S. Department ofTransportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), table 2-1, also available at http://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003.PPooppuullaattiioonn—U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. CensusBureau, Census 2000, available athttp://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html, as of June2003. 22000011 WWaatteerrbboorrnnee—U.S. Department of HomelandSecurity, U.S. Coast Guard, Data Administration Division, per-sonal communication, June 6, 2003. 22000011 TTrraannssiitt— U.S.Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration,National Trends and Summaries 2001 (Washington, DC: 2002).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
92
SSeecc
ttiioonn
99:: AA
cccciidd
eennttss
For people under 65 years of age, the Centersfor Disease Control (CDC) has ranked
transportation accidents as the third leadingcause of death in the United States (after cancerand heart disease) each year from 1991 to 2000[1]. During those years, an average of nearly36,000 people under 65 died each year fromtransportation accidents.1
While transportation accidents amounted to6 percent of the deaths of those under age 65between 1991 and 2000, these fatalities repre-sented 10 percent of the total years of potentiallife lost (YPLL) during this period (figure 63).YPLL, which is computed by adding up theremaining life expectancies of all victims (up to65 years of age) at their deaths, is a measure-ment that accounts for the age distributionamong different causes of injury mortality andother common causes of death (see box).Accordingly, the difference between the percent-age of deaths and YPLL indicates that peoplewho die from transportation accidents tend tobe younger on average than victims of othercauses of death.
Motor vehicle crashes are the most frequentcause of transportation-related fatalities. YPLLsassociated with deaths related to motor vehicleaccidents can be compared with YPLLs for
deaths from all other modes of transportation(figure 64). This shows that, over the 10 years,motor vehicle deaths also contributed to thebulk of YPLLs due to transportation accidents.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,Centers for Disease Control, National Center forHealth Statistics, National Vital StatisticsReports: Deaths, 1991–2000 issues, available athttp://www.cdc.gov/nchs/, as of March 2003.
Years of Potential Life Lost from Transportation Accidents
DDaattaa ffoorr CCaallccuullaattiinngg YYeeaarrss ooff PPootteennttiiaall LLiiffee LLoosstt
Data used here come from a national mortality data-base compiled by the Centers for Disease Control’sNational Center for Health Statistics. Years of poten-tial life lost (YPLL) are computed from this data bymatching the ages of victims with the correspondingentries in the life expectancy tables. Remainingyears of life expectancy from the age of death to 65years are counted toward YPLL. Victims 65 yearsand older are not included. YPLL data for 1982through 2000 are available online through the Web-Based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System(WISQARS).
SSoouurrccee
Centers for Disease Control, National Center for InjuryPrevention and Control, Web-Based Injury Statistics Queryand Reporting System (WISQARS), available at http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars/, as of March 2003.
1 Because of methodological differences, fatality data from theCDC differ from those collected by the individual modal adminis-trations.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
93
SSeeccttiioonn 99:: AA
cccciiddeennttss
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
2
4
6
8
10
12% of total deaths and YPLL
Deaths YPLL
FFIIGGUURREE 6633 DDeeaatthhss aanndd YYeeaarrss ooff PPootteennttiiaall LLiiffee LLoosstt DDuuee ttooTTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn AAcccciiddeennttss:: 11999911––22000000
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
2
4
6
8
10
12% of total YPLL
Motor vehicle accidents
Other transportation accidents
FFIIGGUURREE 6644 YYeeaarrss ooff PPootteennttiiaall LLiiffee LLoosstt DDuuee ttoo MMoottoorr VVeehhiiccllee aannddOOtthheerr TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn AAcccciiddeennttss:: 11999911––22000000
NNOOTTEE:: Years of potential life lost (YPLL) is the difference between the age of death and 65years of age. Fatalities of people 65 years old and older are not included in this calculation.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control,National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Web-Based Injury Statistics Query andReporting System (WISQARS), available at http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars/, as ofFebruary 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
94
SSeecc
ttiioonn
99:: AA
cccciidd
eennttss
Each year a far larger number of people areinjured than killed in transportation-related
accidents. An estimated 3.1 million people suf-fered some kind of injury involving passengerand freight transportation in 2001 (see box).Most of these injuries, about 98 percent,resulted from highway crashes1 [1].
Highway injury rates vary by the type of vehi-cle used (figure 65). In 2001, 75 passenger caroccupants were injured per 100 million passen-ger-miles traveled (pmt) compared with 58 lighttruck occupants. Occupants of large trucks andbuses are even less likely to sustain an injury permile of travel. Motorcycle riders are, by far, themost likely to get hurt. Transit-related injuriesare also relatively high per mile. This is due, atleast in part, to the inclusion of injuries on tran-sit property, including those not caused by tran-sit vehicle operations, such as injuries on escala-tors and in parking lots. (These transit injurydata will be disaggregated starting with 2002data.)
Injury rates for most modes declined between1991 and 2001, with some exceptions.2 Ratesfor light truck occupants rose 15 percent, from50 per 100 million pmt in 1991 to 58 per 100
million pmt in 2001 (figure 66). Motorcyclinghas become safer per mile ridden over thedecade, but since 1999, the injury rate hasincreased from 429 per 100 million pmt to 575per 100 million pmt in 2001. Bus injuries per100 million pmt have declined recently afterincreases in the mid-1990s.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),tables 1-34 and 2-2, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of February 2003.
Transportation Injury Rates
IInnjjuurryy DDaattaa
Each transportation mode tends to define injury dif-ferently. In addition, each mode may generate itsinjury data using different methods. Therefore, com-parisons across modes should be viewed very care-fully. For further information on modal injury defini-tions, see the glossary section of this report.
In the following pages, another source of highwayinjury data—the National Electronic Injury Sur-veillance System operated by the U.S. ConsumerProduct Safety Commission—results in yet anotherset of highway injury data that differs from modaldata presented here.
1 There is the potential for some double counting involving high-way-rail grade crossing and transit bus data. 2 These calculations exclude bicycling, walking, and boating(including recreational boating), because there are no nationalannual trend data estimates of passenger-miles traveled for thesemodes of transportation.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
95
SSeeccttiioonn 99:: AA
cccciiddeennttss
Passenger car
Motorcycle Light truck
Large truck
Bus Total0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700Injuries per 100 million passenger-miles
FFIIGGUURREE 6655 IInnjjuurryy RRaatteess ffoorr OOccccuuppaannttss ooff HHiigghhwwaayy VVeehhiicclleess:: 22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Motorcycle
Passenger carLight truck
Injuries per 100 million passenger-miles
FFIIGGUURREE 6666 IInnjjuurryy RRaatteess ffoorr OOccccuuppaannttss ooff SSeelleecctteedd HHiigghhwwaayy VVeehhiicclleess aanndd MMoottoorrccyycclliissttss:: 11999911––22000011
NNOOTTEE:: Bus and large truck occupant injury rates, 1991–2001, are included in table 66 inappendix B.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: 11999911––22000000—U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of TransportationStatistics, National Transportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), tables 1–34and 2-2, also available at http://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003. 22000011 ddaattaa—See correspon-ding tables in appendix B for full citation.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
96
SSeecc
ttiioonn
99:: AA
cccciidd
eennttss
There were an estimated 3.6 million highway-related injuries in the United States in 2001,
according to data reported to the U.S. ConsumerProduct Safety Commission (CPSC)1 (see box)[1]. An estimated 3.3 million of these injuriesinvolved motor vehicle occupants. The restinvolved about 131,000 pedestrians, 111,000motorcyclists, and 60,000 pedalcyclists.
More females than males were treated forminor injuries in 2001 across most age groups,with spikes for people aged 15 to 24 (figure 67).This age group sustained almost 1 million minormotor vehicle-related injuries. For serious injuries,more males than females were treated across allage groups up to about 65 years (figure 68).Again, serious injuries spiked at ages 15 to 24, butmale injuries spiked substantially higher. This agegroup incurred about 84,000 serious injuries in2001 of which 61 percent happened to males.
In summary, there were sharp peaks in injuriesassociated with youth: for motor vehicle occu-pants and motorcyclists, the peak spanned ages15 to 24; for pedalcyclists and pedestrians, thepeak spanned ages 10 to 14. Young males exhib-ited a substantially greater peak in serious injuriesthan young females. In addition, the percentageof injuries classified as serious was greater formotorcyclists (20 percent of all motorcyclistinjuries were serious), pedestrians (19 percent),and pedalcyclists (10 percent) than it was formotor vehicle occupants (7 percent) (figure 69).
This analysis comes from a Bureau ofTransportation Statistics (BTS) comprehensive
study using 2001 data from the CPSC’s NationalElectronic Injury Surveillance System. Only asmall portion of the BTS study is presented here.The study included data on motor vehicle occu-pants, motorcyclists, pedalcyclists, and pedestri-ans injured on or near public roads,2 but only oninjuries involving collisions with moving motorvehicles.3 BTS also compared data on minor andserious injuries.
Source
1. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission,National Electronic Injury Surveillance System(NEISS), information available at http://www.cpsc.gov/Neiss/oracle.html, as of June 2003.
Motor Vehicle-Related Injuries
NNaattiioonnaall EElleeccttrroonniicc IInnjjuurryy SSuurrvveeiillllaannccee SSyysstteemm ((NNEEIISSSS)) IInnjjuurryy DDaattaa
Use of NEISS data from the U.S. Consumer ProductSafety Commission (CPSC) enables analyses ofinjuries by factors such as age and gender, type ofvehicle, and severity of injuries sustained. NEISS dataare a probability sample of reports from hospital emer-gency rooms in the United States and territories open24 hours a day with at least 6 beds. Each hospital hasa computer linked to CPSC headquarters. Staff con-sistently computer code information in emergencyroom medical reports, which allows injuries to be ana-lyzed and compared within and across transportationmodes and over time. Physicians diagnose injuries,specify injured body part(s), determine disposition,and give other detailed medical information. NEISSdata cannot estimate injuries treated at sites otherthan hospital emergency rooms (e.g., HMOs, physi-cian’s offices, and on-site medical facilities) and do notinclude investigative information aside from emer-gency room medical reports.
1 Because of methodological differences, highway injury datafrom CPSC differ from those estimated by the National HighwayTraffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the U.S. Department ofTransportation. For 2001, NHTSA reported an estimated 3.0 mil-lion highway injuries.
2 This includes injuries involving traffic on public roads and indriveways and parking lots, and at other locations near, but noton, public roads.3 This excludes occupants injured when entering or exiting parkedvehicles, pedalcyclists injured by parked cars or other fixed objects,and pedestrians struck by pedalcyclists or off-road vehicles.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
97
SSeeccttiioonn 99:: AA
cccciiddeennttss
0
50
100
150
200
250
300Thousands
0–4
5–910
–1415
–1920
–2425
–2930
–3435
–3940
–4445
–4950
–5455
–5960
–6465
–6970
–7475
–7980
–8485
–8990
–9495
–99
100+
Females
Males
Age
FFIIGGUURREE 6677 MMiinnoorr MMoottoorr VVeehhiiccllee--RReellaatteedd IInnjjuurriieess bbyy AAggee aanndd GGeennddeerr:: 22000011
100+
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0–4
5–910
–1415
–1920
–2425
–2930
–3435
–3940
–4445
–4950
–5455
–5960
–6465
–6970
–7475
–7980
–8485
–8990
–9495
–99
Thousands
Males
Females
Age
FFIIGGUURREE 6688 SSeerriioouuss MMoottoorr VVeehhiiccllee--RReellaatteedd IInnjjuurriieess bbyy AAggee aanndd GGeennddeerr:: 22000011
Vehicle occupants Motorcyclists Pedalcyclists Pedestrians02468
101214161820
% of injuries within each type that are serious22
FFIIGGUURREE 6699 SSeerriioouuss MMoottoorr VVeehhiiccllee--RReellaatteedd IInnjjuurriieess bbyy TTyyppee:: 22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: A pedalcyclist is a person on a vehicle that is poweredsolely by pedals. A minor injury is one in which the victim wastreated and released. A serious injury is one in which the victimwas either hospitalized or treated and transferred to anotherfacility. FFiigguurree 6699—Data are the share of injuries that were seri-ous for one person type (e.g., the share of seriously injuredpedestrians of all injured pedestrians).
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, calculations based on data from U.S.Consumer Product Safety Commission, National ElectronicInjury Surveillance (NEISS) System, available athttp://www.cpsc.gov/Neiss/oracle.html, as of June 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
98
SSeecc
ttiioonn
99:: AA
cccciidd
eennttss
Motor vehicle crashes in the United Statescost an estimated $231 billion1 in 2000,
about $820 per person or 2 percent of the GrossDomestic Product2 [1]. The largest componentsof the total cost (26 percent each) are marketproductivity—the cost of foregone paid labordue to death and disability—and property dam-age (figure 70). Household productivity—thecost of foregone household (unpaid) labor—accounted for 9 percent of the total cost.Workplace cost (2 percent) is the disruptionfrom the loss or absence of an employee suchthat it requires training a new employee, over-time to accomplish the work of the injuredemployee, and administrative costs to processpersonnel changes.
Alcohol-involved crashes cost $50.9 billion or22 percent of the total costs. Costs related tospeeding were estimated to be $40.4 billion, 18percent of the total. The failure of drivers andpassengers to wear safety belts cost an estimated$26 billion, but the use of safety belts saved $50billion [1].
Ultimately, all people pay for the cost ofmotor vehicle crashes through insurance premi-ums, taxes, out-of-pocket expenses, and the like.About one-quarter of the cost of crashes is paiddirectly by those involved, while society in gen-eral pays the rest (figure 71). Insurance compa-nies, funded by all insured drivers whether theyare involved in a crash or not, paid about halfthe cost in 2000. Government paid 9 percent ofthe cost. “Other” (13 percent) includes unpaidcharges of health care providers and charities,costs borne by employers, and the cost of delayborne by travelers.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration, TheEconomic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes 2000(Washington, DC: 2002), also available athttp://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/economic, as ofDecember 2002.
Economic Impacts of Motor Vehicle Crashes
1 The costs detailed here are the economic costs not the intangi-ble consequences of these events to individuals and families, suchas pain and suffering and loss of life.2 All dollar amounts are in current 2000 dollars.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
99
SSeeccttiioonn 99:: AA
cccciiddeennttss
Market productivity 26%
Property damage 26%Medical costs
14%
Travel delay 11%
Household productivity
9%
Insurance administration 7%
Legal costs 5%
Workplace costs 2% Emergency services
1%
FFIIGGUURREE 7700 CCoommppoonneennttss ooff tthhee EEccoonnoommiicc CCoossttss ooff MMoottoorr VVeehhiiccllee CCrraasshheess:: 22000000
Total government Insurer Self0
10
20
30
40
NA NA NA NA NA
Emergency services
Market productivity Medical
Household productivity
Insurance administration Legal
Property damage
Current $ (billions)
NA NA NA
FFIIGGUURREE 7711 EEssttiimmaatteedd SSoouurrcceess ooff PPaayymmeenntt ffoorr MMoottoorr VVeehhiiccllee CCrraasshheess:: 22000000
KKEEYY:: NA = not applicable.
NNOOTTEE:: Figure 71 does not include payments by sources other than the government, insur-ers, and individuals involved in the accident. These “other” payments amounted to $33 bil-lion, mainly for travel delays.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration, The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes 2000 (Washington, DC:2002), available at http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/economic/, as of December 2002.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
100
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1100::
CCooll
llaattee
rraall DD
aammaagg
ee ttoo
tthhee
HHuumm
aann aa
nndd NN
aattuurr
aall EE
nnvviirroo
nnmmeenn
tt
Transportation in 2001 emitted 66 percent ofthe nation’s carbon monoxide (CO), 47 per-
cent of nitrogen oxides (NOx), 35 percent ofvolatile organic compounds (VOC), 5 percent ofparticulates, 6 percent of ammonia, and 4 per-cent of sulfur dioxide.1 Highway vehicles emittedalmost all of transportation’s share of CO in2001, 80 percent of the NOx, and 75 percent ofall VOC (figure 72). Marine vessels and railroadlocomotives each contributed 10 percent oftransportation’s NOx emissions, and other non-road vehicles2 had a 20 percent share of VOCemissions. With the exception of ammonia,transportation air emissions have declined since1991 (figure 73). NOx shows only a slightdecrease between 1991 and 2001.
Gasoline powered highway vehicles experi-enced the greatest decline in NOx emissions,while diesel-powered highway vehicles and air-craft show increases between 1991 and 2001(figure 74). New, tightened NOx emissions stan-dards for diesel and gasoline trucks are due to gointo effect in 2007 and 2008 [1]. In addition,new NOx standards will apply to certain marineengines built in 2004. The U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency has also proposed new NOxemissions standards for motorcycles and recre-ational boats. NOx emissions standards for loco-motives went into effect in 2000, and tightenedstandards will apply to locomotives built in2005 and later [2].
These key air emissions data (see box) are themost widely used indicator of transportation’simpact on the environment. Key air emissionsgenerated during the use of various vehicles,locomotives, aircraft, and vessels affect thenation’s air quality and human health.
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2003),tables 4-30 through 4-32, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of January 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalRailroad Administration, personal communica-tion, July 2003.
Key Air Emissions
1 With its 2001 updates, the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency is no longer estimating lead emissions. In 2000, transporta-tion emitted 13 percent of the nation’s lead emissions. Aircraftemitted almost 96 percent of all transportation lead emissions.While the substance is no longer used in most fuels, it is still pres-ent in aviation fuels.2 Other nonroad vehicles include recreational marine vessels, air-port service vehicles, and road maintenance equipment.
TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn AAiirr EEmmiissssiioonnss
National data on air emissions are estimated by theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA’sNational Emissions Inventory (NEI) is updated annu-ally and covers mobile, stationary, and area sourcesof pollution regulated under the Clean Air Act. Thesepollutants include the so-called “criteria” and haz-ardous air pollutants.1 Most criteria emissions havebeen estimated since 1970, hazardous emissionsonly since 1996.
EPA’s mobile source category contains “onroad”(highway) and “nonroad” (all other modes) emissions.However, its nonroad category includes nontrans-portation sources such as farming and constructionequipment, lawn and garden equipment, and logging,industrial, and light commercial equipment. To moreaccurately assess transportation air emissions, theBureau of Transportation Statistics removes the non-transportation components from EPA’s criteria mobilesource emissions. It is this subset that is presentedhere as “transportation” emissions.
1 For details on transportation’s contribution to hazardousair pollutants, see U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureauof Transportation Statistics, Transportation Statistics AnnualReport 2000, available at http://www.bts.gov/.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
101
SSeeccttiioonn 1100:: CC
oollllaatteerraall DDaamm
aaggee ttoo tthhee HHuumm
aann aanndd NNaattuurraall EE
nnvviirroonnmmeenntt
0
20
40
60
80
100
Carbon monoxide Nitrogen oxides Volatile organic compounds
Percent
0.3 0.1 0.8 0.3 0.0 0.60.8
Highway gasoline Highway diesel
0.2
Aircraft
Marine vessels Railroad Other
1.4
FFIIGGUURREE 7722 SShhaarree ooff SSeelleecctteedd AAiirr PPoolllluuttiioonn EEmmiissssiioonnss bbyy MMooddee:: 22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8Index: 1991 = 1.0
Ammonia
NOxPM-10
PM-2.5
Lead
CO VOC
FFIIGGUURREE 7733 TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn AAiirr EEmmiissssiioonnss bbyy TTyyppee ooff PPoolllluuttaanntt:: 11999911––22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
Aircraft
Highway diesel OtherRailroad
Marine vessels
Highway gasoline
Index: 1991 = 1.0
FFIIGGUURREE 7744 NNiittrrooggeenn OOxxiiddee EEmmiissssiioonnss bbyy MMooddee:: 11999911––22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: FFiigguurree 7722—EPA no longer estimates lead emissions.Modal shares in 2000 were: highway gasoline vehicles, 4.1%; air-craft, 95.9%. FFiigguurree 7733—Revisions to previous estimates are allrelated to the development of the 1999 National EmissionsInventory (NEI). The 1999 estimates in the table are taken fromVersion 2 of the 1999 NEI and reflect many new data submis-sions from state and local air management agencies. The 1999emissions estimates from mobile sources are in most casesbased on the new MOBILE6 and the draft NONROAD2002 emis-sions models. This is the first time that estimates using thesemodels have appeared in this format. Some but relatively few
mobile source estimates were provided by state air agencies.The largest set of state-submitted data in 1999 was fromCalifornia. Estimates for mobile sources for years prior to 1999were made consistent with the estimates for 1999 and later,allowing for a generally consistent time trend except that state-submitted data were incorporated for 1999 only. See the tables inappendix B for definitions of "highway" and "other" vehicles.SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, National Emissions Inventory,Air Pollutant Emission Trends, available athttp://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/index.html/, as of August 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
102
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1100::
CCooll
llaattee
rraall DD
aammaagg
ee ttoo
tthhee
HHuumm
aann aa
nndd NN
aattuurr
aall EE
nnvviirroo
nnmmeenn
tt
U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions totaled6,936 teragrams (trillion grams) of carbon
dioxide equivalent (TgCO2Eq) in 2001,1 of which1,867 TgCO2Eq (27 percent) were emitted bytransportation. Transportation emissions havegrown 22 percent since 1990, while total U.S.emissions rose 13 percent. Carbon dioxide (CO2),the predominant greenhouse gas, accounted for 84percent of all U.S. emissions in 2001 [1]. Nearly all(97 percent) of CO2 emissions are generated bythe combustion of fossil fuels. Transportation wasresponsible for 1,780.9 TgCO2Eq, or 31 percentof all CO2 emissions. Transportation CO2 emis-sions grew 24 percent between 1991 and 2001, anaverage annual change of 2 percent.
Highway vehicle emissions rose at an averageannual rate of 2 percent between 1991 and 2001(figure 75). At the same time, locomotive emis-sions grew at 3 percent and domestic aircraftemissions rose less than 1 percent. Domesticmaritime emissions increased 2 percent but werevolatile throughout the period. Under the UnitedNations Framework Convention on ClimateChange reporting guidelines, only domestic air-craft and maritime emissions are included in themodal data. The balance of emissions, labeledinternational bunker fuels, declined 2 percent onan annual average basis between 1991 and 2001.
Highway vehicles emitted 79 percent of alltransportation CO2 emissions in 2001.Passenger cars and light-duty vehicles, whichinclude pickup trucks, sport utility vehicles, andvans, were responsible for 78 percent of those
highway emissions (figure 76). Over the period1991 to 2001, emissions of all other trucks grewfastest, at 4 percent annually. The second high-est average annual growth rate among highwayvehicles was 3 percent for light-duty trucks.
Most air pollutants impact local or regional airquality. Greenhouse gases, on the other hand, couldalter the earth’s climate on a regional and globalscale. These potential changes include long-termfluctuations in temperature, wind, precipitation, andother perturbations of the Earth’s climate system.GHGs, including CO2, methane, and nitrous oxideoccur naturally and as a result of human activities.
Source
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventoryof U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks:1990–2001 (Washington, DC: April 2003),tables ES-3 and ES-8.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
1 Including sinks, net U.S. emissions totaled 6,098 TgCO2Eq in2001. A natural sink, according to the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, is “A reservoir that uptakes a pollutant fromanother part of its cycle. Soil and trees tend to act as natural sinksfor carbon.” Unnatural sinks are manmade depositories for pollu-tants (e.g., the Department of Energy is creating underground sinksinto which CO2 can be pumped).
GGHHGG EEmmiissssiioonnss DDaattaa
Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) and the Energy Information Administration(EIA) produce estimated annual U.S. GHG emis-sions data. EPA is responsible for producing the offi-cial inventory of U.S. emissions, as required underthe United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change. Both agencies use EIA fuel con-sumption data as a basis for estimating most GHGemissions but differences in their methodologies canresult in different datasets.1 EIA usually releases itsdata about six months before EPA does. EPA pro-vides more detail of interest to transportation, suchas emissions by mode. EIA presents emissions inmillion metric tons of carbon equivalent (mmtce),while EPA uses teragrams of carbon dioxide equiva-lent (TgCO2Eq) as required under the Convention.[1 TgCO2Eq = 1 mmtce x (44/12)]
1 For further information, see U.S. Department ofTransportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,Transportation Statistics Annual Report 2001 (WashingtonDC: 2002), page 239.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
103
SSeeccttiioonn 1100:: CC
oollllaatteerraall DDaamm
aaggee ttoo tthhee HHuumm
aann aanndd NNaattuurraall EE
nnvviirroonnmmeenntt
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Boats and vessels Locomotives
Highway
Other2
Aircraft
Teragrams ofCO equivalent(1991 = 1.0)
21
FFIIGGUURREE 7755 CCaarrbboonn DDiiooxxiiddee EEmmiissssiioonnss bbyy TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn MMooddee:: 11999911––22000011
Passenger cars
Light-duty trucks
All other trucks
BusesAlternative fuel vehicles
45%
<1%1%
21%
33%
FFIIGGUURREE 7766 SShhaarree ooff HHiigghhwwaayy MMooddee CCaarrbboonn DDiiooxxiiddee EEmmiissssiioonnss bbyy VVeehhiiccllee TTyyppee:: 22000011
1 Teragrams of CO2 equivalent—1 TgCO2 Eq = 1 million metric ton of carbon equivalent x(44/12). A teragram = 1 trillion grams.2 "Other" carbon dioxide emissions are from motorcycles, construction equipment, agri-cultural machinery, pipelines, and lubricants.
NNOOTTEE:: FFiigguurree 7755—Highway includes passenger cars, buses, light-duty trucks, and othertrucks.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse GasEmissions and Sinks: 1990–2001 (Washington, DC: April 2003), table 1-14, also availableat http://www.epa.gov, as of June 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
104
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1100::
CCooll
llaattee
rraall DD
aammaagg
ee ttoo
tthhee
HHuumm
aann aa
nndd NN
aattuurr
aall EE
nnvviirroo
nnmmeenn
tt
Transportation-related sources typicallyaccount for most oil reported to be spilled
into U.S. waters reported each year.1 Forinstance, transportation’s share of the total vol-ume of oil spilled between 1991 and 2000 var-ied from a high of 97 percent in 1996 to a lowof 77 percent in 1992. The volume of each spillvaries significantly from incident to incident:one catastrophic incident can, however, spill mil-lions of gallons into the environment.Consequently, the total volume of oil spilledeach year is volatile (figure 77).
Maritime incidents are the source of most oilspills, particularly on a volume basis. On aver-age, 1.8 million gallons of various types of oilwere spilled each year by all transportation andnontransportation sources between 1991 and2000. Of this, 77 percent of oil spilled came fromincidents associated with maritime transporta-tion, nearly 11 percent from pipeline incidents,and over 1 percent from all other transportationmodes (figure 78). Oil cargo accounted for 58percent of the total volume spilled in 2000 [1].
Failures in transportation systems (vessels,pipelines, highway vehicles, and railroad equip-ment) or errors made by operators can result in
spillage of crude oil, refined petroleum prod-ucts, and other materials and cause seriousdamage to the environment. The ultimateimpact of each spill depends on the location andvolume of the spill, weather conditions, and thenatural resources affected. While data exist onoil spilled into U.S. waters, there is less informa-tion available on the resulting consequences tothe environment.
Source
1. American Petroleum Institute, Oil Spills in U.S.Navigable Waters: 1991–2000 (Washington, DC:Feb. 11, 2003).
Oil Spills into U.S. Waters
AAggggrreeggaattiinngg OOiill SSppiillll DDaattaa
The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) summarizes reportedoil spill data in its Pollution Incidents In and AroundU.S. Waters, A Spill Release Compendium:1969–2000. USCG aggregates the source data intofive categories: marine vessels, pipelines, facilities,other, and unknown. The Bureau of TransportationStatistics has reviewed USCG’s detailed source dataand classified each transportation-related reportedoil spill incident by transportation mode. The datapresented here are preliminary, as research on thedataset is ongoing.
1 When an oil spill occurs in U.S. waters, the responsible party isrequired to report the spill to the U.S. Coast Guard. The CoastGuard collects data on the number, location, and source of spills,volume and type of oil spilled, and the type of operation thatcaused the spill.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5Gallons (millions)
Maritime
All other transportation
NontransportationUnknown and other
FFIIGGUURREE 7777 VVoolluummee ooff OOiill SSppiillllss RReeppoorrtteedd ttoo tthhee UU..SS.. CCooaasstt GGuuaarrdd bbyySSoouurrccee:: 11999911––22000000
Maritimefacilities 22%
Maritime nontank vessels and other 18%
Waterborne tank vessels 37%
Pipeline 11%
Nontransportation structures and facilities 4%
Unknown and other 7%
Highway, aircraft, rail, and other 2%
FFIIGGUURREE 7788 AAvveerraaggee VVoolluummee ooff OOiill SSppiillllss bbyy SSoouurrccee:: 11999911––22000000
NNOOTTEE:: Data are preliminary.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, basedon U.S. Coast Guard, Pollution Incidents In and Around U.S. Waters, available athttp://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/nmc/response/stats/ac.htm, as of September 2002.
105
SSeeccttiioonn 1100:: CC
oollllaatteerraall DDaamm
aaggee ttoo tthhee HHuumm
aann aanndd NNaattuurraall EE
nnvviirroonnmmeenntt
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
106
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1100::
CCooll
llaattee
rraall DD
aammaagg
ee ttoo
tthhee
HHuumm
aann aa
nndd NN
aattuurr
aall EE
nnvviirroo
nnmmeenn
tt
Transportation firms reported more than17,700 hazardous materials incidents in
2001.1 These incidents resulted in 7 deaths and143 injuries, compared with annual averages of21 deaths and 445 injuries between 1991 and2001. During that decade, the number ofreported hazardous materials incidents in-creased (figure 79). However, much of theincrease may be attributed to improved report-ing and an expansion of reporting requirements2
(see box).
Highway vehicles transported 56 percent ofthe tons of hazardous materials shipped in 1997[2]. Between 1991 and 2001, 62 percent of theinjuries and 53 percent of the fatalities attrib-uted to hazardous materials were the result ofhighway incidents. Fatal hazardous materialstransportation incidents in other modes tend tobe infrequent. After a DC-9 aircraft crashed inFlorida in 1996 killing 110 people, the NationalTransportation Safety Board found that thecrash was caused by ignited oxygen leaking fromimproperly stored oxygen generators [1]. Withthe exception of occasional spikes, injuries gen-erally declined in the 1990s, especially fromhighway incidents (figure 80). Of the 926injuries attributed to rail incidents in 1996, 787resulted from chlorine released when a trainderailed in February in Alberton, Montana [3].
Environmental contamination can occur as theresult of hazardous materials incidents, but data arenot routinely collected on the extent of the damage.Their environmental impacts will depend on theconcentration and type of material spilled, the loca-tion and volume of the spill, and exposure rates.
Sources
1. National Transportation Safety Board, NTSBReport AAR-97/06, Docket No. DCA96MA054.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, and U.S. Department ofCommerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Com-modity Flow Survey, Hazardous Materials(Washington, DC: December 1999).
3. U.S. Department of Transportation, Researchand Special Programs Administration, personalcommunication, May 2003.
Hazardous Materials Incidents and Injuries
1 A reported incident is a report of any unintentional release ofhazardous materials while in transportation (including loading,unloading, and temporary storage). It excludes pipeline and bulkshipments by water, which are reported separately. 2 Incident reporting requirements were extended to intrastatemotor carriers on Oct. 1, 1998, which may partly explain the sub-sequent increased volume of reports. Beginning in April 1993,there was a sharp improvement in reporting of incidents by smallpackage carriers.
HHaazzaarrddoouuss MMaatteerriiaallss RReeppoorrttiinngg
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s HazardousMaterials Information System (HMIS) is the primarysource of national data on hazardous materials trans-portation safety. Hazardous materials, as defined inregulations, include nine classes of gases and liquidsand other substances.1 However, the vast majority ofthe hazardous materials shipped within the UnitedStates each year (81 percent in 1997) are flammableand combustible liquids, primarily petroleum products.There have been an estimated 800,000 hazardousmaterials shipments per day (or more than 3.1 billiontons) annually in recent years.
SSoouurrcceeU.S. Department of Transportation, Research and SpecialPrograms Administration, Office of Hazardous MaterialsSafety, Hazardous Materials Shipments (Washington, DC:October 1998).
1 The nine classes are: explosives; flammable, nonflam-mable, and poisonous gases; flammable and combustibleliquid; flammable, spontaneously combustible, and danger-ous-when-wet materials; oxidizers and organic peroxides;poisonous materials and infectious substances; radioactivematerials; corrosive materials; and miscellaneous haz-ardous materials.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
107
SSeeccttiioonn 1100:: CC
oollllaatteerraall DDaamm
aaggee ttoo tthhee HHuumm
aann aanndd NNaattuurraall EE
nnvviirroonnmmeenntt
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Rail
Highway
Air
Incidents (thousands)
FFIIGGUURREE 7799 HHaazzaarrddoouuss MMaatteerriiaallss TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn IInncciiddeennttss bbyy MMooddee:: 11999911––22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
200
400
600
800
1,000
Rail
Highway
Air
Injuries
FFIIGGUURREE 8800 HHaazzaarrddoouuss MMaatteerriiaallss TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn IInnjjuurriieess bbyy MMooddee:: 11999911––22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: Water data are not included. On an average annual basis, 9 incidents are reportedby vessels. Two injuries were reported in 1998; none in other years. Annual data for theseincidents and injuries are in table 80 in appendix B.
The 1996 spike in rail injuries resulted from 1 train derailment in which 787 people wereinjured by the release of chlorine gas.
SSOOUURRCCEE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Special ProgramsAdministration, Hazardous Materials Information System database, available at http://hazmat.dot.gov/files/hazmat/10year/10yearfrm.htm, as of January 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
108
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1111::
CCoonn
ddiittiioo
nn ooff
tthhee
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
SSyyss
tteemm
Highway-related capital stock (highwayinfrastructure, consumer motor vehicles,
and trucking and warehousing) represented themajority of the nation’s transportation capitalstock, $2,166 billion in 2000 (in 1996 chaineddollars1). Highway infrastructure constituted 57percent of highway-related capital stock in2000, or $1,234 billion (figure 81). Rail—at$342 billion—also represented a substantialportion of transportation capital stock;although, it was still less than one-sixth of high-way-related capital stocks. The combined valueof capital stocks for other modes of the trans-portation system, including rail, water, air,pipeline, and transit, is less than the value ofconsumer motor vehicles alone (figure 82).
All highway-related capital stocks increasedbetween 1990 and 2000. In-house transporta-tion grew substantially (81 percent).Transportation services, a component of allmodes, also experienced rapid growth, with an83 percent increase in capital stock. In fact, railand water were the only modes that experienceda decrease in capital stock, shrinking by 6 per-cent and 3 percent, respectively. Pipeline capitalstocks increased only modestly, growing 5 per-cent between 1990 and 2000.
Capital stock is a commonly used economicmeasure of the capacity of the transportationsystem. It combines the capabilities of modes,
components, and owners into a single measureof capacity in dollar value. This measure takesinto account both the quantity of each compo-nent (through initial investment) and its condi-tion (through depreciation and retirements).
With the exception of highway and streetdata, the capital stock data presented here per-tain only to that owned by the private sector. Forinstance, railroad companies own their owntrackage. All of these data are available from theBureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau ofLabor Statistics [1, 2]. The Bureau of Transpor-tation Statistics is currently developing data onpublicly owned capital stock, such as airports,waterways, and transit systems.
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, Standard Fixed Asset Tables(table 7.1 and 8.1); Private Non-ResidentialFixed Assets by Detailed Industry and DetailedAsset Type, Real Cost Net Stocks; NationalIncome and Product Accounts, Quantity andPrice Indexes, various tables; available athttp://www.bea.gov/, as of March 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of LaborStatistics, Consumer Producer Price Indexes, AllUrban Consumers, various series, available athttp://www.bls.gov/ppi/home.htm/, as of March2003.
Transportation Capital Stock
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
109
SSeeccttiioonn 1111:: CC
oonnddiittiioonn ooff tthhee TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SS
yysstteemm
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
Highways and streets
Consumer motor vehicles
In-house transportation stock
Railroad transportation stock
Chained 1996 $ (billions)
FFIIGGUURREE 8811 TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn CCaappiittaall SSttoocckk ffoorr SSeelleecctteedd MMooddeess:: 11999900––22000000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
40
80
120
160
200
Trucking and warehousing
Pipelines, except natural gas Transportation services
Chained 1996 $ (billions)
Air
Water
Transit
FFIIGGUURREE 8822 TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn CCaappiittaall SSttoocckk ffoorrSSeelleecctteedd MMooddeess:: 11999900––22000000
NNOOTTEESS:: Data include only privately owned capital stock, except for highways and streets.Consumer motor vehicles are consumer durable goods. In-house transportation includestransportation services provided within a firm whose main business is not transportation.For example, grocery companies often use their own truck fleets to move goods from theirwarehouses to their retail outlets.
All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars, unless otherwise specified.Current dollar amounts (which are available in appendix B of this report) were adjusted toeliminate the effects of inflation over time.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Fixed Assetsand Consumer Durable Goods in the United States, available at http://www.bea.gov, as ofMarch 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
110
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1111::
CCoonn
ddiittiioo
nn ooff
tthhee
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
SSyyss
tteemm
The condition of roads in the United Statesimproved between 1993 and 2001.1 For
instance, the percentage of rural Interstatemileage in poor or mediocre condition declinedfrom 35 percent in 1993 to 14 percent in 2001(figure 83). Moreover, poor or mediocre urbanInterstate mileage decreased from 42 to 28 per-cent over this period (figure 84).
Just over 40 percent of all U.S. urban andrural roads were in good or very good conditionin 2001, while nearly 19 percent were in poor ormediocre condition. The rest were in fair condi-tion.2 In general, rural roads are in better condi-tion than urban roads. In 2001, for instance, 28percent of urban road-miles were classified aspoor or mediocre compared with only 15 per-cent of rural-miles.
Highway Condition
All U.S. roads
Rural Urban
Arterials Collectors Local Arterials Collectors Local
Principal Minor MinorMajor Principal Minor
Interstate
Other principal arterials
Interstate
Other freeway and expressway
Other principal arterialSOURCESU.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, 1999 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance (Washington, DC: 2000).U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Our Nation's Highways: Selected Facts and Figures 1998 (Washington, DC: 1998).
HHiigghhwwaayy FFuunnccttiioonnaall CCllaassssiiffiiccaattiioonn SSyysstteemm
1 The data presented here start at 1993; in that year the FederalHighway Administration changed to a new indicator for pavementcondition. Thus, combining pre-1993 data and 1993 and laterdata is inappropriate.
2 These percentages include all classes of roads except local roadsor minor collector roads.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
111
SSeeccttiioonn 1111:: CC
oonnddiittiioonn ooff tthhee TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SS
yysstteemm
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50Percent
Interstates
Collectors
Minor arterials
Other principal arterials
FFIIGGUURREE 8833 RRuurraall RRooaaddss iinn PPoooorr oorr MMeeddiiooccrree CCoonnddiittiioonn bbyy FFuunnccttiioonnaall CCllaassss:: 11999933––22000011
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50Percent
Interstates
Collectors
Other principal arterials
Minor arterials
Other freeways and expressways
FFIIGGUURREE 8844 UUrrbbaann RRooaaddss iinn PPoooorr oorr MMeeddiiooccrree CCoonnddiittiioonn bbyy FFuunnccttiioonnaall CCllaassss:: 11999933––22000011
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), table 1-26, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
112
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1111::
CCoonn
ddiittiioo
nn ooff
tthhee
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
SSyyss
tteemm
The condition of bridges nationwide hasimproved markedly since the early 1990s.
Of the nearly 600,000 roadway bridges in 2001,the Federal Highway Administration found that14 percent were structurally deficient and 14percent were functionally obsolete. About 40percent of bridges were either structurally defi-cient or functionally obsolete in 1991 [1].
Structurally deficient bridges are those thatare restricted to light vehicles, require immediaterehabilitation to remain open, or are closed.Functionally obsolete bridges are those withdeck geometry (e.g., lane width), load carryingcapacity, clearance, or approach roadway align-ment that no longer meet the criteria for the sys-tem of which the bridge is a part.1 In the 1990s,while the number of structurally deficientbridges steadily declined, the number of func-tionally obsolete bridges remained fairly con-stant (figure 85).
In general, bridges in rural areas suffer morefrom structural deficiencies than functionalobsolescence (particularly on local roads),whereas the reverse is true for bridges on roadsin urban areas (figures 86 and 87) [1]. A largeproportion of problem bridges nationwide arethose supporting local rural roads: about 71,000of the 165,000 deficient bridges in 2001 (43 per-cent) are rural local bridges. Problems are muchless prevalent on other parts the highway net-work. Nevertheless, in 2001, 20 percent ofurban Interstate bridges and 12 percent of ruralInterstate bridges were deficient.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration, Office of Engineering,Bridge Division, National Bridge Inventory data-base, available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/britab.htm/, as of December 2002.
Bridge Condition
1 Structurally deficient bridges are counted separately from func-tionally obsolete bridges even though most structurally deficientbridges are, by definition, functionally obsolete.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
113
SSeeccttiioonn 1111:: CC
oonnddiittiioonn ooff tthhee TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SS
yysstteemm
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
20
40
60
80
100
120
140Thousands
Structurally deficient
Functionally obsolete
FFIIGGUURREE 8855 SSttrruuccttuurraallllyy DDeeffiicciieenntt aanndd FFuunnccttiioonnaallllyy OObbssoolleettee BBrriiddggeess:: AAllllRRooaaddwwaayyss——11999911––22000011
Principal arterial— Interstate
Other principal arterial
Minor arterial
Major collector
Minor collector
Local0
10
20
30
40Percent
Structurally deficient
Functionally obsolete
Total
FFIIGGUURREE 8866 RRuurraall BBrriiddggee CCoonnddiittiioonn bbyy FFuunnccttiioonnaall CCllaassss:: 22000011
Interstate Other freeways or expressways
Other principal arterial
Minor arterial
Collector Local0
10
20
30
40Percent
Structurally deficient
Functionally obsolete
Total
FFIIGGUURREE 8877 UUrrbbaann BBrriiddggee CCoonnddiittiioonn bbyy FFuunnccttiioonnaall CCllaassss:: 22000011
KKEEYY:: Functionally obsolete refers to bridges that do not have the lane widths, shoulderwidths, or vertical clearances adequate to serve traffic demand, or the bridge may not beable to handle occasional roadway flooding. Structurally deficient refers to bridges needingsignificant maintenance attention, rehabilitation, or replacement.
NNOOTTEE:: Figures 86 and 87 data may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office ofEngineering, Bridge Division, National Bridge Inventory database, available athttp://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/britab.htm, as of December 2002.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
114
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1111::
CCoonn
ddiittiioo
nn ooff
tthhee
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
SSyyss
tteemm
Airport runway conditions improved at thenation’s major public-use airports between
1990 and 2001 [1]. At the nation’s commercialservice airports, pavement in poor conditiondeclined from 5 percent of runways in 1990 to 2percent in 2001 (figure 88). At the larger groupof National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems(NPIAS) airports, the Federal Aviation Admin-istration (FAA) found poor conditions on 5 per-cent of runways in 2001, down from 10 percentin 1990 (figure 89).
FAA inspects runways at public-use airportsand classifies runway condition as good, fair, orpoor. A runway is classified as good if all cracksand joints are sealed. Fair condition means thereis mild surface cracking, unsealed joints, andslab edge spalling.1 Runways are in poor condi-tion if there are large open cracks, surface andedge spalling, and/or vegetation growingthrough cracks and joints [1].
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalAviation Administration, National Plan ofIntegrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) (2001–2005)(Washington, DC: 2002).
Airport Runway Conditions
CCllaassssiiffiiccaattiioonn ooff AAiirrppoorrttss iinn tthhee UUnniitteedd SSttaatteess
As of January 2001, there were 19,306 airports1 inthe United States, with 5,314 of these open to thepublic and known as public-use airports. The FederalAviation Administration includes 3,364 of the existingpublic-use airports in its National Plan of IntegratedAirport Systems (NPIAS). The NPIAS includes bothcommercial and general aviation airports that are eli-gible to receive grants under the Air ImprovementProgram. Commercial service airports are definedas public airports receiving scheduled passengerservice with at least 2,500 enplaned passengers peryear. These airports handle the vast majority ofenplanements in the United States. In 2001, therewere 546 commercial service airports. FAA esti-mates that 67 percent of the U.S. population liveswithin 20 miles of at least 1 of these airports.
SSoouurrccee
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal AviationAdministra-tion, National Plan of Integrated AirportSystems (NPIAS) (2001–2005) (Washington, DC: 2002).
1 Includes civil and joint-use civil-military airports, heli-ports, STOL (short takeoff and landing) ports, and sea-plane bases in the United States and its territories.
1 Spalling refers to chips, scales, or slabs breaking off of surfacepavement.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
115
SSeeccttiioonn 1111:: CC
oonnddiittiioonn ooff tthhee TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SS
yysstteemm
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
20
40
60
80
100Good condition Fair condition Poor condition
N N N N N N
Percent
FFIIGGUURREE 8888 RRuunnwwaayy PPaavveemmeenntt CCoonnddiittiioonn ooff 554466 CCoommmmeerrcciiaall SSeerrvviiccee AAiirrppoorrttss:: 11999900––22000011
100
80
60
40
20
01990 1991 199719961995199419931992 2001200019991998
Good condition Fair condition Poor condition
N N N N N N
Percent
FFIIGGUURREE 8899 RRuunnwwaayy PPaavveemmeenntt CCoonnddiittiioonn ooff 33,,336644 NNPPIIAASS AAiirrppoorrttss
KKEEYY:: N = data are nonexistent; NPIAS = National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2003), also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of January 2003. Based on data obtained from U.S. Department ofTransportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Airport Planning andProgramming, National Planning Division, personal communication, 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
116
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1111::
CCoonn
ddiittiioo
nn ooff
tthhee
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
SSyyss
tteemm
Because of improvements in the longevity ofpassenger cars, the median age of the auto-
mobile fleet in the United States has increasedsignificantly, from 7.0 years in 1992 to 8.4 yearsin 2002. The median age of the truck fleet,1 bycontrast, began to increase in the early 1990sbut has been declining since 1997 as new pur-chases of light trucks have increased substan-tially (figure 90). As a result, the truck medianage of 6.8 years in 2002 is less than its 7.2 yearsin 1990.
The age of transit vehicle fleets varies by tran-sit and vehicle type (figure 91). Ferryboatsbecame substantially older between 1990 and2000, increasing from an average of 21.7 years
to 25.6 years. By contrast, the average age offull-size transit buses decreased over this periodfrom 8.2 years to 8.1 years [1].
The age of fleets as a measure of condition isnot very precise. Because of the different charac-teristics of vehicle fleets across the modes—someserving freight and other passenger, some ownedpredominantly by businesses, and others by indi-viduals—the measure varies widely.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),tables 1-25 and 1-28, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of June 2003.
Age of Highway and Transit Fleet Vehicles
1 This includes all truck categories: light, heavy, and heavy-heavy.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
117
SSeeccttiioonn 1111:: CC
oonnddiittiioonn ooff tthhee TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SS
yysstteemm
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Years
Cars
Trucks
FFIIGGUURREE 9900 MMeeddiiaann AAggee ooff CCaarrss aanndd TTrruucckkss:: 11999922––22000022
30
25
20
15
10
5
01990 2000199919981997199619951994199319921991
Years
Ferryboats Commuter-rail passenger coaches
Heavy-rail passenger cars
Light rail
Full-size transit buses
Vans
FFIIGGUURREE 9911 AAvveerraaggee AAggee ooff SSeelleecctteedd UUrrbbaann TTrraannssiittVVeehhiicclleess:: 11999900––22000000
NNOOTTEESS:: FFiigguurree 9900—“Trucks” represents all types of trucks, including light trucks (sportutility vehicles, vans, and pickup trucks). FFiigguurree 9911—Full-size buses have more than 35seats.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,National Transportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), tables 1-25 and 1-28,also available at http://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003. FFiigguurree 9900 ((22000011––22000022))—R.L. Polk& Co., "Median Age of U.S. Cars and Light Trucks Increases According to R.L. Polk &Co.," press release, Feb. 11, 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
118
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1111::
CCoonn
ddiittiioo
nn ooff
tthhee
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
SSyyss
tteemm
The average age of Amtrak locomotives andpassenger train cars fluctuated in a narrow
range for most of the 1990s (figure 92). Theaverage age of locomotives was 11 years in2000, down 7 percent from 12 years in 1990.Meanwhile, Amtrak railcar age dropped from20 to 19 years over this period. Of the 20,028Class I freight locomotives in service in 2000, 42percent were built before 1980, 21 percentbetween 1980 and 1989, and 37 percent from1990 onwards [1].
Overall, about 28 percent of the U.S. flag ves-sel fleet was 25 years old or more in 2000 (fig-ure 93). This is up from 17 percent in1990–1991.1 Towboats are some of the oldesttypes of vessels plying U.S. waters, and they aregetting older: about 50 percent were 25 yearsold or older in 2000, up from 33 percent in1990–1991. Tank and liquid barges older than25 years made up 43 percent of the total fleet in2000, up from 27 percent in 1990–1991 [2].
The average age of U.S. commercial aircraftwas 13 years in 2000, up from 11 years in 1991
(figure 94). Commercial airlines are air carriersproviding scheduled or nonscheduled passengeror freight service, including commuter and airtaxi on-demand services. Major airlines—thosewith $1 billion or more in annual revenues—accounted for nearly 80 percent of commercialaircraft in 2000 [3]. These aircraft were approx-imately one year younger on average than allcommercial aircraft during the 1990s. The aver-age age of major airlines aircraft was 12 years in2000, up from 11 years in 1991.
Sources
1. Association of American Railroads, RailroadFactbook 2001 (Washington, DC: 2002).
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 20020,table 1-31, also available at http://www.bts.gov,as of January 2003.
3. Calculation based on U.S. Department ofTransportation, Bureau of TransportationStatistics, Form 41, Schedule B-43, 1991–2000.
Age of Amtrak, Aircraft, and Maritime Vessel Fleets
1 These waterborne vessel data are normally surveyed as ofDecember 31 each year. However, due to a system migration of thedata in 1990, the annual survey was collected in June 1991, or halfway between the dates when 1990 and 1991 data would otherwisehave been collected.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
119
SSeeccttiioonn 1111:: CC
oonnddiittiioonn ooff tthhee TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SS
yysstteemm
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
5
10
15
20
25Years
Passenger and other train cars
Locomotives
FFIIGGUURREE 9922 AAvveerraaggee AAggee ooff AAmmttrraakk LLooccoommoottiivvee aanndd CCaarr FFlleeeettss:: 11999900––22000000
Tanker (135)
Towboat (4,990)
Passenger (915)
Support (1,420)
Dry barge (29,009)
Liquid barge (3,987)
Total(41,182)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100% < 6 6–10 11–15 16–20 21–25 > 25
Ship type (number of vessels)
Dry cargo (733)
FFIIGGUURREE 9933 AAggee ooff UU..SS.. FFllaagg VVeesssseellss bbyy TTyyppee:: 22000000
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
4
8
12
16Years
All commercial aircraft
Major airlines aircraft
FFIIGGUURREE 9944 AAvveerraaggee AAggee ooff UU..SS.. CCoommmmeerrcciiaall aanndd MMaajjoorr AAiirrlliinneess AAiirrccrraafftt:: 11999911––22000000
NNOOTTEESS:: FFiigguurree 9933—Support includes offshore support andcrewboats. Liquid barge includes tank barges. FFiigguurree 9944—Commercial airlines are air carriers providing scheduled or non-scheduled passenger or freight service, including commuter andair taxi on-demand services. Major airlines includes only com-mercial airlines with operating revenues greater than $1 billionin 2000. See table 94 notes in appendix B for additional infor-mation.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: FFiigguurreess 9922 aanndd 9933—U.S. Department ofTransportation (USDOT), Bureau of Transportation Statistics(BTS), National Transportation Statistics 2002 (Washington,DC: 2002), tables 1-30 and 1-31, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of April 2003. FFiigguurree 9944—Calculationsbased on USDOT, BTS, Form 41, Schedule B-43, 1991–2000).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
120
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1122::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn--
RReell
aatteedd
VVaarr
iiaabbll
eess tt
hhaatt
IInnfflluu
eennccee
GGlloo
bbaall CC
oommppee
ttiittiivv
eenneess
ss
The United States had relatively lower pricesfor transportation goods and services in
19991 than did 15 out of 25 Organization forEconomic Cooperation and Development(OECD) countries (figure 95). However, thenation’s top two overall merchandise trade part-ners, Canada and Mexico, had lower relativeprices in 1999 than did the United States. Pricesin Japan and the United Kingdom—both majorU.S. trade partners—were much higher than inthe United States. Half of the OECD countriesthat had less expensive transportation goods andservices than the United States are developingand transitional economies.
Further analytical research is needed to clarifytransportation’s contribution to America’sglobal competitiveness. One theory is thatAmericans’ incomes would go further if trans-portation consumer goods and services were rel-atively cheaper than in other countries. Sincetransportation goods and services are a majorinput of business production, relatively lowertransportation prices might also result in rela-
tively lower production costs. Furthermore, itcould be expected that an inexpensive and effi-cient transportation system would stimulatemarket expansion and result in more specializa-tion, faster distribution, and lower productioncosts.
The comparisons here may indicate howdomestic U.S. transportation industries, goods,and services fare against their foreign counter-parts. The relative price for a good or servicetraded between two countries is the price forthat commodity in one country divided by theprice for the same commodity in another coun-try, with the prices for the goods and services inboth countries expressed in a common currency.However, relative prices alone do not reveal whytransportation is more expensive in one countrythan another. Nor do they justify making trans-portation relatively cheaper than it is. They alsodo not reveal the quality or reliability of thetransportation or fully take into account differ-ences in geospatial factors between countries.
Relative Prices for Transportation Goods and Services
1 The most recent year for which comparable international datawere available at the time this report was prepared.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
121
SSeeccttiioonn 1122:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd VV
aarriiaabblleess tthhaatt IInnfflluueennccee GGlloobbaall CC
oommppeettiittiivveenneessss
MexicoPolan
dHungary
TurkeyGree
ce
AustraliaCanada
New Zeal
and
Luxembourg
United State
sSpain Ital
y
Portugal
Germany
Belgium
France
Austria
Netherla
ndsIrel
andSweden
Switzerlan
d
United Kingdom
Japan
DenmarkNorway
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8Relative price: U.S. = 1.0
FFIIGGUURREE 9955 RReellaattiivvee PPrriicceess ffoorr TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn GGooooddss aanndd SSeerrvviicceess ffoorr tthhee UUnniitteeddSSttaatteess aanndd SSeelleecctteedd MMaajjoorr TTrraaddee PPaarrttnneerrss:: 11999999
NNOOTTEESS:: 1999 is the most recent year for which these data are available by country. For these countries, thedata are unavailable for goods and services separately.
Relative prices are based on purchasing power parity for transportation-related goods and services. All dol-lar amounts are in current 1999 dollars.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, calculation based on datafrom Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Purchasing Power Parities and RealExpenditures, 1999 Results (Paris, France: August 2002), table 11.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
122
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1122::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn--
RReell
aatteedd
VVaarr
iiaabbll
eess tt
hhaatt
IInnfflluu
eennccee
GGlloo
bbaall CC
oommppee
ttiittiivv
eenneess
ss
The United States traded $299.6 billionworth (in current dollars1) of transporta-
tion-related goods (e.g., cars, trains, boats, andairplanes and their related parts) in 2002 withits partners (figure 96). Although motor vehiclesand automotive parts constituted by far thelargest share of U.S. international trade in trans-portation-related goods ($233.0 billion) in2002, trade in aircraft, spacecraft, and parts($61.9 billion) generated the largest single sur-plus of any transportation-related commoditycategory ($25.9 billion) [1]. This surplus wasdue to trade with several partners, particularlythe United Kingdom. The only deficits for air-craft products were with France and Canada,countries that have large aviation manufacturingsectors (see box).
As is the case with overall international trade,the United States had a merchandise trade deficitin transportation-related exports and imports,totaling $82.1 billion in 2002 (figure 97). Thedeficit arose from a $108.0 billion U.S. tradedeficit for motor vehicles and parts, whichaccounted for 23 percent of the total U.S. mer-chandise trade deficit of $470.3 billion. Overone-third of the motor vehicles and parts deficitinvolved U.S. trade with Japan, while about one-fifth was with Canada [2].
The United States had a relatively small deficit($90 million) in trade of ships, boats, and float-ing structures in 2002, following a $693 millionsurplus in 2001 [1]. A $53 million trade surplus
for railway locomotives and parts was downfrom $149 million in 2001. The 2002 surpluscan largely be attributed to the United Statessupplying railcars and parts to Canada, thelargest U.S. trade partner for rail products [2].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, calculations based ondata from U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S.International Trade Commission, InteractiveTariff and Trade DataWeb, available athttp://dataweb.usitc.gov/, as of February 2003.
2. _____, U.S. International Trade and FreightTransportation Trends (Washington, DC: 2003).
U.S. International Trade in Transportation-Related Goods
MMeerrcchhaannddiissee TTrraaddee BBaallaannccee TTrreennddss
Trade balances indirectly measure the U.S. competi-tiveness in supplying transportation-related goodsglobally and indicate the U.S. competitive position inthe production, provision, and delivery of thesegoods compared with other major trading partners.Between 1990 and 2002, the United States had agrowing overall trade balance deficit in all categoriesof transportation-related goods, due primarily toincreased demand for imported motor vehicles. TheU.S. trade deficit during this period in these com-modity groups included trade with our top three trad-ing partners: Canada, Mexico, and Japan.
SSoouurrccee
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, U.S. International Trade andFreight Transportation Trends (Washington, DC: 2003).
1 All dollar amounts in this section are in current dollars. Whileit is important to compare trends in economic activity using con-stant or chained dollars to eliminate the effects of price inflation,it is not possible to do so in this instance (see note on the figureand tables 96 and 97 in appendix B).
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
123
SSeeccttiioonn 1122:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd VV
aarriiaabblleess tthhaatt IInnfflluueennccee GGlloobbaall CC
oommppeettiittiivveenneessss
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20020
50
100
150
200
250
300Current $ (billions)
Total (gross)
Imports (payments toforeign countries)
Exports (receiptsby U.S. entities)
FFIIGGUURREE 9966 UU..SS.. TTrraaddee iinn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd GGooooddss:: 11999900––22000022
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002–100
–80
–60
–40
–20
0
20Current $ (billions)
Surp
lus
Defic
it
FFIIGGUURREE 9977 UU..SS.. TTrraaddee BBaallaannccee iinn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd GGooooddss:: 11999900––22000022
NNOOTTEESS:: Transportation-related goods are motor vehicles and parts, aircraft and spacecraftand parts, railway vehicles and parts, and ships and boats.
All dollar amounts are in current dollars. These data have not been adjusted for inflationbecause there is no specific deflator available for transportation-related goods. In addition,it is difficult to control for trading partners' inflation rates as well as currency exchange fluc-tuations when adjusting the value of internationally traded goods and services for inflation.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, calcula-tions based on data from U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. International TradeCommission, Interactive Tariff and Trade DataWeb, available at http://dataweb.usitc.gov/, as of February 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
124
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1122::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn--
RReell
aatteedd
VVaarr
iiaabbll
eess tt
hhaatt
IInnfflluu
eennccee
GGlloo
bbaall CC
oommppee
ttiittiivv
eenneess
ss
U.S. trade in transportation services in 2002totaled $105.4 billion (in current dollars1),
down 2 percent from $107.6 billion in 2001(figure 98). This decline was smaller than the 8percent drop between 2000 and 2001. Of thetrade in 2001, 57 percent was for imports (pay-ments to foreign countries) and 43 percent wasfor exports (receipts by U.S. entities), resulting ina $14.9 billion trade deficit for transportationservices.
The United States had a surplus in transporta-tion services from 1990 through 1997 (figure99). The trade surplus was highest in 1992, at$3.8 billion (in current dollars), but exportsexceeded imports by over $3 billion in otheryears prior to 1997, as well. Then, between1997 and 1998, imports increased 7 percentwhile exports decreased 5 percent, resulting in a$4.6 billion deficit. The deficit continued togrow at an average annual rate of 32 percentbetween 1998 and 2002, when the deficitreached $13.9 billion.
The United States exports and imports trans-portation services, including freight services pro-vided by carriers; port services provided by air-ports, seaports, and terminals; and passengertravel services provided by carriers. U.S. trade intransportation services generates substantial revenues for U.S. businesses in receipts to U.S.
carriers and ports. These services also result inpayments by U.S. companies to foreign freightand passenger carriers and ports. Because anefficient transportation system puts a premiumon system reliability and speed, the performanceof freight carriers and ports directly influencesthe competitiveness of U.S. businesses engagedin international trade.
U.S. International Trade in Transportation-Related Services
CCoommppoonneennttss ooff SSeerrvviiccee TTrraaddee
Exports of freight transportation services occurwhen a U.S. carrier receives payments from a for-eign company or individual for transporting merchan-dise. Imports of freight transportation services occurwhen a U.S. company or individual pays a foreigncarrier for transporting merchandise. Similarly, U.S.exports of port services occur when foreign carrierspurchase services and goods (e.g., fuel) at U.S. air-ports and seaports. U.S. imports of port servicesoccur when a U.S. carrier purchases services andgoods at ports in foreign countries. For passengertravel services, exports consist of fares received byU.S. carriers from foreign residents for travelbetween the United States and foreign countries andbetween two foreign points. Imports of travel servic-es consist of fares paid by U.S. residents to foreigncarriers for travel between the United States and for-eign countries.
SSoouurrccee
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of EconomicAnalysis, Survey of Current Business, November 2001.
1 All dollar amounts in this section are in current dollars. Whileit is important to compare trends in economic activity using con-stant or chained dollars to eliminate the effects of price inflation,it is not possible to do so in this instance (see the note on the fig-ure and tables 98 and 99 in appendix B).
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20020
20
40
60
80
100
120
140Current $ (billions)
Total
Imports(payments to foreign countries)
Exports(receipts by U.S. entities)
FFIIGGUURREE 9988 UU..SS.. IInntteerrnnaattiioonnaall TTrraaddee iinn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteeddSSeerrvviicceess:: 11999900––22000022
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002–20
–15
–10
–5
0
5Current $ (billions)
Surp
lus
Defic
it
FFIIGGUURREE 9999 UU..SS.. TTrraaddee BBaallaannccee iinn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd SSeerrvviicceess:: 11999900––22000022
NNOOTTEESS:: Transportation services include passenger fares, and freight and port services. Itexcludes receipts and payments for travel services, which includes purchases of goodsand services (e.g., food, lodging, recreation, gifts, entertainment, and any incidentalexpense on a foreign visit).
These data have not been adjusted for inflation, because there is no specific deflator avail-able for transportation-related services. In addition, it is difficult to control for trading part-ners' inflation rates as well as currency exchange fluctuations when adjusting the value ofinternationally traded goods and services for inflation.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, calcula-tion based on data from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,International Transactions Accounts data, available at http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/di1.htm,as of April 2003.
125
SSeeccttiioonn 1122:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd VV
aarriiaabblleess tthhaatt IInnfflluueennccee GGlloobbaall CC
oommppeettiittiivveenneessss
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
126
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1133::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
aanndd
EEccoo
nnoomm
iicc GG
rrooww
tthh
Total transportation-related final demandrose by 37 percent between 1990 and 2001
(in 1996 chained dollars1) from $719.8 billionto $984.1 billion (figure 100). However, trans-portation-related final demand as a share ofGDP showed little change throughout theperiod. This implies that transportation-relatedfinal demand grew at about the same rate asGDP. In 2001, the share of transportation-related final demand in GDP was 11 percent, thesame as in 1990.
Personal consumption of transportation—which includes household purchases of motorvehicles and parts, gasoline and oil, and trans-portation services—is the largest component oftransportation-related final demand. Itamounted to $751.8 billion in 2001 andaccounted for 76 percent of the total transporta-tion-related final demand (figure 101). Govern-ment purchases used to be the second largestcomponent of transportation-related finaldemand. Since the mid-1990s, however, govern-ment purchases and private investment haveaccounted for about the same share. Governmentpurchases and private domestic investment in2001 reached $167.2 billion and $168.6 billion,respectively, for shares of 17 percent each.
Net exports were a negative component oftransportation-related final demand between1990 and 2001. In other words, the United Statesimported more transportation-related goods andservices than it exported. This gap has widened in
recent years. In 1990, net exports had a –4 percentshare in total transportation-related final demand,hitting a low point of –5 percent in 1995. After ris-ing somewhat through 1997, they dropped to –11percent in 2001. Deficits in the trade of automo-biles and other vehicles and parts have been theprimary component of the negative net exports oftransportation-related goods and services.
Transportation-related final demand is thetotal value of transportation-related goods andservices purchased by consumers and govern-ment and by business as part of their invest-ments.2 Transportation-related final demand ispart of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), andits share in GDP provides a direct measure of theimportance of transportation in the economyfrom the demand side. The goods and servicesincluded in transportation-related final demandare diverse and extensive, ranging from automo-biles and parts, fuel, maintenance, auto insur-ance, and so on, for user-operated transportationto various transportation services provided byfor-hire transportation establishments.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, calculations based ondata from U.S. Department of Commerce,Bureau of Economic Analysis, National Incomeand Product Account Tables, available athttp://www.bea.gov, as of October 2002.
Transportation-Related Final Demand
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
2 Also included are the net exports of these goods and servicesbecause they represent spending by foreigners on transportationgoods and services produced in the United States. Imports, how-ever, are deducted because consumers, businesses, and governmentpurchases include imported goods and services. Therefore, deduct-ing imports ensures that total transportation-related spendingreflects spending on domestic transportation goods and services.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
127
SSeeccttiioonn 1133:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn aanndd EEccoonnoomm
iicc GGrrooww
tthh
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
Value of transportation demand
Chained 1996 $ (billions)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12Share in GDP (%)
Percent
FFIIGGUURREE 110000 VVaalluuee ooff TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd FFiinnaall DDeemmaanndd aanndd IIttss SShhaarree iinn GGDDPP:: 11999900––22000011
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001–20
0
20
40
60
80Percent
Personal consumption
Gross private domestic investment
Government purchases
Net exports (exports minus imports)
FFIIGGUURREE 110011 PPeerrcceennttaaggee SShhaarree ooff TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd FFiinnaall DDeemmaanndd bbyy TTyyppee:: 11999900––22000011
NNOOTTEESS:: Total transportation-related final demand is the sum of all consumer, private busi-ness, and government purchases of transportation-related goods and services, and netexports (i.e., transportation imports subtracted from transportation exports). Gross privatedomestic investment constitutes railroad and petroleum pipelines only.
All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars, unless otherwise specified.Current dollar amounts (which are available in appendix B of this report) were adjusted toeliminate the effects of inflation over time.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, calcula-tions based on data from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,"National Income and Product Accounts" data, available at http://www.bea.doc.gov/, as ofFebruary 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
128
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1133::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
aanndd
EEccoo
nnoomm
iicc GG
rrooww
tthh
The contribution of for-hire transportationindustries to the U.S economy, as measured
by their value-added (or net output), increased(in 1996 chained dollars1) from $181 billion in1990 to $270 billion in 2001 (figure 102). In thesame time period, this segment’s share in GrossDomestic Product (GDP) fluctuated slightly,increasing from 2.7 percent in 1990 to 3.0 per-cent in 1999 before declining to 2.9 percent in2001. The decreased share of for-hire trans-portation services in 2001 can largely be attrib-uted to the decrease in output of air transporta-tion, reflecting significant reductions in personaland business air travel after the September 11,2001, terrorist attacks.
Among for-hire transportation industries,trucking and air contribute the largest amount toGDP (figure 103). In 2001, they contributed $99billion and $78 billion, respectively [1]. Together,they accounted for more than two-thirds of thetotal for-hire transportation industries’ net out-put. Between 1990 and 2001, local and inter-urban transit grew significantly, followed bytrucking and transportation supporting services.Railroad and pipeline transportation showed theleast growth during this period.
There are two major components of trans-portation services—for-hire transportation, asdetailed above, and in-house transportationservices. For-hire transportation services areprovided by firms for a fee. In-house transporta-tion services are provided by nontransportationestablishments for their own use. For instance,when a retail store uses its own trucks to movegoods from one place to another it is providingan in-house service.
Time-series data on in-house transportationservices are not readily available. The Bureau ofTransportation Statistics last analyzed in-housetransportation services in early 2000 using 1996data. At that time, in-house transportation con-tributed $142 billion (in 1996 dollars) to theeconomy, while for-hire transportation con-tributed $243 billion.2
Source
1. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, “Gross Domestic Product byIndustry and the Components of Gross DomesticIncome,” available at http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn2.htm, as of February 2003.
Transportation Services
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
2 The full results of that study appear in Transportation StatisticsAnnual Report 2000, available at http://www.bts.gov/.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
129
SSeeccttiioonn 1133:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn aanndd EEccoonnoomm
iicc GGrrooww
tthh
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400 3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
Chained 1996 $ (billions)
Share in GDP (%)
Value
Percent
FFIIGGUURREE 110022 VVaalluuee AAddddeedd bbyy FFoorr--HHiirree TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSeerrvviicceess ttoo UU..SS.. GGDDPP aanndd IIttss SShhaarree iinn TToottaall UU..SS.. GGDDPP:: 11999900––22000011
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40Percent
Trucking and warehousing
Air
Transportation services
RailTransit
WaterPipelines, except natural gas
FFIIGGUURREE 110033 SShhaarree ooff FFoorr--HHiirree TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn VVaalluuee AAddddeedd bbyy MMooddee:: 11999900––22000011
KKEEYY:: GDP = Gross Domestic Product.
NNOOTTEESS:: For-hire transportation services include railroad transportation, local and inter-urban passenger transit, trucking and warehousing, water transportation, air transporta-tion, pipelines (except natural gas), and transportation services. Transportation servicescover establishments furnishing services incidental to transportation (e.g., forwarding andpacking services and the arrangement of passenger and freight transportation). All dollaramounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars, unless otherwise specified. Current dollaramounts (which are available in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminate theeffects of inflation over time.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, calcula-tions based on data from U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,"Gross Domestic Product by Industry," available at http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2/gpo.htm,as of February 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
130
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1144::
GGoovv
eerrnnmm
eenntt
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFiinn
aannccee
Federal, state, and local government trans-portation revenues earmarked to finance
transportation programs1 increased from $82.2billion in 1990 to $113.6 billion in 2000 (in1996 chained dollars2) for an annual inflation-adjusted growth rate of 3 percent (figure 104).However, the share of transportation revenues intotal government revenues decreased slightlyfrom 4.4 percent to 4.2 percent in the sameperiod [1].
The federal government share of revenuesaveraged 32 percent per year between 1990 and1997 and then rose to an average share of 38percent per year from 1998 to 2000. On theother hand, the state government share of rev-enues dropped from an average share of 48 per-cent in 1990 through 1997 to a share of 43 per-cent between 1998 and 2000. The rise in thefederal government share after 1997 can beattributed to increased federal motor fuel taxes,the introduction of new transportation usercharges, and the shift of transportation receiptsfrom the general fund for deficit reduction totransportation trust funds [1].
Among all transportation modes, highwayusage generates the largest amount of trans-portation revenues, accounting for $79.2 billionor 70 percent of the total in 2000 (figure 105).Air transportation produces the second largestshare of transportation revenues (17 percent).Transit revenues, a combination of money paidinto the Mass Transit Account of the HighwayTrust Fund and proceeds from operations of thepublic mass transportation system, represent 10percent of the total. With annual growth rates of11 percent and 5 percent, respectively, pipelineand air revenues grew faster than did othermodes from 1990 to 2000 [1]. Rail is not repre-sented in revenues because fuel and property taxreceipts from rail are channeled into the generalfund for deficit reduction and hence do not fallunder the definition of transportation revenuesused by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.Amtrak generates revenues from passengerfares, but since Amtrak is not considered a gov-ernment entity, its revenues are not included.
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, Government Trans-portation Financial Statistics 2001, available athttp://www.bts.gov, as of February 2003.
Government Transportation Revenues
1 Money collected by government from transportation usercharges and taxes, which are earmarked to finance transportationprograms, are counted by the Bureau of Transportation Statisticsas transportation-related revenues. The following types of receiptsare excluded: 1) revenues collected from users of the transporta-tion system that are directed to the general fund and used for non-transportation purposes, 2) nontransportation general fund rev-enues that are used to finance transportation programs, and 3)proceeds from borrowing. 2 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
131
SSeeccttiioonn 1144:: GG
oovveerrnnmmeenntt TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFiinnaannccee
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
20
40
60
80
100
120
140Chained 1996 $ (billions)
Total
State
Federal
Local
FFIIGGUURREE 110044 FFeeddeerraall,, SSttaattee,, aanndd LLooccaall GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd RReevveennuueess:: 11999900––22000000
Highway 69.8%
Transit 10.1%
Air17.2%
Water 2.9%
Pipeline 0.03%
FFIIGGUURREE 110055 FFeeddeerraall,, SSttaattee,, aanndd LLooccaall GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd RReevveennuueess bbyy MMooddee:: 22000000
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: AAllll eexxcceepptt aass nnootteedd—U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, "Government Transportation Financial Statistics SearchableDatabase," available at http://www.bts.gov, as of February 2003. SSttaattee aanndd llooccaall ppoorrttiioonn ffoorr22000000—U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, "State and Local GovernmentFinances," available at ftp://ftp2.census.gov/pub/outgoing/govs/Finance/, as of February2003. CChhaaiinn--ttyyppee pprriiccee iinnddeexx—U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of EconomicAnalysis, "National Income and Product Accounts Tables," table 7.1, available athttp://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/, as of February 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
132
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1144::
GGoovv
eerrnnmm
eenntt
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFiinn
aannccee
Spending on building, maintaining, operating,and administering the nation’s transportation
system by all levels of government totaled$149.0 billion in 2000 (in chained 1996 dol-lars1). The federal government spent 30 percentof the funds; state and local governments, 70percent (figure 106). Between 1990 and 2000,these transportation expenditures grew fasterthan total government expenditures, increasingtransportation’s share in the total from 5.6 per-cent to 6.1 percent. State and local governmentspending grew faster (at an average annual rateof 3 percent) than the federal government’sspending (at 2 percent). State and local govern-ments also spent a higher percentage of theirtotal expenditures on transportation than thefederal government. In 2000, the respectiveshares were 13 percent and 3 percent [1].
Among all modes of transportation, highwaysreceive the largest amount of total governmenttransportation funds. In 2000, this amounted to$93.6 billion and accounted for nearly 63 per-cent of the total (figure 107). Transit and airmodes accounted for 19 percent and 13 percent,respectively, while rail and pipeline modesaccounted for less than 1 percent each. Between1990 and 2000, government expenditures onhighway, transit, and air transportationincreased at about the same rate, leaving theoverall modal distribution of government trans-portation expenditures almost unchanged [1].
Source
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, Government Trans-portation Financial Statistics 2001, available athttp://www.bts.gov, as of February 2003.
Government Transportation Expenditures
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
133
SSeeccttiioonn 1144:: GG
oovveerrnnmmeenntt TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFiinnaannccee
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160Chained 1996 $ (billions)
Total
State and local
Federal
FFIIGGUURREE 110066 FFeeddeerraall,, SSttaattee,, aanndd LLooccaall GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd EExxppeennddiittuurreess ffrroomm OOwwnn FFuunnddss:: FFiissccaall YYeeaarrss 11999900––22000000
Highway 63%
Transit 19%
Rail<1%
Air 13%
Water 5%
General support <1%
Pipeline <1%
FFIIGGUURREE 110077 SShhaarreess ooff FFeeddeerraall,, SSttaattee,, aanndd LLooccaall GGoovveerrnnmmeennttTTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn--RReellaatteedd EExxppeennddiittuurreess bbyy MMooddee ffrroomm OOwwnnFFuunnddss:: FFiissccaall YYeeaarr 22000000
NNOOTTEESS:: Federal expenditures from own funds consists of out-lays of the federal government including not only direct spend-ing but also grants to state and local governments. State andlocal expenditures from own funds include outlays of state andlocal governments from all sources of funds excluding federalgrants. State and local data are reported together because dis-aggregated federal grants data are not available.
All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which are
available in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: EExxcceepptt aass nnootteedd—U.S. Department of Transporta-tion, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, "GovernmentTransportation Financial Statistics Searchable Database," avail-able at http://www.bts.gov, as of February 2003. SSttaattee aanndd llooccaallppoorrttiioonn ffoorr 22000000—U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. CensusBureau, "State and Local Government Finances," available atftp://ftp2.census.gov/pub/outgoing/govs/Finance/, as of February2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
134
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1144::
GGoovv
eerrnnmm
eenntt
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
FFiinn
aannccee
Gross government transportation invest-ment,1 including infrastructure and vehi-
cles, has increased steadily over the last decade.The Bureau of Transportation Statistics has esti-mated that total gross government transporta-tion investment reached $76.0 billion in 2000(in chained 1996 dollars2), compared with $59.0billion in 1990, an average annual growth rateof 3 percent (figure 108). Government trans-portation investment grew faster than did othergovernment investments. As a result, the shareof transportation in total government invest-ment increased from 24 percent in 1990 to 27percent in 2000 [1, 2]. However, the share ofgovernment transportation investment in theGross Domestic Product (GDP) changed little,remaining at almost 1 percent each year [2].This indicates that funds allocated by govern-ment for improving and expanding transporta-tion capital have been growing at the same paceas GDP.
State and local governments are the maininvestors in transportation infrastructure, buttheir relative role has decreased slightly overtime. Direct federal infrastructure investment
rose from $2.4 billion to $3.9 billion—an aver-age annual growth rate of 5 percent between1990 and 2000. State and local investment intransportation infrastructure grew from $49.6billion to $63.0 billion, an average annualgrowth rate of 2 percent (figure 109).
Infrastructure accounted for nearly 90 per-cent of the total government transportationinvestment during the 1990s, the bulk of which(almost three-quarters of the total) was allocatedto highways (figure 110). Nevertheless, the shareof highway investment in total infrastructureinvestment has gone down, whereas that fortransit and air has gone up. Air investment grewat an average annual rate of 4 percent, fasterthan all other modes in the 1990s.
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, National Income andProduct Account Tables, available athttp://www.bea.gov, as of February 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, “TransportationInvestment: Concepts, Data and Analysis,” com-piled based on data from U.S. Department ofCommerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, FixedAssets and Consumer Durables, available athttp://www.bea.gov, as of July 2002.
Government Transportation Investment
1 Transportation investment is the purchase value of transporta-tion equipment and the purchase or construction value of trans-portation facilities and structures, namely, roads, railways, air-ports, air control facilities, water ports, pipelines, and so forth,that have a service life of longer than one year. The total purchaseor construction value of new transportation capital in a year isgross investment. While investment increases the stock of trans-portation capital, the existing transportation capital stock depreci-ates or wears out over time. Therefore, gross investment minusdepreciation provides net investment.2 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
NNOOTTEESS:: Investment in transportation infrastructure includes thepurchase or construction value of transportation facilities andstructures. Data on state and local transportation investment arenot available separately. For rail infrastructure, only state andlocal investment from 1993 to 2000 are included. Governmentinvestment in pipeline infrastructure and federal investmentspending on railroads are not covered due to lack of data.Investment in rolling stock consists of government outlays formotor vehicles only. Government spending on other rollingstocks (e.g., aircrafts, vessels, and boats) and other machineryand equipment used by federal, state, and local DOTs are notcounted in the estimates due to lack of data. All dollar amountsare expressed in chained 1996 dollars, unless otherwise speci-
fied. Current dollar amounts (which are available in appendix Bof this report) were adjusted to eliminate the effects of inflationover time.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, "Transportation Investment-Concepts,Data and Analysis," draft, compiled based on data from U.S.Department of Commerce (USDOC), Bureau of EconomicAnalysis (BEA), "Fixed Assets and Consumer Durables," andpersonal communications with BEA; and USDOC, U.S. CensusBureau, "Value of Construction Put in Place Statistics," DetailedConstruction Expenditure Tables, available at http://www.census.gov, as of February 2003.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
SSeeccttiioonn 1144:: GG
oovveerrnnmmeenntt TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFiinnaannccee
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
40
60
80Infrastructure Rolling stock
Chained 1996 $ (billions)
20
FFIIGGUURREE 110088 GGrroossss GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt IInnvveessttmmeennttss iinn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn IInnffrraassttrruuccttuurree aanndd RRoolllliinngg SSttoocckk:: 11999900––22000000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
40
60
80Federal (direct) State and local
Chained 1996 $ (billions)
20
FFIIGGUURREE 110099 GGrroossss GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt IInnvveessttmmeennttss iinn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonnIInnffrraassttrruuccttuurree bbyy LLeevveell ooff GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt:: 11999900––22000000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000
10
20
30
40
50
60
Highway
WaterRail
TransitAir
Chained 1996 $ (billions)
FFIIGGUURREE 111100 GGrroossss GGoovveerrnnmmeenntt IInnvveessttmmeenntt iinn TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonnIInnffrraassttrruuccttuurree bbyy MMooddee:: 11999900––22000000
135
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
136
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1155::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
EEnnee
rrggyy
Transportation energy use grew 22 percentbetween 1991 and 2001, to 28 percent of
the nation’s total energy consumption in 2001(figure 111) [4]. Highway vehicles consumed anestimated 81 percent of transportation sectorenergy [5].
Still, transportation energy use has grownmore slowly than has the Gross DomesticProduct (GDP) over the decade. As a result, theamount of transportation energy used per dollarof GDP declined at the average annual rate ofover 1 percent between 1991 and 20011 [2, 3](figure 112).
Over 96 percent of all transportation energyconsumed comes from petroleum. Total U.S.petroleum usage increased 16 percent during thelast decade, with transportation responsible for83 percent of that rise [1]. In 2001, transporta-tion consumed 67 percent of all petroleum, upfrom 65 percent in 1991 (figure 113). Becauseover half of U.S. petroleum is imported, theUnited States, and especially the transportation
sector, may be vulnerable to supply disruptionswith fuel price fluctuations having the potentialto contribute to economic instability.
Sources
1. Davis, S., Transportation Energy Data Book:Edition 22 (Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge NationalLaboratory, September 2002), table 2.4.
2. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, National Income andProduct Account Tables, available athttp://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn1.htm, as ofFebruary 2003.
3. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy InformationAdministration, Annual Energy Review 2001,available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/contents.html, as of February 2003.
4. _____, Monthly Energy Review, February 2003,available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/contents.html, as of February 2003.
5. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2003),table 4-6.
Transportation Sector Energy Use
1 GDP is in chained 1996 dollars.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
137
SSeeccttiioonn 1155:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn EEnneerrggyy
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40BTU (quadrillion)
Industrial
Transportation
Residential
Commercial
FFIIGGUURREE 111111 UU..SS.. EEnneerrggyy CCoonnssuummppttiioonn bbyy SSeeccttoorr:: 11999911––22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5Index: 1991 = 1.0
GDP
Transportation sector energy use
Transportation energyuse per dollar of GDP
FFIIGGUURREE 111122 TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn SSeeccttoorr EEnneerrggyy UUssee aanndd GGrroossss DDoommeessttiicc PPrroodduucctt:: 11999911––22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
2
4
6
8
10
12
14Barrels/day (millions)
Transportation
Industry
UtilitiesBuildings
FFIIGGUURREE 111133 UU..SS.. PPeettrroolleeuumm UUssee bbyy SSeeccttoorr:: 11999911––22000011
KKEEYY:: BTU = British thermal units. The average heat content ofmotor gasoline is 129,024 BTU per gallon. One quadrillion BTUis equivalent to 7.75 billion gallons of motor gasoline. GDP =Gross Domestic Product. GDP is shown in 1996 chained dol-lars.
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: FFiigguurree 111111—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly Energy
Review (Washington, DC: August 2002), table 2.1. FFiigguurreess 111122aanndd 111133—DOE, EIA, Annual Energy Review 2001, available athttp://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/contents.html, as of February2003. GGDDPP—U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, "National Income and Product AccountTables," available at http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn1.htm, as ofFebruary 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
138
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1155::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
EEnnee
rrggyy
Transportation fuel prices (in chained 1996dollars1) experienced short-term fluctua-
tions between 1992 and 2002 (figure 114). Theaverage price of motor fuel (all types of gasoline)decreased 15 percent in 1998, to $1.08 per gal-lon from $1.27 per gallon in 1997. Two yearslater, transportation fuel prices rebounded to thehighest levels in more than a decade. Motor fuelprices jumped 25 percent, to $1.46 per gallon in2000. Other fuels, such as aviation fuels anddiesel used by railroads, underwent similar pricefluctuations. Fuel prices decreased slightly dur-ing 2001 and 2002, so that most transportationfuels cost approximately the same amount in2002 as in 1992. Aviation gasoline—used pri-marily in general aviation planes—was oneexception, remaining 6 percent more expensivein 2002 than in 1992.
Transportation fuel prices are correlated withthe world price of crude oil, because crude oilrepresents a large percentage of the final price oftransportation fuel. This correlation can be seenin the price trends from 1992 to 2002 for crudeoil and various transportation fuels. Crude oilprices increased 9 percent, while all other typesof transportation fuel (except aviation gasoline)increased 2 percent or less [1].
While prices of transportation fuels fluctuateover time, per capita vehicle-miles traveled (vmt)for all modes of transportation have increased inalmost every year. For instance, between 1991and 2001, per capita highway vmt rose about 1percent annually, while that of large air carriersgrew 3 percent (figures 115 and 116).
Transportation fuel prices can affect overallconsumer transportation prices. As measured bythe Consumer Price Index, between 1991 and2001, motor fuel prices and transportationprices increased at the same average annual rate(2 percent). This inflation rate for transportationwas lower than average annual inflation for allgoods and services (3 percent) [2]. In fact, trans-portation-related consumer prices increased lessthan all other major spending categories exceptapparel, which decreased less than 1 percentfrom 1991 to 2001.
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy InformationAdministration, Monthly Energy Review(Washington, DC: August 2002 and June 2003).
2. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of LaborStatistics, Consumer Price Index, available athttp://www.bls.gov, as of June 2003.
Transportation Energy Prices
1 All dollar amounts are expressed in chained 1996 dollars,unless otherwise specified. Current dollar amounts (which areavailable in appendix B of this report) were adjusted to eliminatethe effects of inflation over time.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
139
SSeeccttiioonn 1155:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn EEnneerrggyy
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 20020
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6Chained 1996 $ per gallon
Gasoline, all types
Aviation gasoline
Diesel no. 2
Railroad diesel
Jet fuel, kerosene
Crude oil
FFIIGGUURREE 111144 TTrraannssppoorrttaattiioonn FFuueell PPrriicceess:: 11999922––22000022
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
1,350
2,700
4,050
5,400
6,750
8,100
9,450
10,800
Per capita vehicle-miles traveled
Per capita vehicle-miles
0
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.5
1.8
Gasoline price, all types
Chained 1996 $ per gallon
FFIIGGUURREE 111155 MMoottoorr FFuueell PPrriicceess CCoommppaarreedd WWiitthh ppeerr CCaappiittaa MMoottoorrVVeehhiiccllee--MMiilleess TTrraavveelleedd:: 11999911––22000011
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 20010
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
0
5
10
15
20
25
Per capita aircraft-miles
Jet fuel price
Per capita aircraft-miles Chained 1996 $ per gallon
FFIIGGUURREE 111166 JJeett FFuueell PPrriicceess CCoommppaarreedd WWiitthh ppeerr CCaappiittaa AAiirrccrraafftt--MMiilleess TTrraavveelleedd:: 11999911––22000011
NNOOTTEE:: Current dollar data are available in table 114 in appendixB and were adjusted using a chain-type index to eliminate theeffects of inflation over time.
SSOOUURRCCEE:: 11999911––22000011 ffuueell pprriicceess—U.S. Department ofTransportation (USDOT), Bureau of Transportation Statistics(BTS), National Transportation Statistics 2002 (Washington,DC: 2002), table 3-8, also available at http://www.bts.gov.
22000022 ffuueell pprriicceess—See table 114 source. PPeerr ccaappiittaa vveehhiiccllee-- aannddaaiirrccrraafftt--mmiilleess—Calculations based on USDOT, BTS, NationalTransportation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), table 1-29, also available at http:// www.bts.gov; and U.S. Department ofCommerce, U.S. Census Bureau, International Database (IDB),available at http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/ idbnew.html, as ofApril 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
140
SSeecc
ttiioonn
1155::
TTrraa
nnssppoo
rrttaatt
iioonn
EEnnee
rrggyy
Passenger travel was 5 percent more energyefficient in 2000 than in 1990 (figure 117),
mainly due to gains by domestic commercial avi-ation. Improved aircraft fuel economy andincreased passenger loads resulted in a 32 per-cent increase in commercial air passenger energyefficiency between 1990 and 2000 [2]. Aircraftfuel economy improved by 20 percent between1990 and 2000. Domestic commercial air pas-senger-miles rose 49 percent between 1990 and2000, while energy use grew 13 percent [1].
Highway passenger travel—by automobiles,motorcycles, and light trucks—represented 85percent of all passenger-miles and 91 percent ofpassenger travel energy use in 2000. Highwaytravel was 2 percent more energy efficient in2000 compared with 1990 [1]. This gain wasdue to a 6 percent increase in the energy effi-ciency of passenger cars and motorcycles, offsetby a 5 percent loss in efficiency of light trucks1
[2]. Furthermore, light truck passenger-milesgrew 47 percent between 1990 and 2000, com-pared with 12 percent for passenger cars and 22percent for all highway passenger vehicles.
Freight energy efficiency (ton-miles per BTU)declined 7 percent from 1990 to 2000 (figure118). The decline in freight energy efficiencyoccurred as a result of 2 percent average annualgrowth rate in ton-miles paired with a relativelyrapid average annual growth rate of 3 percent in
freight energy consumption. Contributing to thistrend was the decline in the energy efficiency ofthe freight truck and waterborne modes [2].
Sources
1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, National Transpor-tation Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002),calculation based on tables 1-34, 1-44, 4-6, and4-8, also available at http://www.bts.gov/, as ofMay 2003.
2. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, Transportation EnergyEfficiency Trends in the 1990s, Issue Brief, avail-able at http://www.bts.gov/, as of May 2003.
Transportation Energy Efficiency
TTeerrmmss UUsseedd aanndd CCaallccuullaattiioonnss MMaaddee
The following definitions apply to the discussionhere:
■ Energy is measured in British thermal units(BTU).
■ A passenger-mile traveled is one passengertransported one mile.
■ A ton-mile is one ton transported one mile.
■ Passenger energy efficiency is the ratio of pas-senger miles traveled to BTU (or to energy con-sumed).
■ Freight energy efficiency is the ratio of ton-milesto BTU (or to energy consumed).
■ Fuel economy is the ratio of miles per gallon offuel.
1 Light trucks include minivans, pickup trucks, and sport utilityvehicles.
Chapter 2: Transportation Indicators
141
SSeeccttiioonn 1155:: TT
rraannssppoorrttaattiioonn EEnneerrggyy
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
Energy consumption
Passenger-miles
Energy efficiency
Index: 1990 = 1.01.4
FFIIGGUURREE 111177 PPaasssseennggeerr--MMiilleess,, EEnneerrggyy CCoonnssuummppttiioonn,, aanndd EEnneerrggyyEEffffiicciieennccyy:: 11999900––22000000
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 20000.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Energy consumption
Ton-miles
Energy efficiency
Index: 1990 = 1.0
FFIIGGUURREE 111188 FFrreeiigghhtt TToonn--MMiilleess,, EEnneerrggyy CCoonnssuummppttiioonn,, aanndd EEnneerrggyyEEffffiicciieennccyy:: 11999900––22000000
SSOOUURRCCEESS:: PPaasssseennggeerr--mmiilleess,, ttoonn--mmiilleess,, aanndd eenneerrggyy uussee ((uunnlleessss ootthheerrwwiissee nnootteedd))—U.S.Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, National TransportationStatistics 2002 (Washington, DC: 2002), tables 1-34, 1-44, 4-6, and 4-8, also available athttp://www.bts.gov/, as of May 2003. TTrruucckk ttoonn--mmiilleess ffoorr 22000000—The Eno TransportationFoundation, Transportation in America, 19th Edition (Washington, DC: 2002), p. 45. TTrraannssiitteenneerrggyy uussee ccaallccuullaatteedd ffrroomm—American Public Transportation Association, Transit Statistics,tables 30 and 33, available at http://www.apta.com, as of May 2003.
Chapter 3
State of TransportationStatistics
145
State of Transportation Statistics
ransportation statistics arise from an array of data systems eachconstructed for specific, sometimes narrow, purposes. These systems
exist much like a collection of pieces from different jigsaw puzzles of thesame picture. The pieces answer some questions well but leave manyothers unanswered or partly or poorly answered. The pieces do not con-stitute a whole because of a number of factors, such as incompatibledefinitions, diverse collection methods, data overlaps and omissions,coverage and timeliness of data collection and releases, and apparentinconsistencies. In addition, transportation statistics need to satisfy avariety of users (see table 1).
This chapter focuses on five core transportation areas: freight, passen-ger travel, air transportation, economic, and geospatial data. Each sec-tion provides an analysis of why these data are important, a review ofexisting data, and possible options for filling crucial data gaps. The chal-lenge for the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) will be to solve,where possible, some of the more pressing data needs in these areas.
FREIGHT DATA
Changes in freight transportation reflect the dynamic nature of nationaland global economies and the continuing improvements and innovationsin technology. Alterations in the mix of manufactured products, shifts inglobal production and trade patterns, and growing domestic demandsfrom industry and consumers all affect freight transportation and relateddata needs.
The consensus on collected freight data is that they are often too outof date to capture current developments and, despite progress, there aremany missing pieces to the freight picture. Furthermore, data are oftennot comparable across modes. Table 2 compares features of severalfreight data sources.
Some freight data needs come up consistently among data users.Major categories of data where important gaps remain include:
■ freight flows (modal combinations used; tonnage, weight, ton-miles,volume, and value of shipments) at the local, state, national, andinternational levels;
T
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
146
■ true origins and destinations of shipments(not necessarily the same as the place ofrecord);
■ commodities (type; value; whether hazard-ous, containerized, or bulk);
■ transit times (how long it takes to shipcommodities);
■ shipment costs;
■ intermodal connections (seaports, airports,railyards) through which freight passes;and
■ infrastructure, vehicles, vessels, airplanes,and pipelines used.
In many of these categories, some of the datamay be available but not on a comprehensivebasis.
Existing Freight Data and Data Programs
Commodity Flow Survey (CFS)The CFS, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureaufor BTS, is the broadest, most comprehensivenational survey available of multimodal freight
TABLE 1 Transportation Data Users and Their Needs
Category of user Who the users are What the data are used for
Policymakers Congress; officials of the U.S. Department of Transportation and other Executive Branch agencies; state and local agencies; metropolitan planning organizations; port authorities
Safety regulation, security, congestion analysis, international trade and travel, environmental issues, economic impact and cost-benefit analyses, modal choice issues (e.g., cost allocation studies and analysis of factors affecting modal choice), competition analysis (e.g., market share and effects on prices)
Planners Transportation infrastructure planners at all levels of government; private sector officials; environmental, economic development, and emergency response planners
Forecasting regional or national freight and passenger travel demand and its effects on and need for public or private infrastructure, effects of transportation on the environment and the economy, national security issues, performance planning and budgeting
Shippers, operators, carriers, intermediaries, and transportation equipment manufacturers
Public sector authorities responsible for transit and ports; private sector businesses
Planning for infrastructure needs, tracking vehicle or cargo location, planning for service offerings or marketing initiatives, understanding market potential, understanding commodity movements and passenger flows
Transportation regulators Government officials; private security organizations
Allocating enforcement resources; ensuring the safety and integrity of the transportation system
Researchers and consultants Academics; private consultants To support research in the public and private sector
News media Reporters Various interests of broad concern (e.g., hazardous materials spills, congestion, and infrastructure condition)
General public Individuals and organizations Travel planning; identifying and rectifying local, regional, and national transportation issues
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
147
TABLE 2 Selected Freight Flow Data Programs of Nationwide Scope
Program/agency ModesShipment variables
covered Limitations
Data-collection frequency
Data-collection
methodology
Commodity Flow Survey
Bureau of Transportation Statistics—(BTS)—in conjunction with the U.S. Census Bureau
All(including intermodal)
Kind of commodity and its value, weight, true origin and destination (if domestic)
Only domestic shippers surveyed; most retail, all government, and some other establishments (e.g., farms, logging) are not surveyed; most imports not covered; crude petroleum pipeline shipments not covered
Every 5 years as part of the economic census; previous data-collection years were 1993, 1997, and 2002
Survey of domestic shippers
Sample size:200,000 in 1993, 100,000 in 1997, and 50,000 in 2002
Railcar Waybill Sample
Surface Transportation Board
Rail Commodity and its weight and rail line system origin and destination
Does not reveal true origin and destination of most shipments; export traffic only picked up if rebilled at border; does not provide shipment value data
Annual Stratified sample of rail waybill
Sample rate varies from 2.5% to 50% depending on shipment size
Waterborne Commerce Data
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Maritime Commodity; shipment weight; origin, destination, and routing of waterborne portion of shipment
Includes domestic and foreign shipments
Value data not collected for domestic shipments
Data collection continuous; some data released monthly for inland waterways; most other data issued annually
Census of companies and vessels operating in U.S. waterborne trade, both domestic and foreign
Air carrier freight data
BTS
Air Freight weight enplaned by each carrier at each airport; weight of freight carried over airport-to-airport segments; available ton-miles of capacity; revenue ton-miles flown by each carrier
Covers domestic, transborder, and foreign flights of U.S. carriers.
Does not identify the commodity shipped, its value, or true origin and destination; air origin and destination points may not be identified if cargo is interchanged at an airport; very small carriers, such as air taxi, not covered
Does not cover flights of foreign carriers
Monthly U.S. air carriers file monthly reports with BTS
(Table 2 continues on the next page)
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
148
trends. Every five years, the U.S. CensusBureau surveys shippers for the CFS. Releaseof 2002 survey data will begin in late 2003; pre-viously available data cover 1993 and 1997. Fora sample of shipments, shippers are asked toprovide information on the shipment’s originand destination, its value and weight, the modeor modes of transportation, and the commoditytype (using codes from the Standard Classifica-tion of Transportable Goods—SCTG).
Uses of CFS data include:
■ determination of the magnitude of freightmoving over the national transportationsystem,
■ projection of growth in freight transporta-tion demand,
■ calculation of ton-miles using origin anddestination points,
■ estimation of traffic routing, and
■ calculation of the modal distribution ofshipments by value, tonnage, and ton-miles.
While the CFS is the most extensive surveyavailable of domestic freight activity, it does notcover all sectors of the economy. The shipmentsof farms, logging and fishing operations, govern-ments, construction firms, service establish-ments, transportation firms, and most retailfirms are not within the scope of the CFS. Thedistribution center or warehouse of a retail firmwill be in scope, but its retail store will not. Forinstance, farm produce is not captured when it istransported from the farm to a grain elevator orprocessor but is when reshipped by the elevatoror processor. Pipeline shipments of crude petro-leum are also outside the scope of the CFS.
The CFS excludes imports unless the ship-ment is received by an importer at its establish-ment within the United States and thenreshipped; the reshipment portion would becounted. The CFS includes the value and ton-nage of exports. However, only the domesticportion of the shipment mileage is counted; theinternational portion is not. The CFS excludes
Program/agency ModesShipment variables
covered Limitations
Data-collection frequency
Data-collection
methodology
U.S. foreign trade data: transport of freight into and out of the United States
U.S. Customs, U.S. Census Bureau, BTS, Canadian and Mexican agencies
Truck, rail, pipeline, government mail, and certain other modes involved in trade between the United States and Canada, and the United States and Mexico
For surface modes, shipment weight (imports only), its value and commodity classification, mode of transportation when crossing border, port of entry or exit, freight charges, and whether shipment is containerized
Data specify state or province of origin and destination
Transportation data derived from U.S. foreign trade data currently provide only limited information on air and water modes, even with Canada and Mexico, and do not identify intermodal combinations used in shipping cargo from its origin to its destination. Data on transportation of exports to other countries are collected, but limited in availability. Some trade records may be filed by intermediaries (e.g., a freight forwarder) that may list an administrative office located in a place other than the point of entry or exit, and can result in misreporting of the origin or destination of a shipment.
Monthly Data derived from official U.S. international merchandise import and export trade documents and extracted from records filed with administering agencies
An increasing number of these records are filed electronically
TABLE 2 Selected Freight Flow Data Programs of Nationwide Scope (continued)
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
149
“landbridge” cargo carried across the UnitedStates (i.e., cargo that does not originate or ter-minate in the United States—truck traffic fromCanada to Mexico, or rail traffic carryingPacific Rim freight from West Coast seaports toEast Coast seaports for shipment to Europe).
The relatively small sample size of the CFSlimits its geographic and commodity detail.The 1993 CFS had an establishment samplesize of 200,000; the 1997 sample was reducedto 100,000 (covering 5 million shipments); andthe 2002 sample was halved again to 50,000(covering 2.7 million shipments). The CensusBureau designs the CFS to survey national andstate-to-state flows, so data on flows to andfrom metropolitan areas are often not avail-able. Planners and policymakers have indicateda strong need for greater geographic detail—atthe county level—for analysis and forecasting.
Carload Waybill SampleThis specialized database provides detailedinformation on freight movements by rail. TheSurface Transportation Board collects this strati-fied sample of rail waybills, with the samplerate varying from 2.5 percent to 50 percentdepending on the size of the shipment. About577,000 shipments were sampled in 2001.
Data collected include rail system origin anddestination, weight, commodity (by 7-digit Stan-dard Transportation Commodity Classification(STCC) code), and mileage. No value data arecollected. The main weakness of the CarloadWaybill Sample is the lack of true origin anddestination data. The sample gathers no informa-tion beyond the scope of the rail system, so thatthe origin and destination are treated as occur-ring when the shipment is tendered to or deliv-ered by the system. The true origin anddestination, if it requires a connection to the railsystem by truck, is not shown. Moreover, ship-
ments interlined between two railroads are oftenshown as two movements, with the interchangepoint being listed as the destination of the firstshipment and the origin of the second. Exporttraffic is also excluded unless it is rebilled at theborder.
Waterborne Commerce DataThe Waterborne Commerce Data collected bythe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers providedetails on maritime freight. It is a complete cen-sus of all waterborne domestic and foreignmovements and gathers data on the weight ofthe shipment, the origin, destination, and rout-ing of the waterborne portion of the shipment,the waterborne distance traveled, and a codefor the commodity carried (using the Corps ofEngineers’ own commodity coding system). Novalue data are collected for domestic ship-ments, but the Corps collects customs data onthe value of foreign shipments. The foreigndata lack information on routing.
Air Freight DataBTS gathers data on air freight directly from thecarriers. For each carrier, these data show theenplaned weight of freight at each airport, theweight of freight carried over airport-to-airportsegments, available ton-miles of capacity, andactual revenue ton-miles flown. The data do notinclude information on the commodity classifi-cation of the freight carried or its value. Thedata also generally do not report the true originand destination of cargo, that is, the point fromwhich it is shipped by truck to the airport and towhich it is delivered from the airport. Moreover,when the cargo is interchanged at an airport,even by the same airline, it is treated as a newshipment, so even the airborne origin and desti-nation points are lost. The database also doesnot count cargo moved by the smallest carriers(i.e., air taxis).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
150
International DataThe U.S. Census Bureau provides surfacefreight import data collected from the Bureauof Customs and Border Protection1 to BTS.These data are then reported as part of BTS’sTransborder Surface Freight Data. BTS alsogathers data on exports from Canada andMexico to the United States to complete thedatabase. The data measure the weight ofimports (but not exports), the value of ship-ments, the modes of transportation, the com-modity classifications (from the 2-digitHarmonized Schedule), the ports of entry orexit, the freight charges, and codes to indicateif the shipments were containerized. Data onorigin and destination show only the state orprovince. Similar data are not available for airand water exports and imports to and fromCanada and Mexico, and the data available onexports and imports from other countries areeven more limited.
The federal government plans to substan-tially improve the quality of internationalfreight data using an International Trade DataSystem (ITDS). The ITDS, a multiple agencyeffort spearheaded by the Bureau of Customsand Border Protection, promises to providecomprehensive data on imports and exports,including origin and destination, mode, com-modity, weight, and value.
Motor Carrier DataData on the number of vehicles passingthrough the transportation network are neededfor many purposes. For instance, the number ofvehicles is important for calculating the level ofcongestion in the transportation system. Many
freight vehicles travel empty, contributing tohighway congestion but not showing up infreight statistics.
The U.S. Census Bureau conducts the VehicleInventory and Use Survey (VIUS) every fiveyears. The VIUS provides data on the numberof trucks (including data on the size of truckfleets owned by carriers), their types, vehicleweights and lengths, fuel economy, the indus-tries they serve, the kinds of commodities theycarry, their range of operation (e.g., local,regional, or long distance) and the percentageof miles operated out-of-state, weeks operated,model years, how they are acquired, and thenature of the carriers (e.g., for-hire, private, orcontract). These data do not provide any infor-mation about freight flows themselves, such asorigins and destinations, but are useful in con-junction with other databases for understand-ing truck movements.
Options for Filling Freight Data GapsAs the above discussion suggests, there are manyimportant freight data gaps. Two pressing exam-ples are the lack of good origin and destinationdata for truck shipments and data on intermodalshipments. While the CFS is, in principle, a com-prehensive freight database, it in fact omitsmany sectors of the economy and reports limiteddetails on a relatively small sample of shippers.Moreover, the sample may contain significanterrors in the reported mode of transportationwhen the shipper often has incomplete informa-tion (e.g., the shipper that hires a trucking com-pany to transport the shipment may not knowthat the trucking company contracts with a rail-road to move the trailers by rail flatcar for aconsiderable portion of the trip). Databases onrail, air, and maritime shipments fill some ofthese gaps, but little data are available for truckand intermodal shipments. Moreover, other
1 In 2003, functions of the Immigration and Naturalization Ser-vice, the U.S. Customs Service, the Animal and Plant InspectionService, and the Border Patrol were combined into the U.S.Department of Homeland Security’s Bureau of Customs and Bor-der Protection.
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
151
databases cover only the portion of the trip han-dled by the mode on which they focus and donot cover intermodal connections.
The Committee on National Statistics of theNational Academy of Science’s TransportationResearch Board (TRB) released a study on theCFS in March 2003 [8]. The committee recom-mended that the five-year survey be continueduntil an improved alternative could be estab-lished. The committee reasoned that the exist-ing CFS provided unique and important dataon domestic freight movements, despite its lim-itations and shortcomings. Among the limita-tions cited by the committee were gaps inshipment and industry coverage and a lack ofgeographic and commodity detail. These limi-tations, according to the committee, are com-pounded by the survey’s shrinking sample size.(Recommendations from another report onfreight data options—by the TRB Committeeon Freight Transportation Data—A Frame-work for Development—were not available intime for inclusion in this report.)
A new American Freight Data Programwould aim to fill in key data gaps. It could havemany elements, but the extent to which gapscould be eliminated would depend on resourcesavailable. Three specific components of a newprogram could be:
■ filling the most important gaps and makingfreight data more timely by changing theCommodity Flow Survey to an annual orcontinuous collection of data that includesspecialized sample frames of construction,agricultural, retail, and services shippers;
■ providing complete statistical coverage oftransportation of imports and exportsthrough the ITDS; and
■ developing a mail-out survey of nonpassen-ger vehicles to collect data on vehicle move-ments and vehicle and driver characteristics.
Such approaches would build on existing dataefforts. Over the longer term, new innovationsand approaches may emerge as practical alterna-tives for gathering data. Two of these—electronic transmission of operational datafrom vehicles and infrastructure and possibleadoption of transportation data elements aspart of a universal bill of lading—are discussedin box 1.
CFS EnhancementFor the foreseeable future, a survey such as theCFS is likely to remain a central component of anational freight data program. A top priority forCFS enhancement would be to gather informa-tion from shippers currently outside the scope ofthe survey. The focus for sample frames for theshippers could be those that generate the mostvehicle-miles of traffic (e.g., construction, ser-vices, retail trade, and agriculture).
Two other key weaknesses in the CFS arelack of timely data and a sample size that is toosmall for local planning. It may never be possi-ble in a national freight flow survey to generatesufficiently detailed data to meet the needs ofall local planners, but if data were collectedannually they could be aggregated to providelarger sample sizes. This would allow the mostrecent data to be analyzed if the focus is on cur-rency at the expense of geographical detail; itwould allow data for the last five years to beanalyzed if the focus is on maximum geo-graphic or commodity detail.
BTS lacks independent authority to requireresponses to a survey. Previously, BTS collectedfreight data under an interagency agreementwith the Census Bureau, which has mandatoryauthority under its five-year economic census.It has been demonstrated that voluntaryresponses are less timely, complete, and accu-rate than responses collected under a manda-tory survey, reducing the quality of the dataand increasing the cost of the survey.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
152
Another way to provide data for local plan-ning might be through partnerships with stateand local governments willing to provideresources to increase sampling rates in geo-graphical areas in which they have a specialinterest. This approach would add data to theCFS while allowing state and local govern-ments to obtain information on their own localtraffic flows, probably at a lower cost thanconducting their own surveys. This is similar tothe approach taken with the 2001 NationalHousehold Travel Survey.
While the CFS lacks import data, some dataare available from the Bureau of Customs andBorder Protection. The ITDS, while still in theplanning stage, will eventually remedy this exist-ing data gap in the CFS.
Vehicle Movement DataEven if all the gaps in the CFS are filled, certainkinds of data will still not be available. As indi-cated above, the CFS only tracks movements offreight, whereas for many transportation plan-
ners and policymakers, movement of all non-passenger vehicles is of interest, whether thosevehicles carry freight or not.
There are also other important data needsthat cannot be met through a freight surveyalone. Safety exposure data describe the driversoperating vehicles (e.g., their age, level of expe-rience, number of hours on duty), but moredescriptive vehicle data than that provided bythe VIUS are needed (e.g., tare weights, axleloadings, safety equipment), as are data onwhere vehicles are operating.
A number of approaches already exist forsurveying vehicles. The United Kingdom uses amail-out vehicle survey in which truck opera-tors fill in weekly diaries on the operations of aparticular vehicle for a week’s period. Thesediaries report, for each trip during the week,information on the origin and destination ofthe trip, the number of miles operated full andempty, the weight of the shipment, and the typeof goods carried (with a special code to note
BOX 1Other Ways to Collect Freight Data
Freight data are collected from both shippers andcarriers, but no record follows a shipment through itsentire trip. Shippers often have only partial informationon the mode and routing of the shipment. The carrierknows the routing for its portion of the trip but mayhave little information on other portions of the trip oreven the type or value of commodities carried. Norecords are available to tie together the informationthat is known by the shipper and the various carriers.
A universal bill of lading could record all theneeded data and be sampled to provide acomprehensive freight database. Currently, a bill oflading accompanies all shipments, but the data on itare not standardized. Surface Transportation Boardregulations (49 CFR 1035) specify certainrequirements for bills of lading on rail and watershipments, as do the Federal Motor Carrier SafetyAdministration requirements for truck shipments (49CFR Part 373). The bills of lading list the weight ofthe shipment but may provide no information on thetype of commodity (which may be recorded simply as
“Freight All Kinds”), the true origin or destination, therouting, or the mode or modes of transportationused. The carrier with whom the shipper contractsmay be shown on the bill of lading, but if the carriersubcontracts all or part of the carriage, those othercarriers will not be listed.
While a universal bill of lading might be a long-termsolution to the freight data problem, it would beimportant to develop consensus within thetransportation community that costs of implementingsuch a concept would be justified by the benefits ofthe data made possible by it.
As information technologies advance, the potentialgrows to capture data collected automatically as freightpasses through electronic interchanges, although manyinstitutional barriers exist in using such data for publicpurposes. In theory, such a data-collection approachcould replace most surveys and carrier reports.Barriers, such as the proprietary nature of this data andincompatible systems, constrain use.
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
153
hazardous materials). While these diaries donot provide data on transit times or the vehi-cle’s driver, this approach could be used togather this information.
Canada uses a roadside intercept survey, inwhich data collectors stop trucks at 238 road-side points and ask the driver questions aboutorigin, destination, routing, and transit time ofthe trip (including information on stops), theweight and commodity classification of thecargo, the nature of the truck, and informationabout the driver and the carrier. Data are col-lected on handheld computers.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB),in conjunction with the Federal HighwayAdministration (FHWA), conducted a one-timestudy in 1999 using global positioning system(GPS) technology to track vehicles in SouthernCalifornia. CARB obtained usable data from 140trucks and tracked them for 4 months. Data werecollected on truck routes and stops, travel timesand speeds, idling times, and times of starts andstops. This approach gives the most detailed dataon the actual route used by the truck, the actualtimes when the truck was in operation, and theamount of time required to make a trip at partic-ular times of the day, week, and year.
PASSENGER TRAVEL STATISTICS
A much-valued feature of American life is theability to travel from place to place with rela-tive ease, at a reasonable expense, and rela-tively quickly, whether it is across town, acrosscountry, or to a foreign destination. Americansaverage 1,500 daily trips annually, covering anaverage of 14,500 miles per person [19]. Manykinds of data are needed to evaluate this demandfor passenger travel and how well the supplymeets the demand. For instance, data areneeded for the different modes of transporta-tion and at various levels of detail, including
geographic scale. Questions that help evaluatethe needs of current and future travelersinclude why people travel, how and when theytravel, what their origins and destinations are,how long travel takes, and how much it costs.Travel data, in combination with other types ofdata, can also be used to assess the costs andbenefits of travel, including transportationsafety and its environmental effects.
Government and private organizations needpassenger travel data. Policymakers, planners,and forecasters use these data to determineinfrastructure investment requirements and tomeasure and design strategies to influencetransportation demand, particularly in the faceof growing congestion. Data can also be used toidentify geographic areas and groups of individ-uals who may be underserved by public trans-portation. Passenger travel data, including thenumber, type, and use of motor vehicles, canprovide measures of exposure for safety analy-ses, energy efficiency, and the environmentalimpacts of travel. State-by-state estimates ofvehicle travel are the foundation of decisionsabout funding, cost, and fee allocation.
Businesses and other private sector entities(e.g., consumer organizations and public interestgroups) also want passenger travel data for awide variety of reasons, and despite the cost,they frequently collect data for their own pur-poses. These data are often of use to others andmay be available to the public. Privately col-lected data may be supplemented with govern-ment data; however, in many cases, governmentdata are the only source of information availablefor business planning and other analyses.
Existing Passenger Travel Dataand Data ProgramsThere are three main types of passenger traveldata: survey, regulatory/administrative, and
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
154
operations/industry data. Each type providesdifferent levels of detail in terms of coverage,periodicity, and geography; and each possessesdifferent strengths and weaknesses.
Passenger Transportation SurveysSince the 1960s, the federal government hasperiodically conducted nationwide surveys ofpassenger travel in the United States. The mostrecent, the 2001 National Household TravelSurvey (NHTS), combines two previous sur-veys: the Nationwide Personal TransportationSurvey (NPTS—a survey primarily of dailytravel), and the American Travel Survey (ATS—a survey of long-distance travel). BTS andFHWA conduct the NHTS.2 The 2001 NHTSnational sample surveyed 26,000 householdsnationwide on their daily travel and askedabout the number and purpose of their trips,the mode(s) of transportation used, the dis-tance traveled, as well as the social and demo-graphic characteristics of the household. Inaddition, the survey asked household respon-dents to report all long-distance trips (trips of50 miles or more one way) during a four-weekperiod. Additional detail on purpose, mode,duration, overnight stops made to and from thefarthest destination, and so on, were collectedfor each of these trips. In addition to thenational sample, another 40,000 householdswere surveyed from 9 additional jurisdictions:5 local, mostly urban, areas and 4 states [19].
The NHTS travel data along with the demo-graphic data collected on households and indi-viduals provide one of the few tools to analyzethe travel patterns of sociodemographic groups.For instance, a recent study by TRB used dataon the travel of children from the 1995 NPTS toassess their safety going to and from school [9].
Several improvements were introduced in the2001 NHTS, including data collection on thetravel of children under the age of five and bet-ter data on walking and medium-range trips(from 50 to 100 miles). These changes meanthat the most recent survey data cannot alwaysbe easily compared with data from prior yearsurveys. An important supplement to this kindof travel survey is the upcoming time-use surveybeing developed by the U.S. Department ofLabor [13].
Commuting behavior, which affects conges-tion and the scheduling of work, is capturedmost fully by the long form of the decennialcensus. Mode, origin and destination, starttime, and travel time can be linked to the fullrange of social, economic, and demographiccharacteristics of the population at a very finegeographic scale. Information from the decen-nial census is relied on for federal policymakingand program development; for metropolitantransportation planning, including air qualityanalyses under the Clean Air Act; and fortransit planning. The U.S. Census Bureau plansto eliminate the long form from the 2010 cen-sus and replace it with an annual AmericanCommunity Survey to provide up-to-datedemographic and housing data on a continuingbasis. National-level journey-to-work data arealso collected every two years in the AmericanHousing Survey, conducted by the U.S. CensusBureau for the Department of Housing andUrban Development.
Some other, more specialized surveys alsoexist. For instance, the Office of Travel andTourism Industries in the Department ofCommerce surveys between 69,000 and 95,000passengers per year through a Survey ofInternational Air Travelers (In-Flight) Program,providing information on the origin and desti-nation of foreign visitors coming to the UnitedStates by air and the foreign travel of Ameri-
2 Prior to the 2001 NHTS, the NPTS was conducted in 1969,1977, 1983, 1990, and 1995, and the ATS (or similar surveys)was conducted in 1963, 1967, 1972, 1977, and 1995.
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
155
cans by air [12]. This information is supple-mented by arrivals and departures data fromthe Bureau of Customs and Border Protection.Additional information on the travel of Cana-dians to the United States and Americans toCanada is provided by Statistics Canada. TheFederal Aviation Administration conducts theGeneral Aviation and Air Taxi Activity Surveyannually. The VIUS, discussed earlier in theFreight section, collects information on privateand commercial trucks, including passenger-oriented light trucks, their use, and a host ofother related variables at the state level [11].Examples of private surveys include the TravelIndustry Association of America’s survey oftourist travel [10] and the American Bus Asso-ciation’s survey of the intercity bus industry [3].
Regulatory Data and Administrative RecordsRegulatory programs that require service pro-viders to report information to the governmentgenerate passenger travel data, as do administra-tive records and other data collections by statesand localities. Regulatory program data includeinformation on airlines, intercity bus travel, andtransit. Administrative records and other datacollected by state and local governments includethe Highway Performance Monitoring System(HPMS) and fuel tax revenue data. Since deregu-lation of the transportation industry, beginningin the late 1970s, availability of regulatory datahas declined.
The National Transit Database, the mostcomprehensive information on transit, containsdata collected from major urban transit agen-cies receiving federal aid and is maintained bythe Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Datacover services supplied and consumed, finances,safety, and security.
Airline data, collected by BTS’s Office of Air-line Information, include flight on-time data,
other service quality indicators (mishandled bag-gage and oversales), enplanements by airportand airline, airplane- and passenger-miles, andfinancial data. Other airline data include thePassenger Origin and Destination Survey, a sam-ple of 10 percent of all airline tickets used inscheduled service, as discussed later in the AirTransportation Statistics section.
FHWA, through the HPMS, collects datafrom states on vehicle-miles traveled by vehicleand road type, as well as information on theextent and condition of the road system. Thisinformation is available for states and urban-ized areas. Among other things, HPMS data areused for federal funding apportionment and fora major annual congestion study by the TexasTransportation Institute [7]. States also reportother types of information to FHWA derivedfrom administrative records, such as fuel con-sumption from state fuel tax revenue recordsand motor vehicle registrations.
Operations and Industry DataPublic operators of the transportation system,particularly state and local departments oftransportation and industry groups, collect avast amount of data. Industry sources releasingoperations data include the American PublicTransportation Association (APTA) (transit),Amtrak (intercity train travel), and airline asso-ciations. APTA’s transit database adds to theNational Transit Database by collecting datathat their members do not report to the federalgovernment. Amtrak operations data includenumber of passengers served, miles traveled,and on-time performance.
Real-time monitoring of vehicle travel byroadside sensors can provide data for a numberof purposes such as evaluating the impacts ofintelligent transportation systems, computermodel calibration, congestion monitoring, andtransportation planning. For instance, an
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
156
FHWA-sponsored project is using roadside sen-sor data to develop indicators of congestion in10 urban areas on a monthly basis [6]. TheTexas Transportation Institute is working on asimilar project [7]. Ensuring confidentiality andprivacy of this type of data collection is an areathat is and will continue to be important.
Operations data also exist in air travel.FAA’s Air Traffic Control System CommandCenter monitors, in real-time, air traffic overthe continental United States and provides real-time airport status information to the public.
The Bureau of Customs and Border Protec-tion captures inbound border crossing informa-tion by vehicle type (passenger car, bus, andtrain) and of pedestrians [17]. The Bureau doesnot collect comparable data on outbound vehi-cles. Other sources of information include indi-vidual bridge operators, border stategovernments, and the Mexican and Canadiangovernments.
Options for Filling Passenger Travel Data GapsData exist for all modes of passenger travel andrelated factors on a wide range of variables, butsignificant gaps exist. A data gap can resultfrom deficiencies in data existence, complete-ness, detail, quality, timeliness, integration, andaccessibility.
Timeliness and quality are virtually alwaysissues. Options for making passenger travelsurveys more timely are limited, because theytend to be conducted five or more years apartand the data usually take more than a year topublish after collection. Continuous measure-ment may help solve the problem of timeliness,although it has its own set of challenges [15].Operational and administrative data also takestime to produce, compile, and publish. Forinstance, it takes about a year to assemble and
publish a national set of annual data for theNational Transit Database.
Variability in definitions, populations sur-veyed, reference periods and timeframes, sam-pling question formats, and so on also affectcomparability of data collected. Sometimes agood deal of data exist on a topic from varioussources, but the collection method has not beenstandardized so that integrating the data in astatistically valid way is difficult or impossible.Much data collected and analyzed pertains toonly one mode of transportation. Only a fewdata sources, such as the NHTS, identify theways in which different modes are used in com-bination to make a single trip. Consequently,there is little information on subjects such aswait times between different trip segments.
Data integration is also a problem for stateand local users who need system data, such asinfrastructure extent and condition, integratedwith data on system use and surrounding char-acteristics such as land use. Indeed, data toassess the link between transportation and landuse is typically a top concern for analysts at thelocal level.
Several types of important passenger traveldata are not available in usable form, because,among other things, they are not publicly avail-able or cannot be aggregated. Data gaps existfor travel cost and time. Some cost informationis available for commercial modes and from theBureau of Labor Statistics’s (BLS’s) ConsumerExpenditure Survey, but these sources generallydo not provide information on the prices con-sumers paid nor do they relate costs to specifictrips or types of trips [16]. Using the BTS Pas-senger Origin and Destination Survey data,BTS is working with BLS to develop an airlineprice index. Travel time or on-time perfor-mance is available for air carriers and Amtrak,and the decennial census collects data on time
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
157
spent commuting. In addition, the BTS/FHWANHTS includes travel times for all trips. How-ever, NHTS data provide national averages,making it difficult to assess highway congestionor transit reliability trends in specific areas.
Publicly available information on intercitybus and rail are limited even on a national level,not to mention corridor-specific data or use ofthese modes by population subgroups. Further-more, data on these long-distance modes in the2001 NHTS are more limited than the data thatwere collected in the 1995 ATS. And, despitework by FTA and the Community Transporta-tion Association of America, rural transit dataare also quite poor [20].
Publicly available information on passengertravel using commercial water transportation,such as cruise vessels, are limited although arecent congressionally mandated ferry surveyby FHWA provides important information forthat segment of the industry. Historically, dataon the use of recreational boats (e.g., motor-boats, jet skis, and sailboats) have not been col-lected, limiting safety analysis. However, a newNational Boating Survey conducted by the U.S.Coast Guard may begin to correct this defi-ciency. Exposure measures for general aviationaircraft are also limited.
The U.S. Census Bureau initiated the Longi-tudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD)pilot program to demonstrate the potential forlinking existing economic and demographicadministrative and survey data. BTS is partici-pating in this pilot to conduct research ondeveloping detailed origin and destinationtables based on residence and employmentinformation of U.S. workers. This researcheffort will combine information about workers(place of residence, employment, and income)and employers (location, type of business, num-ber of employees, and payroll). Once available,
these data will illustrate the travel flow ofworkers to places of employment and will bemade available to the transportation commu-nity, subject to confidentiality requirements. Itis anticipated that the LEHD data will providegreater geographic specificity than has beenavailable in the past and will lead to the abilityto derive enhanced travel demand patterns foruse by transportation researchers, planners,and engineers.
In many instances, few or no data exist onpopulations with special transportation needs;for example, people with disabilities and spe-cial segments of the elderly population such asthe housebound, those living in special carefacilities, and those living in rural areas. BTSsponsored questions about the travel of peoplewith disabilities in the 1995 National HealthInterview Survey on Disability conducted bythe National Center for Health Statistics, butthe survey provided very limited information.In 2002, BTS conducted its own small-scale3
national survey about how persons with dis-abilities use transportation, the barriers theyface, and their overall satisfaction with thetransportation system [18]. A preliminary find-ings report will be available in late 2003.
Detail and completeness are problems withmost travel datasets in even the major travelsurveys. Despite its utility, the NHTS does notinclude origin and destination information forlocal trips. Data for state and local analyses arelimited to the few “add-on” areas where statesor locations have supported collection of addi-tional data. The decennial census, conductedevery 10 years, is limited to commuting, tripsthat account for only a small percentage of alltrips made. To improve pedestrian data, BTSincludes related questions in its bimonthly
3 The completed survey sample consisted of 2,698 nondisabledrespondents and 2,321 disabled respondents.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
158
Omnibus Survey. In addition, BTS and theNational Highway Traffic Safety Administra-tion conducted a small national survey in 2002on bicycling and walking to ascertain the scopeand magnitude of these activities and the pub-lic’s behavior and attitudes regarding them[21].
More comprehensive solutions to passengerdata issues may be appropriate. In late 2001,BTS asked TRB and the Committee onNational Statistics to convene a panel ofexperts to review the key BTS survey programs.The Expert Panel to Review BTS Survey Pro-grams recommended the following options intheir June 2002 letter report:4
■ An enhanced NHTS. This could involve: 1)improving the sample size and representa-tiveness, 2) increasing the overall precisionof resulting estimates, 3) providing moretimely data to users by changing the fre-quency of the data collection, 4) addingmore statistical rigor in data processing andfinal products, and 5) expanding the use ofexisting and emerging technologies.
■ A new, targeted data-collection program.The program would develop and imple-ment ways to address known data gapsbut be flexible enough to handle new gapsthat arise.
AIR TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS
Airline traffic and financial statistics were firstcollected by the federal government in the1930s for use in monitoring and promoting thefledgling air transport industry. Today, the U.S.Department of Transportation (DOT) collectstraffic, operational, and financial statistics
from more than 240 domestic and foreign air-lines serving the United States.
Prior to deregulation of commercial airlinesin 1978, traffic and financial statistics sup-ported the federal government’s responsibilityto ensure universal air service through regula-tion of routes, airfares, and freight and mailrates. After deregulation, the federal govern-ment’s responsibilities were reduced, althoughkey data series in such areas as safety, financial,and operating statistics were retained. Air car-riers have also increased their use of traffic andfinancial information as they monitor andadjust their competitive position and determinenew route opportunities.
While scheduled service enplanements grewby 47 percent from 452 million to 665 millionfrom 1991 to 2000, by 2001 these enplane-ments decreased to 622 million [14]. Thedecrease was due primarily to the economicdownturn and to the September 11, 2001, ter-rorist attacks on the United States, after whichthe aviation system was shut down entirely forone day and then partially for several days,costing the airline industry an estimated $330million per day [1]. Since that time, the airlineindustry has faced a fundamental shift in travelpatterns and increased security and safety mea-sures. Higher operational costs and narrowprofit margins create economic challenges forthe airlines. Financial, operational, air traffic,pricing, and safety airline statistics aid inaddressing these and other issues and providepolicymakers and industry stakeholders withinformation to understand airline travel trends.
Air transport data supports policy initiativesand international air service negotiations, moni-toring of air carrier fitness, allocating airportimprovement funds, ensuring the provision ofessential air services, setting international andintra-Alaska mail rates, and safety and security
4 A comprehensive final report by the Expert Panel is expected inlate fall 2003. As of August 2003, three letter reports had beenissued by the Committee, covering the NHTS, Omnibus, andCFS.
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
159
analyses. For instance, the Department of Laboruses aviation data in their computation of produc-tivity and consumer price indices. The Depart-ment of Justice uses data to monitor the collectionof customs service fees and for anti-trust cases.
Examples of other uses of air transport sta-tistics include airport planning, traffic forecast-ing, and development of tourism initiatives bystate and local governments; travel planning bythe general public; planning and marketing bythe travel and tourism industry; and forecastingand analysis by airlines.
Existing Air Transport Data and Data ProgramsThe four categories of airline statistics—financial,operational and traffic, pricing and fees, andsafety—provide different levels of detail in termsof coverage, periodicity, and focus. The federalgovernment collects the majority of publiclyavailable aggregated airline statistics directly fromair carriers. The Air Transport Association (ATA)reports member data on a quarterly and monthlybasis on airfares, a cost index, and passenger andcargo traffic.5 The International Civil AviationOrganization (ICAO) collects international airdata covering 188 countries.
Financial DataBTS, through its Office of Airline Information(OAI), collects air carrier financial data, includ-ing income data and limited carrier operatingexpense data. Fuel constitutes the industry’ssecond-largest operating expense. Air carriersreport to OAI monthly on the gallons and costsof fuel consumed, which allows OAI to calcu-late and publish the average price per gallon.BTS also collects, on a monthly basis, the
weighted average number of full time employ-ees per labor category and the maintenancecosts for flight equipment for carriers by air-craft type.
ICAO reports annual data on the fleets andpersonnel of both international and domesticscheduled and nonscheduled carriers. The sta-tistics cover the number and types of aircraftoperated, their capacity and utilization, and thenumbers of airline personnel by job categoryand the annual expenditures for these person-nel. ICAO also collects financial data frominternational scheduled airlines on annual reve-nues and expenditures, year-end assets and lia-bilities, retained earnings, and summary trafficdata. [5]
Operational and Traffic DataOperational and traffic airline statistics coverinformation such as aircraft departures per-formed, delays, fleets, aircraft revenue-miles,and passenger and cargo revenue-hours.Additional data cover information, such asrevenue passenger-miles, available seat-miles,revenue ton-miles (for passengers, freight,and mail), segment and market traffic andcapacity by airport-pair, and enplanementsby airport.
Particular OAI data collections include flighton-time data, other service quality indicators(mishandled baggage and oversales), enplane-ments by airport and airline, airplane- andpassenger-miles, and financial data. Monthly datasubmitted to OAI include arrivals, departures,and aircraft revenue-miles and hours. Twelve ofthe largest U.S. air carriers report to OAI onscheduled and actual arrival/departure times andcancellations by flight number and day of month.Finally, information on aircraft operatingexpenses by aircraft type and changes in aircraftfleet inventory are also reported to OAI.
5 ATA members are common carriers in air transportation ofpassengers and/or cargo that operate a minimum of 20 millionrevenue ton-miles annually and have done so for 1 year precedingthe date of application, and operate under a valid certificateissued by the Federal Aviation Administration [2].
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
160
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)collects data in a variety of areas of aviationincluding the Operations Network database,which captures flight operations and delays;the Air Traffic Control System Command Cen-ter, which monitors air traffic in real-time overthe continental United States as well as provid-ing airport status information to the public;and the Enhanced Traffic Management System(ETMS), which contains detailed informationon flights for which a flight plan has been filed.FAA uses the ETMS to strategically managetraffic flow in the National Airspace System,balancing demand and capacity to avoid con-gestion that eventually translates to delays.
Every year, FAA conducts the General Avia-tion and Air Taxi Activity Survey, which pro-vides estimates of the number of active aircraft,hours flown, primary use, and many othercharacteristics by aircraft type. Additionalsources of information are ATA reports on pas-senger and cargo traffic, as well as ICAO col-lections of monthly traffic data for majorinternational airports that include internationalaircraft movements, number of passengersembarked and disembarked, and tons of freightand mail loaded and unloaded.
Pricing and Fees DataOAI’s Passenger Origin and Destination (O&D)Survey samples 10 percent of all airline ticketsused in scheduled service and reports on the fullticket itinerary, operating and ticketing carrieron each coupon, fare basis codes, and total dol-lar value of the ticket. BLS publishes both aConsumer Price Index (CPI) and a ProducerPrice Index (PPI) for airfares. The CPI measureschanges in the prices paid by consumers fordomestic and international airline trips, includ-ing taxes and any distribution costs not receivedby the carriers (e.g., travel agents’ fees). The PPImeasures changes in revenues received by pro-ducers of domestic airline trips only. Monthly
prices for the two programs are gathered fromdifferent data sources: CPI prices come from theSABRE system,6 while PPI prices are gathereddirectly from airline pricing departments. Addi-tional sources of this category of informationare available from ATA, which reports on mem-ber passenger prices.
SafetyThe National Transportation Safety Board(NTSB) investigates the causes of accidents anduses the information gathered to make safetyrecommendations to the transportation industry.
The National Airspace Incident MonitoringSystem is a repository that includes the FAAAccident/Incident Data System, the Near Mid-Air Collision System, the Pilot Deviation System,and other aviation safety-related databases. TheAccident/Incident Data System contains NTSB’srecommendations to FAA and FAA’s responses.
The Aviation Safety Reporting System(ASRS) is a voluntary, confidential, and anony-mous incident reporting system that collectsinformation used to identify hazards and safetydiscrepancies in the National Airspace System.Data from the ASRS are also used to formulatepolicy and to strengthen the foundation of avi-ation human factors safety research.
Options for Filling Air Transportation Data GapsThe discussion above illustrates the variety ofair transport data currently available. However,many gaps exist. One important gap is themultimodal nature of passenger and freight airtravel, that is, movement to and from airports.Passengers arrive at airports in cars (their ownor taxis), by transit, by shuttle and intercitybuses, and, to some extent, by rail. Nearly all
6 A commercial system that provides users with airline schedules,availability, pricing, and other information, as well as reserva-tions and ticketing capability.
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
161
air freight arrives by truck, but the extent ofprior movement is not known. Some of thesedata may be captured but in data systems withdifferent formats, definitions, and data ele-ments, increasing the challenge to integrate thedata into single trips.
One major challenge in the collection of air-line statistics is air carrier concern about reveal-ing proprietary information that could putthem at a competitive disadvantage. A secondchallenge is that the immense volume of datathat could be collected by carriers is expensiveto house and analyze.
In collaboration with BLS, BTS is investigat-ing a new method of computing price indicesfor air travel. The research aims to produce anairfare index series based on actual transactionprices, because the current BLS price indices forair travel do not capture the effects of specialdiscounts (e.g., Internet specials or frequentflyer awards) on price trends. The BTS serieswill also provide more geographic detail; forexample, estimate indices for particular citiesof itinerary origin to facilitate local area eco-nomic analysis. However, greater detail isneeded for the O&D data to be able to distin-guish different products or services and theirassociated prices.
Options for improving air transportationdata include:
■ Traffic data on air taxis (on-demand aircarriers) and corporate jets, when com-bined with information from NTSB, couldbe used to conduct exposure/risk analyses.The information would also be useful inassessing the degree to which these forms ofair transportation substitute for traditionalcarriers.
■ On-time statistics for smaller carriers andinternational flights could be used to calcu-late delays and travel time for an important
segment of the U.S. aviation industry andwould benefit consumers of these services.
■ Flight-specific data would allow more accu-rate estimates of the performance of the air-line industry, including the cost topassengers of flying, the time required totravel, the reliability of travel times, and thenumber of passengers affected by airlinedelays. Currently, however, BTS is unableto collect these data because of a legislativeprohibition on collecting passenger data byflight number.
TRANSPORTATION ECONOMIC DATA
Transportation economics refers to industry per-formance on key economic measures such asprices, quantities, productivity, and externalities.It looks at not only how the industry performsdirectly in meeting the needs of its customers,but also how it affects the economy as a whole,based on, for example, measures of employ-ment, output, and international competitiveness.
Existing Economic Data
PricesMany customers focus on the price they pay fortransportation as the key indicator of how wellthe transportation system is meeting their needs.The costs of passenger transportation rise andfall in line with prices in the overall economy butare particularly affected by energy prices and theproductivity of individual modes. Good dataexist on the component costs of automobiletransportation, which represents the bulk of pas-senger movement. Reasonably good data areavailable on the price of passenger rail transpor-tation and transit.
On the freight side, there are some data avail-able on all modes of transportation, but thesedata often do not show the actual prices paid on
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
162
particular routes or for particular commodities.Without this information it is difficult to deter-mine which customers benefit from lower prices,even when average prices go down. Price dataare also often not adjusted for changes in qual-ity, such as delivery time and reliability.
QuantitiesQuantities are the physical amount of trans-portation produced and thus measure the levelof mobility that the transportation systemenables. Quantities (e.g., passenger-miles orton-miles) are essential to understanding theimpacts of transportation on the economy andto making investment and other economic pol-icy decisions.
Reasonably good data on physical move-ment, except for trucking, are publicly avail-able, but details on specific routes, particulartimes, and vehicle types are not. Data on high-way transportation of freight and passengers,which account for a substantial portion of allmovement, have gaps in completeness, accu-racy, and timeliness. Better data are needed fortruck ton-miles and highway passenger-miles,as well as those for transit, intercity bus, andAmtrak (discussed earlier under Freight Dataand Passenger Travel Statistics).
InvestmentTransportation investment includes public andprivate infrastructure and vehicles and affectsboth the capacity and condition of the trans-portation system. Capital stock is the accumu-lated stock of these investments over a periodof years, reflecting new investments and depre-ciation of existing investments. Information oncapital stock is essential for measuring the pro-ductivity of the transportation system and itseffect on economic growth.
Reasonably good data are available on mostcomponents of private capital stock: railroads,privately owned automobiles, trucking, airlines,waterway operators, pipelines, privately ownedlocal transit, transportation services (e.g., travelagents and freight brokers), and the transporta-tion-related capital stock of in-house transporta-tion companies, as well as public highways andstreets. All of these forms of transportation capi-tal stock have increased with the growth of theeconomy over the last 50 years, with the excep-tion of railroad capital stock, which declined (ininflation-adjusted terms), and privately ownedlocal transit, which declined (in inflation-adjusted terms) until recently.
ProductivityProductivity measures how effectively eco-nomic inputs are converted into output. Laborproductivity measures the output per hour oflabor. Multifactor productivity, which is a morecomprehensive measure, relates changes in out-put to changes in all inputs, including capital,labor, energy, materials, and services. If thetransportation system becomes more produc-tive, then fewer resources are needed and pricescan decline.
Labor productivity data are widely availablefor a large number of industries. Multifactorproductivity data are not as widely available
BOX 2Transportation Services Output Indices
Experimental indices of overall transportationoutput under development by the Bureau ofTransportation Statistics show that some types oftransportation tend to rise and fall in advance ofcorresponding changes in the overall economy.These transportation services output indices,which measure passenger, freight, and total outputof services for-hire, are being studied in contextwith the growth cycles of the U.S. economy. Theturning points of the freight measure, in particular,seem to lead the economic turning points byseveral months, potentially providing a usefulforecasting tool.
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
163
for the economy as a whole and are only avail-able for the railroad industry in the transporta-tion sector. Railroad multifactor productivityincreased more rapidly than that of either man-ufacturing or business over the last decade.
Externalities and RegulationTransportation often generates negative effectssuch as pollution, collisions, congestion, andnoise, which are known as externalities and arethe driving force behind regulation and manyother public policies affecting transportation.Measures of the costs of external effects oftransportation (e.g., on safety, congestion, andthe environment) are important in determiningwhether various kinds of regulation of trans-portation are appropriate.
The physical quantity data described earliercan be used to determine the amount of totalpollution and noise emissions, but not neces-sarily the exact locations of these emissions ortheir costs. The physical quantity data also canbe used to analyze the growth of congestion,although questions remain about the impactson travel patterns of urban growth, system anddemand management policies, and changes intechnology. In addition, congestion tends to bevery site- and time-specific, so estimates or pol-icy decisions may need to be based on specificlocal data.
Historically, transportation has also beensubject to economic regulation. Reduced eco-nomic regulation over the last 20 years has ledto increased competition and lower prices forconsumers. However, some carriers have foundit difficult to stay in business in the face ofincreased competition. There is also consider-able debate about whether transportationmergers have reversed some of the benefits ofderegulation. Data on prices, quantities, invest-ment, and productivity are crucial to under-standing these trends.
Impact on the EconomyThe transportation system links producers andconsumers to markets. Public and privateinvestment and other improvements to thetransportation system increase capacity, reducecost, and improve service. Improvements infreight transportation allow economies of scalein production, diversity in products availableto consumers and sources available to produc-ers, and increased competition in markets. Allof these factors lower the cost of goods Ameri-cans buy and broaden the markets for thegoods produced.
Similarly, passenger transportation affectsseveral areas of the economy. Improved localcommuter transportation supports broaderlabor markets, increasing the choice of jobs andeconomic efficiency. Better intercity transporta-tion allows greater opportunity for personaltravel and makes possible better management ofgeographically decentralized business organiza-tions. Transportation also represents a majorsource of demand for many industries, both forsuppliers to the transportation industry andproducers of complementary services, such asthe hotel and restaurant industries. Transporta-tion thus creates efficiencies throughout thegeneral economy, increasing incomes, providinghigher paying jobs, and enhancing the interna-tional competitiveness of the economy.
Considerable debate continues, however,about appropriate means of measuring theseeffects. While data are available on severalaspects of the overall efficiency of the trans-portation system (e.g., the productivity andphysical flow data mentioned earlier), data arelacking on other important aspects, such as theefficiency of specific port and intermodal yardfacilities and their related surface transporta-tion links.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
164
BTS’s Transportation Satellite Accounts(TSAs) provide a broad measure of the value oftransportation services to the economy, includ-ing both for-hire transportation and a largeportion of in-house transportation, such astrucks owned by manufacturing companies.BTS continues to develop the TSAs as a way ofmeasuring the more direct impacts of transpor-tation on the economy.
Options for Filling Transportation Economic Data GapsResearch is underway at BTS to fill some of theknown gaps in economic data. One project willimprove the quality of data on airline transpor-tation prices with the development of an Air-fare Index, covering both domestic andinternational travel. This research could even-tually be extended to other modes.
Other key projects include the following:
■ expansion of Transportation SatelliteAccounts data to include additional modes,such as private barge, rail, and air, andupdating of the household production oftransportation services (e.g., local errandsin a private automobile and people com-muting to work) component;
■ augmentation of available privately ownedcapital stock data by developing data onpublicly owned capital stock, such as air-ports, waterways, and transit systems; and
■ development of multifactor productivitymeasures for modes other than railroads tobetter measure transportation industry pro-ductivity in relation to the rest of the indus-try sector of the economy.
GEOSPATIAL DATA
Geospatial information technologies havebecome increasingly useful decisionmakingtools for the transportation industry and agen-
cies responsible for transportation planning.Previously used only by expert operators onspecialized mainframe systems, they are nowavailable for desktop systems and distributedcomputing services that give nontechnical usersaccess to spatial analytical tools. One exampleof this technology, geographic informationsystems (GIS), provides desktop computerapplications, Internet mapping services, andother information technology systems designedto store, display, and analyze geographicallyreferenced information (geospatial data). Thistechnology enables the presentation of massesof data in more useable forms (see map).
Geospatial data describe both manmade andnatural features on the earth’s surface, such asroads, rivers, and political boundaries. Thesefeatures reference the geographic coordinatesor location on the earth and also include asso-ciated characteristics that describe the features.These characteristics may define the type ofroad, river depth, or political boundaries.These data for use in a GIS are collectedthrough a number of methods including the useof Global Positioning System (GPS) satellitesand receivers to collect accurate geographiclocations, remote sensing technology to captureearth images, and conversion of tabular data orpaper maps through digitization.
As the use of geographic information tech-nologies spreads, the range of applicationsexpands. Today, GIS is used to track urbancrime patterns, coordinate emergency responseefforts, visualize data critical to national secu-rity, and support city zoning decisions. Fromurban planning support systems to on-boardglobal positioning systems (GPS) and mappingtechnologies for public transport vehicles andautomobiles, GIS tools provide a means fordisplaying and analyzing transportation data inreal-world physical contexts. Public transporta-tion agencies use these tools to plan system
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
165
Map Showing Part of the Supporting Data
ID Item1 Item6a Item7 Item9 longdd latdd
56 251 HWY RIVER RD US 5 S END BR JCT US 5 & RIVER RD. -72.58557222220 42.08092777780 61 251 ST 57 W TRAFFIC CIR US 5 .1 MI SE OF WESTFIELD RIV 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 62 251 ST 57 E TRAFFIC CIR US 5 .25 MI SE OF WESTFIELD RV 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 63 251 HWY ACCESS RD US 5 .09 MI S OF W SPRINGFIELD 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 66 251 ST159 MAIN ST ST 57 EB 4.75 MI E OF SOUTHWICK -72.61458888890 42.07557777780 69 251 ST159 MAIN ST ST 57 WB 4.75 MI E OF SOUTHWICK -72.61457777780 42.07580277780 93 251 WATER MERRIMACK RIVER I 95 AT MERRIMAC RIVER -70.91066388890 42.83580833330 94 251 HWY EVANS PLACE I 95 AT I-95 -70.90905000000 42.83773055560 108 251 RR BMRR BURIED I 495 NB .1 MI N EXIT 55 -70.91712777780 42.84772500000 109 251 RR BMRR BURIED I 495 SB .1 MI N EXIT 55 -70.91765555560 42.84788611110 193 251 OTHER PED / TUNNEL ST 2 JUST W OLD ALEWIFE ROTARY 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 251 251 WATER LAKE ROHUNTA ST 2 ST 2 /LAKE ROHUNTA 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 453 251 WATER SWIFT RIVER ST 9 .3 M W JCT RIVER RD. -72.33763055560 42.27375277780 572 251 WATER NEPONSET RIVER HWY ADAMS ST OVER NEPONSET RIV AT MILT -71.06808611110 42.27083611110 576 251 US 3 NB CHARLES RIVER ST 3 CAMBRIDGE ST .2 MI S OF BLOSSOM ST 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 584 251 WATER CHARLES RIVER HWY N WSHNGTN ST AT CHAS RIV NR BOS GARDEN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 586 251 WATER CHARLES RIVER HWY N WSHNGTN ST AT CHAS RIV NR BOS GARDEN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 595 251 HWY CHELSEA LOCAL STS US 1 NB CHLSEA LW TOBIN BRIDGE -71.05183888890 42.38006944440 598 251 OTHER RELIEF US 1 NB TOLL LOWR TOBIN BRIDGE 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 600 251 US 1 NB TOLL PLAZA LOWR US 1 SB TOLL UPPR TOBIN BRIDGE -71.04873055560 42.38359444440 608 251 WATER NEPONSET RIVER HWY GRANITE AVE MILTON TOWN LINE -71.05344444440 42.27765833330 613 251 WATER MYSTIC RIVER ST 99 ALFORD ST AT MYSTIC RIVER -71.07112500000 42.38963055560 616 251 WATER DORCHESTER BAY HWY MORRISY BVD .2 MI E OF I 93 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 617 251 WATER RESERVE CHANNEL HWY SUMMER ST 1 MI SE OF FT PT CHANNEL -71.03808888890 42.34365000000 675 251 HWY BROOKS ST I 90 EB .1 MI S. CHARLES RV S34 -71.16203055560 42.35751111110 676 251 HWY BROOKS ST I 90 WB .1 MI S. CHARLES RV S34 -71.16198888890 42.35766944440 680 251 RR MBTA & BMRR HWY MAIN STREET 600 M NW OF SULLIVAN SQ -71.07683611110 42.38626111110 739 251 RR MBTA & CSX HWY MORTON ST .8 KM SW OF JCTSR28&SR203 -71.08548888890 42.28102500000 752 251 WATER CHARLES RIVER ST109 SPRING ST @ DEDHAM TL = D05006 -71.17346944440 42.27067222220 761 251 ST 1 A MT VERNON ST HWY MORRISY BLV .1 MI W OF I 93 -71.05346944440 42.32140000000 784 251 RR PARKING & RR I 93 US1 SB OFF R .25 MI SE OF JCT I93&US1 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 803 251 I 90 & AMTRAK I93 ONRP NB @B-WAY 500 FT S OF JCT I93&I90 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 806 251 HWY SUFACE RD I93 S.ABUT.-BT.60 .2 MI N OF DEW SQ TUN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 807 251 HWY E BERKLEY B-WAY I 93 BNT 22-9 .6 MI S OF DEWEY SQ TUN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 809 251 HWY SURFACE RD I 93 BENT 60-56 .2 MI N OF DEWEY SQ TUN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 810 251 COMB I 90 & CSX& AMTRK I 93 BENT9-N ABUT .4 MI S OF DEWEY SQ TUN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 811 251 HWY CITY STREETS I-93 BT.48-56 N.&S .4 MI N OF DEWEY SQ TUN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 812 251 HWY SURFACE RD I-93 BT.41-48 N&S. .4 MI N OF DEWEY SQ TUN 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 814 251 HWY CITY STREETS I 93 BENT 41-31 .5 MI N OF JCT USI 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 820 251 I 93 SB BENT A3-2 I 93 NB BNT A3-2 .1 MI S JCT I93&US1 -71.06126666670 42.36728055560 822 251 WATER CHARLES RIVER I 93 SB BENT A3-2 JCT I93 & US1 -71.06270833330 42.36932777780 838 251 ST 2 COMM AVE ST 2A MASS AVE JUST S CHARLES RIV -71.08864722220 42.34910833330 841 251 HWY GARDNER ST HWY SUL SQ OP NB 1 MI N OF N WSHNGTON ST 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 842 251 COMB.SULL.SQ.RR & RTE 99 HWY SUL SQ OVERP 1.6 KM N OF N WSHNGTON ST 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 872 251 I 93 SB BENT 61 TO B5 I 93 NB .5 MI N OF JCT 193&US1 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 884 251 I 93 SB BENT 28 TO 38 I 93 NB .6 MI N OF JCT I93&US1 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 886 251 COMB CSX & I-93 SB I 93 NB B5-B10 .8 MI N OF RAMP I93&US1 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 893 251 I 93SB CMBRG AMTRAK MBTA I 93 NB B16 - NB4 1.1 MI N OF JCT I93&US1 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 894 251 HWY WATERST & CANA RAMPS I 93 SB BTSA3TO9 .1 MI N OF JCT I93&US1 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 917 251 HWY CHARLESGATE INT HWY STOR DR EB AT CHARLESGATE 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 928 251 I 93 I 90 EB RAMP OFF OVER FITZGERALD XPWY S76 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 930 251 I 90 EB RAMPS ABP I 93 NB RAMP OFF .1MIW.FORT POINT CHNL S78 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 932 251 I 90 EB RAMPS ABP "I 90 RAMPS C,R" .1MIW.FORT POINT CHNL S79 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 933 251 I 90 WB RAMP ON I 93 NB RAMP OF .1MIW.FORT POINT CHNL S81 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 946 251 ST 3 A N HANCK ST NB RR ST 3 A MOR BLVD .2 MI E OF I 93 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 964 251 US 1 NB STORROW DR US 1 SB STORROW D .1 N OF BEACON ST 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 968 251 OTHER TUNNEL TO RTE1 HWY BERKELEY ST AT TUNNEL 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 1059 251 WATER TAUNTON RIVER ST 18 BEDFORD ST 0.5 M N OF PLYMOUTH ST -70.96564166670 41.93672500000 1184 251 CAPE COD CANAL MA ROUTE 3 JUNCTION MA RTES 3 & 6 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 1216 251 US 3 MEMORIAL DRIVE ST 2 A MASS AVE N END HARVARD BR -71.09262222220 42.35721111110 1217 251 HWY BROOKLINE STREET US 3 MEM DR .2 MI FROM CITY LINE 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 1219 251 WATER CHARLES RIVER ST 3 SB MEM DRIVE JUST S OF LONGFELLOW BR -71.07917777780 42.36123333330 1220 251 WATER CHARLES RIVER ST 3 NB MEM DRIVE JUST S OF LONGFELLOW BR -71.07855833330 42.36148055560 1221 251 WATER BROAD CANAL ST 3 LAND BLVD .1 MI N OF LONGFELLOW BR 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 1232 251 WATER NEPONSET RIVER I 95 NB & ST128 NB I 95 AT DEDHAM T.L. 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 1233 251 WATER NEPONSET RIVER I 95 SB &ST128 SB I 95 AT DEDHAM T.L. -71.14457777780 42.20994722220 1599 251 WATER WATERS RIVER ST128 .4 MI N ST114 -70.93666666670 42.54724166670 1601 251 RR MBTA ST128 1.3 MI N ST114 -70.93019722220 42.55707777780 1603 251 WATER PORTER RIVER ST128 1.6 MI N ST114 -70.92658888890 42.56022222220 1649 251 HWY HARRIS ST. US 1 .08 KM. NO. OF ST135 0.00000000000 0.00000000000 1660 251 "COMB MBTA,AMTRAK & PARK" I 95 NB & ST128 .51 KM. SE OF US 1 -71.14658888890 42.21138055560 1661 251 "COMB MBTA,AMTRAK & PARK" I 95 SB & ST128SB .51 KM. SE OF US 1 -71.14670833330 42.21116388890 1672 251 COMB DFLD R & STLLWTR RD I 91 NB OVER DEERFIELD RIVER 0.00000000000 0.00000000000
National Bridge Inventory
BTS is geocoding FHWA's bridge condition data to help decision-makers prioritize bridge investments.
n|
|
!.
▲
▲▲▲▲▲
▲
▲
▲▲▲▲
▲▲
▲▲▲▲▲▲▲
▲▲▲
▲
▲ ▲
▲▲▲▲
▲
▲
▲▲▲
▲
▲
▲▲
Lynn
Quincy
Newton
Malden
Boston
Waltham
Medford
Weymouth
Cambridge
Brookline
Somerville
Structurally Deficient Bridges▲
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
166
services and expansion, as well as maintainmaps and analyze service areas. Geographicinformation technology enables freight andpassenger carriers to warehouse data on operat-ing resources and model the flow of goods andpassengers across the transportation system.
Existing Geospatial Data and Data ProgramsBTS creates, maintains, and distributes geospa-tial data through the National TransportationAtlas Database (NTAD) Program. These dataare obtained from multiple sources and includethe National Highway Planning Network, anational rail network, public-use airports andrunways, and Amtrak stations. In addition, theNTAD includes state, county, congressionaldistrict, and metropolitan statistical areaboundary files to provide a geographic refer-ence for transportation features.
Geospatial information depicting transporta-tion infrastructure can be stored and managedin a GIS for development and maintenanceplanning. For instance, the National BridgeInventory maintained by FHWA contains infor-mation on structurally deficient bridges. Infor-mation describing the location and bridgeconditions can be displayed cartographicallyand analyzed. Geographically accurate mapscan be produced using a variety of data tablesor layers placed one on top of the other toshow geographic relationships (see map).
BTS in partnership with the DOT Officeof Intermodalism and FHWA developedGeoFreight: The Intermodal Freight DisplayTool. GeoFreight calculates and measures theintensity of infrastructure use for intermodalfacilities (e.g., airports, seaports, and truck-railinterchanges). The information is displayed onregional or national maps. A CD-ROM ver-sion of GeoFreight is expected to be issued inlate 2003.
New transportation applications for GIScontinue to be developed, such as emergencyresponse planning for crisis management. Newapplications place a premium not only ontimely development of geospatial data but alsoon commonly agreed-on standards for dataquality, content, and technology. As GISbecomes a more mainstream information tech-nology tool, issues of open access to geographicdata and software interoperability will grow inimportance.
Organizations such as the Federal Geo-graphic Data Committee (FGDC) and theOpen GIS Consortium work to facilitate thewide availability and implementation of stan-dardized geospatial data and technologies.FGDC is an interagency committee of represen-tatives from the Executive Office of the Presi-dent and cabinet-level and independentagencies. FGDC, in cooperation with state,local, and tribal governments, the academiccommunity, and the private sector, is develop-ing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure(NSDI). The NSDI is composed of geospatialdata themes of national significance; documen-tation describing the data, standards (meta-data), and partnerships; and the NationalSpatial Data Clearinghouse, which providesaccess to documented geospatial data andmetadata from a variety of publicly availabledata sources [4].
The Geospatial One-Stop, a federal e-govern-ment initiative that extends the goals of theNSDI, facilitates public and private access togeographic data, with particular reference tothe framework themes of the NSDI. In keepingwith the trend toward development of datastandards, Internet GIS applications, and onlinedata warehousing, the Geospatial One-Stopeffort will result in the creation of an onlineportal through which users can freely accessgeospatial data from the federal governmentand other sources, as well as gather information
Chapter 3: State of Transportation Statistics
167
on spatial analytical tools and data standards.The Departments of the Interior, Commerce,and Transportation are the federal agencieswith lead responsibilities for coordinating thenational coverage and stewardship of specificNSDI framework data themes. The Bureau ofTransportation Statistics (BTS) is the operatingadministration within DOT responsible forcoordinating the development of the NSDItransportation standards.
Options for Filling Geospatial Data GapsGeospatial information technologies andgeospatial data have become permanent fix-tures in the information technology landscape,and the variety of Internet GIS applications anddata available to the public and private sectorwill continue to develop and expand. Key areasfor future geospatial data and standards devel-opment critical for transportation analysisinclude land-use planning, employee-basedtravel pattern analysis, and fine-grained dataon infrastructure and operations critical totransportation safety and security analysis. Spe-cific areas include:
■ integration of bridge, tunnel, and transitdata into the National Transportation AtlasDatabase;
■ development of a North American Trans-portation Atlas Database covering theUnited States, Mexico, and Canada;
■ expansion of the current web-based map-ping center to enable customers to generateinteractive maps and spatial analysis tosupport their projects and requirements;and
■ provision of technical assistance/trainingworkshops on geospatial data to state DOTsand metropolitan planning organizations.
CONCLUSION
A focused yet comprehensive transportation sta-tistics program can be concentrated in five keyareas: freight, passenger travel, air transporta-tion, transportation economics, and geospatialinformation. The preceding review shows that,while a wealth of data exist to inform stakehold-ers about the state of transportation, much workremains to be done. Data need to be collected orcollected differently, relevant linkages amongdatasets need to be established, and data need tobe analyzed and offered in ways useful for stake-holders at all levels of government and the pri-vate sector.
Sources1. Air Transport Association, Airlines in Crisis:
The Perfect Economic Storm, available athttp://www.airlines.org/public/industry/binAirlines InCrisis.pdf, as of July 2003.
2. ______, data available at http://www.airlines.org/public/home/default1.asp, as of March 2003.
3. American Bus Association, MotorcoachCensus 2000 (Washington, DC: 2000), avail-able at http://www,buses.org/industry/ABA-RLBanksReport.pdf, as of February 2003.
4. Federal Geographic Data Committee, availableat http://www.fgdc.gov, as of March 2003.
5. International Civil Aviation Organization, dataavailable at http://www.icao.org, as of March2003.
6. Jung, S., J. Larkin, A. Toppen, and K. Wunder-lich, “Urban Congestion Reporting,” draftreport prepared by Mitretek for the U.S.Department of Transportation, Federal High-way Administration, January 2003.
7. Texas Transportation Institute, 2002 UrbanMobility Study (College Station, TX: 2002).
8. Transportation Research Board, “Letter Reportto the Bureau of Transportation Statistics,”Mar. 20, 2003.
9. ______, The Relative Risks of School Travel(Washington, DC: 2002).
10. Travel Industry Association of America, Travel-Scope Survey (Washington, DC: 2003), alsoavailable at http://www.tia.org/Travel/, as ofFebruary 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
168
11. U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. CensusBureau, 1997 Economic Census: Vehicle Inven-tory and Use Survey (Washington, DC: 1999).
12. U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Traveland Tourism Industries, Survey of InternationalAir Travelers, available at http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/, as of February 2003.
13. U.S. Department of Labor, American Time UseSurvey, available at http://www.bls.gov/tus/#docs, as of March 2003.
14. U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, Annual Historical AirTraffic Statistics, 1981–2001, available athttp://www.bts.gov/oai/, as of March 2003.
15. ______, Implications of Continuous Measure-ment for the Uses of Census Data in Transpor-tation Planning (Washington, DC: 1996).
16. ______, Transportation Statistics BeyondISTEA: Critical Gaps and Strategic Responses(Washington, DC: January 1998).
17. ______, Border Crossing Data, available athttp://www.bts.gov/itt/cross/, as of February2003.
18. ______, National Transportation Availabilityand Use Survey for Persons with Disabilities,2002, information on the survey available athttp://www.bts.gov/omnibus/, as of April 2003.
19. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalHighway Administration and Bureau ofTransportation Statistics, 2001 National House-hold Travel Survey, Preliminary Data ReleaseVersion 1, available at http://nhts.ornl.gov/2001/index.shtml, as of February 2003.
20. U.S. Department of Transportation, FederalTransit Administration and Community Trans-portation Association of America, Status ofRural Public Transportation: 2000 (Washing-ton, DC: April 2001).
21. U.S. Department of Transportation, NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration andBureau of Transportation Statistics, NationalSurvey of Pedestrian & Bicyclist Attitudes andBehaviors, Highlights Report (Washington,DC: nd).
Appendices
AADT average annual daily trafficADA Americans with Disabilities ActAFV alternative fuel vehicle
BAC blood alcohol concentrationBEA Bureau of Economic AnalysisBLS Bureau of Labor StatisticsBTS Bureau of Transportation StatisticsBtu British thermal unit
CAA Clean Air ActCAFE Corporate Average Fuel EconomyCFR Code of Federal RegulationsCFS Commodity Flow SurveyCO carbon monoxideCO2 carbon dioxideCRAF Civil Reserve Air Fleet
DGPS Differential Global Positioning SystemDOC U.S. Department of CommerceDOD U.S. Department of DefenseDOE U.S. Department of EnergyDOI U.S. Department of the InteriorDOL U.S. Department of LaborDOT U.S. Department of Transportationdwt deadweight tons
EDS Explosive Detection SystemsEIA Energy Information AdministrationEJ environmental justiceEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyETC electronic toll collectionETMS Enhanced Traffic Management System
FAA Federal Aviation AdministrationFAF Freight Analysis FrameworkFARs Federal Aviation RegulationsFARS Fatality Analysis Reporting SystemFHWA Federal Highway AdministrationFMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety AdministrationFRA Federal Railroad AdministrationFTA Federal Transit Administration
171
Appendix A: List of Acronyms and Glossary
FY fiscal yearGA general aviationGAO General Accounting OfficeGDD Gross Domestic DemandGDP Gross Domestic ProductGHG greenhouse gasGIS geographic information systemsGPRA Government Performance and Results ActGPS Global Positioning System
HAPs hazardous air pollutantsHELP Heavy Vehicle Electronic License PlateHMIS Hazardous Materials Information SystemHPMS Highway Performance Monitoring SystemHSR high-speed railHTF Highway Trust Fund
IBET Intermodal Bottleneck Evaluation ToolINS Immigration and Naturalization ServiceIPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency ActIT information technologyITS intelligent transportation system
LNG liquefied natural gasLPG liquefied petroleum gasLTV light trucks and vans
MARAD Maritime AdministrationMMLD Merchant Mariner Licensing Documentationmmtc million metric tons of carbonmpg miles per gallonmph miles per hourMPO metropolitan planning organizationMSATs mobile source air toxicsMSP Maritime Security ProgramsMSW municipal solid wasteMTBE methyl-tertiary-butyl-ether
NAFTA North American Free Trade AgreementNAS National Airspace System planNASS GES National Automotive Sampling System General Estimates SystemNDRF National Defense Reserve FleetNHTS National Household Travel SurveyNHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationNO2 nitrogen dioxideNOX nitrogen oxidesNPIAS National Plan of Integrated Airport SystemsNPL National Priorities ListNPTS Nationwide Personal Transportation SurveyNTL National Transportation Library
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
172
NTSB National Transportation Safety BoardOMB Office of Management and BudgetOPEC Organization of Petroleum Exporting CountriesOPS Office of Pipeline SafetyOSRA Ocean Shipping Reform Act
PFD personal flotation devicePM-2.5 particulate matter of 2.5 microns in diameter or smallerPM-10 particulate matter of 10 microns in diameter or smallerpmt passenger-miles of travelPSC Port State ControlPSR Present Serviceability RatingPTC positive train controlPUV personal-use vehicle
quads quadrillion
RFG reformulated gasolineROR run-off-the-roadRRF Ready Reserve FleetRSPA Research and Special Programs Administration
SCTG Standard Classification of Transported GoodsSO2 sulfur dioxideSTRAHNET Strategic Highway NetworkSUV sport utility vehicle
TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st CenturyTEU 20-foot equivalent container unitTICSA Transportation Infrastructure Capital Stock AccountTTI Texas Transportation Institute
UNFCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeUSCG U.S. Coast GuardUSGS U.S. Geological SurveyUST underground storage tank
vmt vehicle-miles of travelVOC volatile organic compounds
Appendix A
173
14 CFR 121 (air): Code of Federal Regulations,Title 14, part 121. Prescribes rules governing theoperation of domestic, flag, and supplementalair carriers and commercial operators of largeaircraft.
14 CFR 135 (air): Code of Federal Regulations,Title 14, part 135. Prescribes rules governing theoperations of commuter air carriers (scheduled)and on-demand air taxi (unscheduled).
ACCIDENT (aircraft): As defined by theNational Transportation Safety Board, anoccurrence incidental to flight in which, as aresult of the operation of an aircraft, any person(occupant or nonoccupant) receives fatal or seri-ous injury or any aircraft receives substantialdamage.
ACCIDENT (automobile): See Crash (high-way).
ACCIDENT (gas): 1) An event that involves therelease of gas from a pipeline or of liquefied nat-ural gas (LNG) or other gas from an LNG facil-ity resulting in personal injury necessitatingin-patient hospitalization or a death; or estimat-ed property damage of $50,000 or more to theoperator or others, or both, including the valueof the gas that escaped during the accident; 2)an event that results in an emergency shutdownof an LNG facility; or 3) an event that is signifi-cant in the judgment of the operator eventhough it did not meet the criteria of (1) or (2).
ACCIDENT (hazardous liquid or gas): Releaseof hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide whilebeing transported, resulting in any of the fol-lowing: 1) an explosion or fire not intentionallyset by the operator; 2) loss of 50 or more barrels
of hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide; 3)release to the atmosphere of more than 5 barrelsa day of highly volatile liquids; 4) death of anyperson; 5) bodily harm resulting in one or moreof the following—a) the loss of consciousness,b) the necessity of carrying a person from thescene, c) the necessity for medical treatment, d)disability that prevents the discharge of normalduties, and 6) estimated damage to the propertyof the operators and/or others exceeding$50,000.
ACCIDENT (highway-rail grade-crossing): Animpact between on-track railroad equipmentand an automobile, bus, truck, motorcycle,bicycle, farm vehicle, or pedestrian or otherhighway user at a designated crossing site. Side-walks, pathways, shoulders, and ditches associ-ated with the crossing are considered to be partof the crossing site.
ACCIDENT (rail): A collision, derailment, fire,explosion, act of God, or other event involvingoperation of railroad on-track equipment(standing or moving) that results in railroaddamage exceeding an established dollar thresh-old.
ACCIDENT (recreational boating): An occur-rence involving a vessel or its equipment thatresults in 1) a death; 2) an injury that requiresmedical treatment beyond first aid; 3) damageto a vessel and other property, totaling morethan $500 or resulting in the complete loss of avessel; or 4) the disappearance of the vesselunder circumstances that indicate death orinjury. Federal regulations (33 CFR 173–4)require the operator of any vessel that is num-bered or used for recreational purposes to sub-mit an accident report.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
174
Glossary
ACCIDENT (transit): An incident involving amoving vehicle, including another vehicle, anobject, or person (except suicides), or a derail-ment/left roadway.
AIR CARRIER: The commercial system of airtransportation comprising large certificated aircarriers, small certificated air carriers, com-muter air carriers, on-demand air taxis, supple-mental air carriers, and air travel clubs.
AIR TAXI: An aircraft operator who conductsoperations for hire or compensation in accor-dance with 14 CFR 135 (for safety purposes) orFAR Part 135 (for economic regulations orreporting purposes) in an aircraft with 30 orfewer passenger seats and a payload capacity of7,500 pounds or less. An air taxi operates on anon-demand basis and does not meet the flightschedule qualifications of a commuter air carrier(see below).
AIRPORT: A landing area regularly used by air-craft for receiving or discharging passengers orcargo.
ALTERNATIVE FUELS: The Energy Policy Actof 1992 defines alternative fuels as methanol,denatured ethanol, and other alcohol; mixturescontaining 85 percent or more (but not less than70 percent as determined by the Secretary ofEnergy by rule to provide for requirementsrelating to cold start, safety, or vehicle func-tions) by volume of methanol, denaturedethanol, and other alcohols with gasoline orother fuels. Includes compressed natural gas,liquid petroleum gas, hydrogen, coal-derivedliquid fuels, fuels other than alcohols derivedfrom biological materials, electricity, or anyother fuel the Secretary of Energy determines byrule is substantially not petroleum and wouldyield substantial energy security and environ-mental benefits.
AMTRAK: Operated by the National RailroadPassenger Corporation, this rail system was cre-ated by the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970
(Public Law 91-518, 84 Stat. 1327) and giventhe responsibility for the operation of intercity,as distinct from suburban, passenger trainsbetween points designated by the Secretary ofTransportation.
ARTERIAL HIGHWAY: A major highway usedprimarily for through traffic.
ASPHALT: A dark brown to black cement-likematerial containing bitumen as the predominantconstituent. The definition includes crudeasphalt and finished products such as cements,fluxes, the asphalt content of emulsions, andpetroleum distillates blended with asphalt tomake cutback asphalt. Asphalt is obtained bypetroleum processing.
AVAILABLE SEAT-MILES (air carrier): Theaircraft-miles flown in each interairport hopmultiplied by the number of seats available onthat hop for revenue passenger service.
AVERAGE HAUL: The average distance, inmiles, one ton is carried. It is computed bydividing ton-miles by tons of freight originated.
AVERAGE PASSENGER TRIP LENGTH(bus/rail): Calculated by dividing revenue pas-senger-miles by the number of revenue passen-gers.
AVIATION GASOLINE (general aviation): Allspecial grades of gasoline used in aviation recip-rocating engines, as specified by American Soci-ety of Testing Materials Specification D910 andMilitary Specification MIL-G5572. Includesrefinery products within the gasoline range mar-keted as or blended to constitute aviation gaso-line.
BARREL (oil): A unit of volume equal to 42U.S. gallons.
BLOOD ALCOHOL CONCENTRATION(highway): A measurement of the percentage ofalcohol in the blood by grams per deciliter.
Appendix A
175
BRITISH THERMAL UNIT (Btu): The quantityof heat needed to raise the temperature of 1pound (approximately 1 pint) of water by 1 °Fat or near 39.2 °F.
BULK CARRIER (water): A ship with special-ized holds for carrying dry or liquid commodi-ties, such as oil, grain, ore, and coal, inunpackaged bulk form. Bulk carriers may bedesigned to carry a single bulk product (crudeoil tanker) or accommodate several bulk prod-uct types (ore/bulk/oil carrier) on the same voy-age or on a subsequent voyage after holds arecleaned.
BUS: Large motor vehicle used to carry morethan 10 passengers, including school buses,intercity buses, and transit buses.
CAFE STANDARDS: See Corporate AverageFuel Economy Standards.
CAR-MILE (rail): The movement of a railroadcar a distance of one mile. An empty or loadedcar-mile refers to a mile run by a freight car withor without a load. In the case of intermodalmovements, the designation of empty or loadedrefers to whether the trailers or containers aremoved with or without a waybill.
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCEAND NECESSITY (air carrier): A certificateissued by the U.S. Department of Transporta-tion to an air carrier under Section 401 of theFederal Aviation Act authorizing the carrier toengage in air transportation.
CERTIFICATED AIR CARRIER: An air carrierholding a Certificate of Public Convenience andNecessity issued by the U.S. Department ofTransportation to conduct scheduled servicesinterstate. These carriers may also conduct non-scheduled or charter operations. Certificated aircarriers operate large aircraft (30 seats or moreor a maximum load of 7,500 pounds or more)in accordance with FAR Part 121. See alsoLarge Certificated Air Carrier.
CERTIFICATED AIRPORTS: Airports thatservice air carrier operations with aircraft seat-ing more than 30 passengers.
CHAINED DOLLARS: A measure used toexpress real prices, defined as prices that areadjusted to remove the effect of changes in thepurchasing power of the dollar. Real prices usu-ally reflect buying power relative to a referenceyear. The “chained-dollar” measure is based onthe average weights of goods and services in suc-cessive pairs of years. It is “chained” becausethe second year in each pair, with its weights,becomes the first year of the next pair. Prior to1996, real prices were expressed in constantdollars, a weighted measure of goods and servic-es in a single year. See also Constant Dollars andCurrent Dollars.
CLASS I RAILROAD: A carrier that has anannual operating revenue of $250 million ormore after applying the railroad revenue defla-tor formula, which is based on the RailroadFreight Price Index developed by the U.S.Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statis-tics. The formula is the current year’s revenuesmultiplied by the 1991 average index or currentyear’s average index.
COASTWISE TRAFFIC (water): Domestic traf-fic receiving a carriage over the ocean or theGulf of Mexico (e.g., between New Orleans andBaltimore, New York and Puerto Rico, SanFrancisco and Hawaii, Alaska and Hawaii).Traffic between Great Lakes ports and seacoastports, when having a carriage over the ocean, isalso considered coastwise.
COLLECTOR (highway): In rural areas, routesthat serve intracounty rather than statewidetravel. In urban areas, streets that provide directaccess to neighborhoods and arterials.
COMBINATION TRUCK: A power unit (trucktractor) and one or more trailing units (a semi-trailer or trailer).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
176
COMMERCIAL BUS: Any bus used to carrypassengers at rates specified in tariffs; chargesmay be computed per passenger (as in regularroute service) or per vehicle (as in charter serv-ice).
COMMERCIAL SERVICE AIRPORT: Airportreceiving scheduled passenger service and hav-ing 2,500 or more enplaned passengers per year.
COMMUTER AIR CARRIER: Different defini-tions are used for safety purposes and for eco-nomic regulations and reporting. For safetyanalysis, commuter carriers are defined as aircarriers operating under 14 CFR 135 that carrypassengers for hire or compensation on at leastfive round trips per week on at least one routebetween two or more points according to pub-lished flight schedules, which specify the times,days of the week, and points of service. OnMarch 20, 1997, the size of the aircraft subjectto 14 CFR 135 was reduced from 30 to fewerthan 10 passenger seats. (Larger aircraft aresubject to the more stringent regulations of 14CFR 121.) Helicopters carrying passengers orcargo for hire, however, are regulated underCFR 135 whatever their size. Although, in prac-tice, most commuter air carriers operate aircraftthat are regulated for safety purposes under 14CFR 135 and most aircraft that are regulatedunder 14 CFR 135 are operated by commuterair carriers, this is not necessarily the case.
For economic regulations and reporting require-ments, commuter air carriers are those carriersthat operate aircraft of 60 or fewer seats or amaximum payload capacity of 18,000 poundsor less. These carriers hold a certificate issuedunder section 298C of the Federal Aviation Actof 1958, as amended.
COMMUTER RAIL (transit): Urban passengertrain service for short-distance travel between acentral city and adjacent suburb. Does notinclude rapid rail transit or light rail service.
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS: Natural gascompressed to a volume and density that ispractical as a portable fuel supply. It is used as afuel for natural gas-powered vehicles.
CONSTANT DOLLARS: Dollar value adjustedfor changes in the average price level by dividinga current dollar amount by a price index. Seealso Chained Dollars and Current Dollars.
CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMYSTANDARDS (CAFE): Originally establishedby Congress for new automobiles and later forlight trucks. This law requires automobile man-ufacturers to produce vehicle fleets with a com-posite sales-weighted fuel economy not lowerthan the CAFE standards in a given year. Forevery vehicle that does not meet the standard, afine is paid for every one-tenth of a mile per gal-lon that vehicle falls below the standard.
CRASH (highway): An event that producesinjury and/or property damage, involves amotor vehicle in transport, and occurs on a traf-ficway or while the vehicle is still in motion afterrunning off the trafficway.
CRUDE OIL: A mixture of hydrocarbons thatexists in the liquid phase in natural under-ground reservoirs and remains liquid at atmos-pheric pressure after passing throughsurface-separating facilities.
CURRENT DOLLARS: Dollar value of a goodor service in terms of prices current at the timethe good or service is sold. See also ChainedDollars and Current Dollars.
DEADWEIGHT TONNAGE (water): The car-rying capacity of a vessel in long tons (2,240pounds). It is the difference between the numberof tons of water a vessel displaces “light” andthe number of tons it displaces when submergedto the “load line.”
Appendix A
177
DEMAND RESPONSIVE VEHICLE (transit):A nonfixed-route, nonfixed-schedule vehiclethat operates in response to calls from passen-gers or their agents to the transit operator ordispatcher.
DIESEL FUEL: A complex mixture of hydrocar-bons with a boiling range between approxi-mately 350 and 650 °F. Diesel fuel is composedprimarily of paraffins and naphthenic com-pounds that auto-ignite from the heat of com-pression in a diesel engine. Diesel is usedprimarily by heavy-duty road vehicles, construc-tion equipment, locomotives, and by marineand stationary engines.
DISTILLATE FUEL OIL: A general classifica-tion for one of the petroleum fractions producedin conventional distillation operations. Includedare No. 1, No. 2, and No. 4 fuel oils and No. 1,No. 2, and No. 4 diesel fuels. Distillate fuel oil isused primarily for space heating, on- and off-highway diesel engine fuel (including railroadengine fuel and fuel for agricultural machinery),and electric power generation.
DOMESTIC FREIGHT (water): All waterbornecommercial movement between points in theUnited States, Puerto Rico, and the VirginIslands, excluding traffic with the PanamaCanal Zone. Cargo moved for the military incommercial vessels is reported as ordinary com-mercial cargo; military cargo moved in militaryvessels is omitted.
DOMESTIC OPERATIONS (air carrier): All aircarrier operations having destinations within the50 United States, the District of Columbia, theCommonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S.Virgin Islands.
DOMESTIC PASSENGER (water): Any persontraveling on a public conveyance by waterbetween points in the United States, PuertoRico, and the Virgin Islands.
DRY CARGO BARGES (water): Large flat-bottomed, nonself-propelled vessels used totransport dry-bulk materials such as coal andore.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY: The ratio of energyinputs to outputs from a process, for example,miles traveled per gallon of fuel (mpg).
ENPLANED PASSENGERS (air carrier): SeeRevenue Passenger Enplanements.
ETHANOL: A clear, colorless, flammable oxy-genated hydrocarbon with a boiling point of78.5 °C in the anhydrous state. It is used in theUnited States as a gasoline octane enhancer andoxygenate (10 percent concentration). Ethanolcan be used in high concentrations in vehiclesoptimized for its use. Otherwise known as ethylalcohol, alcohol, or grain-spirit.
FATAL CRASH (highway): A police-reportedcrash involving a motor vehicle in transport ona trafficway in which at least 1 person dies with-in 30 days of the crash as a result of that crash.
FATAL INJURY (air): Any injury that results indeath within 30 days of the accident.
FATALITY: For purposes of statistical reportingon transportation safety, a fatality is considereda death due to injuries in a transportation crash,accident, or incident that occurs within 30 daysof that occurrence.
FATALITY (rail): 1) Death of any person froman injury within 30 days of the accident or inci-dent (may include nontrain accidents or inci-dents); or 2) death of a railroad employee froman occupational illness within 365 days after theoccupational illness was diagnosed by a physi-cian.
FATALITY (recreational boating): All deaths(other than deaths by natural causes) and miss-
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
178
ing persons resulting from an occurrence thatinvolves a vessel or its equipment.
FATALITY (transit): A transit-caused deathconfirmed within 30 days of a transit incident.Incidents include collisions, derailments, per-sonal casualties, and fires associated with transitagency revenue vehicles, transit facilities ontransit property, service vehicles, maintenanceareas, and rights-of-way.
FATALITY (water): All deaths and missing per-sons resulting from a vessel casualty.
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COM-MISSION (FERC): The federal agency withjurisdiction over, among other things, gas pric-ing, oil pipeline rates, and gas pipeline certifica-tion.
FERRYBOAT (transit): Vessels that carry pas-sengers and/or vehicles over a body of water.Generally steam or diesel-powered, ferryboatsmay also be hovercraft, hydrofoil, and otherhigh-speed vessels. The vessel is limited in its useto the carriage of deck passengers or vehicles orboth, operates on a short run on a frequentschedule between two points over the mostdirect water routes other than in ocean or coast-wise service, and is offered as a public service ofa type normally attributed to a bridge or tunnel.
FOSSIL FUELS: Any naturally occurring organ-ic fuel formed in the Earth’s crust, such as petro-leum, coal, and natural gas.
FREIGHT REVENUE (rail): Revenue from thetransportation of freight and from the exerciseof transit, stopoff, diversion, and reconsignmentprivileges as provided for in tariffs.
FREIGHTERS (water): General cargo carriers,full containerships, partial containerships, roll-on/rolloff ships, and barge carriers.
GAS TRANSMISSION PIPELINES: Pipelinesinstalled for the purpose of transmitting gasfrom a source or sources of supply to one ormore distribution centers, or to one or morelarge volume customers; or a pipeline installedto interconnect sources of supply. Typically,transmission lines differ from gas mains in thatthey operate at higher pressures and the distancebetween connections is greater.
GASOHOL: A blend of finished motor gasoline(leaded or unleaded) and alcohol (generallyethanol but sometimes methanol) limited to 10percent by volume of alcohol.
GASOLINE: A complex mixture of relativelyvolatile hydrocarbons, with or without smallquantities of additives that have been blended toproduce a fuel suitable for use in spark ignitionengines. Motor gasoline includes both leaded orunleaded grades of finished motor gasoline,blending components, and gasohol. Leadedgasoline is no longer used in highway motorvehicles in the United States.
GENERAL AVIATION: 1) All civil aviationoperations other than scheduled air services andnonscheduled air transport operations for taxis,commuter air carriers, and air travel clubs thatdo not hold Certificates of Public Convenienceand Necessity. 2) All civil aviation activity exceptthat of air carriers certificated in accordancewith Federal Aviation Regulations, Parts 121,123, 127, and 135. The types of aircraft used ingeneral aviation range from corporate multi-engine jet aircraft piloted by professional crewsto amateur-built single-engine piston-drivenacrobatic planes to balloons and dirigibles.
GENERAL ESTIMATES SYSTEM (highway):A data-collection system that uses a nationallyrepresentative probability sample selected fromall police-reported highway crashes. It beganoperation in 1988.
Appendix A
179
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (U.S.): Thetotal output of goods and services produced bylabor and property located in the United States,valued at market prices. As long as the laborand property are located in the United States,the suppliers (workers and owners) may beeither U.S. residents or residents of foreigncountries.
GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT RATING (truck):The maximum rated capacity of a vehicle,including the weight of the base vehicle, alladded equipment, driver and passengers, and allcargo.
HAZARDOUS MATERIAL: Any toxic sub-stance or explosive, corrosive, combustible, poi-sonous, or radioactive material that poses a riskto the public’s health, safety, or property, partic-ularly when transported in commerce.
HEAVY RAIL (transit): An electric railway withthe capacity to transport a heavy volume of pas-senger traffic and characterized by exclusiverights-of-way, multicar trains, high speed, rapidacceleration, sophisticated signaling, and high-platform loading. Also known as “subway,”“elevated (railway),” or “metropolitan railway(metro).”
HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSING (rail): Alocation where one or more railroad tracks arecrossed by a public highway, road, street, or aprivate roadway at grade, including sidewalksand pathways at or associated with the crossing.
HIGHWAY TRUST FUND: A grant-in-aid typefund administered by the U.S. Department ofTransportation, Federal Highway Administra-tion. Most funds for highway improvements areapportioned to states according to formulas thatgive weight to population, area, and mileage.
HIGHWAY-USER TAX: A charge levied on per-sons or organizations based on their use of publicroads. Funds collected are usually applied toward
highway construction, reconstruction, and main-tenance.
INCIDENT (hazardous materials): Any unin-tentional release of hazardous material while intransit or storage.
INCIDENT (train): Any event involving themovement of a train or railcars on track equip-ment that results in a death, a reportable injury,or illness, but in which railroad property dam-age does not exceed the reporting threshold.
INCIDENT (transit): Collisions, derailments,personal casualties, fires, and property damagein excess of $1,000 associated with transitagency revenue vehicles; all other facilities onthe transit property; and service vehicles, main-tenance areas, and rights-of-way.
INJURY (air): See Serious Injury (air carrier/general aviation).
INJURY (gas): Described in U.S. Department ofTransportation Forms 7100.1 or 7100.2 as aninjury requiring “in-patient hospitalization”(admission and confinement in a hospitalbeyond treatment administered in an emergencyroom or out-patient clinic in which confinementdoes not occur).
INJURY (hazardous liquid pipeline): An injuryresulting from a hazardous liquid pipeline acci-dent that results in one or more of the following:1) loss of consciousness, 2) a need to be carriedfrom the scene, 3) a need for medical treatment,and/or 4) a disability that prevents the dischargeof normal duties or the pursuit of normal dutiesbeyond the day of the accident.
INJURY (highway): Police-reported highwayinjuries are classified as follows:
Incapacitating Injury: Any injury, other than afatal injury, that prevents the injured personfrom walking, driving, or normally continuing
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
180
the activities the person was capable of perform-ing before the injury occurred. Includes severelacerations, broken or distorted limbs, skull orchest injuries, abdominal injuries, unconscious-ness at or when taken from the accident scene,and inability to leave the accident scene withoutassistance. Exclusions include momentary uncon-sciousness.
Nonincapacitating Evident Injury: Any injury,other than a fatal injury or an incapacitatinginjury, evident to observers at the scene of theaccident. Includes lumps on head, abrasions,bruises, minor lacerations, and others. Excludeslimping.
Possible Injury: Any injury reported or claimedthat is not evident. Includes, among others,momentary unconsciousness, claim of injuriesnot obvious, limping, complaint of pain, nau-sea, and hysteria.
INJURY (highway-rail grade crossing): 1) Aninjury to one or more persons other than rail-road employees that requires medical treatment;2) an injury to one or more employees thatrequires medical treatment or that results inrestriction of work or motion for one or moredays, or one or more lost work days, transfer toanother job, termination of employment, or lossof consciousness; 3) any occupational illnessaffecting one or more railroad employees that isdiagnosed by a physician.
INJURY (rail): 1) Injury to any person otherthan a railroad employee that requires medicaltreatment, or 2) injury to a railroad employeethat requires medical treatment or results inrestriction of work or motion for one or moreworkdays, one or more lost workdays, termina-tion of employment, transfer to another job,loss of consciousness, or any occupational ill-ness of a railroad employee diagnosed by aphysician.
INJURY (recreational boating): Injury requiringmedical treatment beyond first aid as a result ofan occurrence that involves a vessel or its equip-ment.
INJURY (transit): Any physical damage or harmto a person requiring medical treatment or anyphysical damage or harm to a person reportedat the time and place of occurrence. For employ-ees, an injury includes incidents resulting in timelost from duty or any definition consistent witha transit agency’s current employee injuryreporting practice.
INJURY (water): All personal injuries resultingfrom a vessel casualty that require medical treat-ment beyond first aid.
INLAND AND COASTAL CHANNELS:Includes the Atlantic Coast Waterways, theAtlantic Intracoastal Waterway, the New YorkState Barge Canal System, the Gulf Coast Water-ways, the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, the Mis-sissippi River System (including the IllinoisWaterway), the Pacific Coast Waterways, theGreat Lakes, and all other channels (waterways)of the United States, exclusive of Alaska, that areusable for commercial navigation.
INTERCITY CLASS I BUS: As defined by theBureau of Transportation Statistics, an inter-state motor carrier of passengers with an aver-age annual gross revenue of at least $1 million.
INTERCITY TRUCK: A truck that carriesfreight beyond local areas and commercialzones.
INTERNAL TRAFFIC (water): Vessel move-ments (origin and destination) that take placesolely on inland waterways located within theboundaries of the contiguous 48 states or withinthe state of Alaska. Internal traffic also appliesto carriage on both inland waterways and the
Appendix A
181
water on the Great Lakes; carriage between off-shore areas and inland waterways; and carriageoccurring within the Delaware Bay, ChesapeakeBay, Puget Sound, and the San Francisco Bay,which are considered internal bodies of waterrather than arms of the ocean.
INTERSTATE HIGHWAY: Limited access,divided highway of at least four lanes designat-ed by the Federal Highway Administration aspart of the Interstate System.
JET FUEL: Includes kerosene-type jet fuel (usedprimarily for commercial turbojet and turbo-prop aircraft engines) and naphtha-type jet fuel(used primarily for military turbojet and turbo-prop aircraft engines).
LAKEWISE OR GREAT LAKES TRAFFIC:Waterborne traffic between U.S. ports on theGreat Lakes system. The Great Lakes system istreated as a separate waterways system ratherthan as a part of the inland system.
LARGE CERTIFICATED AIR CARRIERS: Anair carrier holding a certificate issued under sec-tion 401 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, asamended, that: 1) operates aircraft designed tohave a maximum passenger capacity of morethan 60 seats or a maximum payload capacityof more than 18,000 pounds, or 2) conductsoperations where one or both terminals of aflight stage are outside the 50 states of the Unit-ed States, the District of Columbia, the Com-monwealth of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. VirginIslands. Large certificated air carriers aregrouped by annual operating revenues: 1)majors (more than $1 billion in annual operat-ing revenues), 2) nationals (between $100 mil-lion and $1 billion in annual operatingrevenues), 3) large regionals (between $20 mil-lion and $99,999,999 in annual operating rev-enues), and 4) medium regionals (less than $20million in annual operating revenues).
LARGE REGIONALS (air): Air carrier groupswith annual operating revenues between $20million and $99,999,999.
LARGE TRUCK: Trucks over 10,000 poundsgross vehicle weight rating, including single-unittrucks and truck tractors.
LEASE CONDENSATE: A mixture consistingprimarily of pentanes and heavier hydrocar-bons, which are recovered as a liquid from natu-ral gas in lease or field separation facilities. Thiscategory excludes natural gas liquids, such asbutane and propane, which are recovered atnatural gas processing plants or facilities.
LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE: A vehicle categorythat combines light automobiles and trucks.
LIGHT RAIL: A streetcar-type vehicle operatedon city streets, semi-exclusive rights-of-way, orexclusive rights-of-way. Service may be providedby step-entry vehicles or by level boarding.
LIGHT TRUCK: Trucks of 10,000 poundsgross vehicle weight rating or less, includingpickups, vans, truck-based station wagons, andsport utility vehicles.
LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG): Naturalgas, primarily methane, that has been liquefiedby reducing its temperature to –260 °F at atmos-pheric pressure.
LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (LPG): Pro-pane, propylene, normal butane, butylene,isobutane, and isobutylene produced at refiner-ies or natural gas processing plants, includingplants that fractionate new natural gas plant liq-uids.
LOCOMOTIVE: Railroad vehicle equippedwith flanged wheels for use on railroad tracks,powered directly by electricity, steam, or fossil
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
182
fuel, and used to move other railroad rollingequipment.
LOCOMOTIVE-MILE: The movement of alocomotive unit, under its own power, the dis-tance of 1 mile.
MAINS (gas): A network of pipelines that servesas a common source of supply for more thanone gas service line.
MAJORS (air): Air carrier groups with annualoperating revenues exceeding $1 billion.
MEDIUM REGIONALS (air): Air carriergroups with annual operating revenues less than$20 million.
MERCHANDISE TRADE EXPORTS: Mer-chandise transported out of the United States toforeign countries whether such merchandise isexported from within the U.S. Customs Serviceterritory, from a U.S. Customs bonded ware-house, or from a U.S. Foreign Trade Zone. (For-eign Trade Zones are areas, operated as publicutilities, under the control of U.S. Customs withfacilities for handling, storing, manipulating,manufacturing, and exhibiting goods.)
MERCHANDISE TRADE IMPORTS: Com-modities of foreign origin entering the UnitedStates, as well as goods of domestic originreturned to the United States with no change incondition or after having been processed and/orassembled in other countries. Puerto Rico is aCustoms district within the U.S. Customs terri-tory, and its trade with foreign countries isincluded in U.S. import statistics. U.S. importstatistics also include merchandise tradebetween the U. S. Virgin Islands and foreigncountries even though the Islands are not offi-cially a part of the U.S. Customs territory.
METHANOL: A light, volatile alcohol pro-duced commercially by the catalyzed reaction ofhydrogen and carbon monoxide. Methanol is
blended with gasoline to improve its operationalefficiency.
METHYL-TERTIARY-BUTYL-ETHER(MTBE): A colorless, flammable, liquid oxy-genated hydrocarbon that contains 18.15 per-cent oxygen. It is a fuel oxygenate produced byreacting methanol with isobutylene.
MINOR ARTERIALS (highway): Roads linkingcities and larger towns in rural areas. In urbanareas, roads that link but do not penetrateneighborhoods within a community.
MOTORBUS (transit): A rubber-tired, self-pro-pelled, manually steered bus with a fuel supplyonboard the vehicle. Motorbus types includeintercity, school, and transit.
MOTORCYCLE: A two- or three-wheeledmotor vehicle designed to transport one or twopeople, including motor scooters, minibikes,and mopeds.
NATIONALS (air): Air carrier groups withannual operating revenues between $100 mil-lion and $1 billion.
NATURAL GAS: A naturally occurring mixtureof hydrocarbon and nonhydrocarbon gasesfound in porous geologic formations beneath theEarth’s surface, often in association with petro-leum. The principal constituent is methane.
NATURAL GAS PLANT LIQUIDS: Liquidsrecovered from natural gas in processing plantsor field facilities, or extracted by fractionators.They include ethane, propane, normal butane,isobutane, pentanes plus, and other products,such as finished motor gasoline, finished avia-tion gasoline, special naphthas, kerosene, anddistillate fuel oil produced at natural gas pro-cessing plants.
NEAR MIDAIR COLLISION (air): An incidentin which the possibility of a collision occurred
Appendix A
183
as a result of aircraft flying with less than 500feet of separation, or a report received from apilot or flight crew member stating that a colli-sion hazard existed between two or more air-craft.
NONOCCUPANT (Automobile): Any personwho is not an occupant of a motor vehicle intransport (e.g., bystanders, pedestrians, pedalcy-clists, or an occupant of a parked motor vehicle).
NONSCHEDULED SERVICE (air): Revenueflights not operated as regular scheduled service,such as charter flights, and all nonrevenue flightsincident to such flights.
NONSELF-PROPELLED VESSEL (water): Avessel without the means for self-propulsion.Includes dry cargo barges and tanker barges.
NONTRAIN INCIDENT: An event that resultsin a reportable casualty, but does not involve themovement of ontrack equipment and does notcause reportable damage above the thresholdestablished for train accidents.
NONTRESPASSERS (rail): A person lawfully onany part of railroad property used in railroadoperations or a person adjacent to railroadpremises when injured as the result of railroadoperations.
NONVESSEL-CASUALTY-RELATED DEATH(water): A death that occurs onboard a commer-cial vessel but not as a result of a vessel casualty,such as a collision, fire, or explosion.
OCCUPANT (highway): Any person in or on amotor vehicle in transport. Includes the driver,passengers, and persons riding on the exterior ofa motor vehicle (e.g., a skateboard rider holdingonto a moving vehicle). Excludes occupants ofparked cars unless they are double parked ormotionless on the roadway.
OCCUPATIONAL FATALITY: Death resultingfrom a job-related injury.
OPERATING EXPENSES (air): Expensesincurred in the performance of air transporta-tion, based on overall operating revenues andexpenses. Does not include nonoperating incomeand expenses, nonrecurring items, or incometaxes.
OPERATING EXPENSES (rail): Expenses offurnishing transportation services, includingmaintenance and depreciation of the plant usedin the service.
OPERATING EXPENSES (transit): The total ofall expenses associated with operation of an indi-vidual mode by a given operator. Includes distri-butions of “joint expenses” to individual modesand excludes “reconciling items,” such as inter-est expenses and depreciation. Should not beconfused with “vehicle operating expenses.”
OPERATING EXPENSES (truck): Includesexpenditures for equipment maintenance, super-vision, wages, fuel, equipment rental, terminaloperations, insurance, safety, and administrativeand general functions.
OPERATING REVENUES (air): Revenues fromthe performance of air transportation and relat-ed incidental services. Includes l) transportationrevenues from the carriage of all classes of trafficin scheduled and nonscheduled services, and 2)nontransportation revenues consisting of federalsubsidies (where applicable) and services relatedto air transportation.
OTHER FREEWAYS AND EXPRESSWAYS(highway): All urban principal arterials with lim-ited access but not part of the Interstate system.
OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS (highway):Major streets or highways, many of multi-laneor freeway design, serving high-volume trafficcorridor movements that connect major genera-tors of travel.
OTHER RAIL REVENUE: Includes revenuesfrom miscellaneous operations (i.e., dining- and
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
184
bar-car services), income from the lease of roadand equipment, miscellaneous rental income,income from nonoperating property, profit fromseparately operated properties, dividend income,interest income, income from sinking and otherreserve funds, release or premium on fundeddebt, contributions from other companies, andother miscellaneous income.
OTHER REVENUE VEHICLES (transit): Otherrevenue-generating modes of transit service,such as cable cars, personal rapid transit sys-tems, monorail vehicles, inclined and railwaycars, not covered otherwise.
OTHER 2-AXLE 4-TIRE VEHICLES (truck):Includes vans, pickup trucks, and sport utilityvehicles.
OXYGENATES: Any substance that whenadded to motor gasoline increases the amount ofoxygen in that gasoline blend. Includes oxygen-bearing compounds such as ethanol, methanol,and methyl-tertiary-butyl-ether. Oxygenated fueltends to give a more complete combustion ofcarbon into carbon dioxide (rather than monox-ide), thereby reducing air pollution from exhaustemissions.
PASSENGER CAR: A motor vehicle designedprimarily for carrying passengers on ordinaryroads, includes convertibles, sedans, and sta-tions wagons.
PASSENGER-MILE: 1) Air: One passenger trans-ported 1 mile; passenger-miles for 1 interairportflight are calculated by multiplying aircraft-miles flown by the number of passengers carriedon the flight. The total passenger-miles for allflights is the sum of passenger-miles for allinterairport flights. 2) Auto: One passenger trav-eling 1 mile; e.g., 1 car transporting 2 passengers4 miles results in 8 passenger-miles. 3) Transit:The total number of miles traveled by transitpassengers; e.g., 1 bus transporting 5 passengers3 miles results in 15 passenger-miles.
PASSENGER REVENUE: 1) Rail: Revenue fromthe sale of tickets. 2) Air: Revenues from thetransport of passengers by air. 3) Transit: Fares,transfer, zone, and park-and-ride parkingcharges paid by transit passengers. Prior to1984, fare revenues collected by contractorsoperating transit services were not included.
PASSENGER VESSELS (water): A vesseldesigned for the commercial transport of passen-gers.
PEDALCYCLIST: A person on a vehicle that ispowered solely by pedals.
PEDESTRIAN: Any person not in or on a motorvehicle or other vehicle. Excludes people inbuildings or sitting at a sidewalk cafe. TheNational Highway Traffic Safety Administrationalso uses an “other pedestrian” category to referto pedestrians using conveyances and people inbuildings. Examples of pedestrian conveyancesinclude skateboards, nonmotorized wheelchairs,rollerskates, sleds, and transport devices used asequipment.
PERSON-MILES: An estimate of the aggregatedistances traveled by all persons on a given tripbased on the estimated transportation-network-miles traveled on that trip.
PERSON TRIP: A trip taken by an individual.For example, if three persons from the samehousehold travel together, the trip is counted asone household trip and three person trips.
PERSONAL CASUALTY (transit): 1) An inci-dent in which a person is hurt while getting onor off a transit vehicle (e.g., falls or door inci-dents), but not as a result of a collision, derail-ment/left roadway, or fire. 2) An incident inwhich a person is hurt while using a lift to get onor off a transit vehicle, but not as a result of acollision, derailment/left roadway, or fire. 3) Anincident in which a person is injured on a transitvehicle, but not as a result of a collision, derail-
Appendix A
185
ment/left roadway, or fire. 4) An incident inwhich a person is hurt while using a transit facil-ity. This includes anyone on transit property(e.g., patrons, transit employees, trespassers),but does not include incidents resulting from ill-ness or criminal activity.
PETROLEUM (oil): A generic term applied tooil and oil products in all forms, such as crudeoil, lease condensate, unfinished oils, petroleumproducts, natural gas plant liquids, and nonhy-drocarbon compounds blended into finishedpetroleum products.
PROPERTY DAMAGE (transit): The dollaramount required to repair or replace transitproperty (including stations, right-of-way, busstops, and maintenance facilities) damaged dur-ing an incident.
PUBLIC ROAD: Any road under the jurisdictionof and maintained by a public authority (federal,state, county, town or township, local govern-ment, or instrumentality thereof) and open topublic travel.
RAPID RAIL TRANSIT: Transit service usingrailcars driven by electricity usually drawn froma third rail, configured for passenger traffic, andusually operated on exclusive rights-of-way. Itgenerally uses longer trains and has longer sta-tion spacing than light rail.
REFORMULATED GASOLINE: Gasolinewhose composition has been changed to meetperformance specifications regarding ozone-forming tendencies and release of toxic sub-stances into the air from both evaporation andtailpipe emissions. Reformulated gasolineincludes oxygenates and, compared with gaso-line sold in 1990, has a lower content of olefins,aromatics, volatile components, and heavyhydrocarbons.
RESIDUAL FUEL OIL: The heavier oils thatremain after the distillate fuel oils and lighterhydrocarbons are distilled away in refinery oper-
ations and that conform to American Society forTesting and Materials Specifications D396 and976. Includes, among others, Navy Special oilused in steam-powered vessels in governmentservice and No. 6 oil used to power ships.Imports of residual fuel oil include importedcrude oil burned as fuel.
REVENUE: Remuneration received by carriersfor transportation activities.
REVENUE PASSENGER: 1) Air: Person receiv-ing air transportation from an air carrier forwhich remuneration is received by the carrier.Air carrier employees or others, except ministersof religion, elderly individuals, and handicappedindividuals, receiving reduced rate charges (lessthan the applicable tariff) are considered non-revenue passengers. Infants, for whom a tokenfare is charged, are not counted as passengers. 2)Transit: Single-vehicle transit rides by initial-board (first-ride) transit passengers only.Excludes all transfer rides and all nonrevenuerides. 3) Rail: Number of one-way trips made bypersons holding tickets.
REVENUE PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS(air): The total number of passengers boardingaircraft. Includes both originating and connect-ing passengers.
REVENUE PASSENGER LOAD FACTOR (air):Revenue passenger-miles as a percentage ofavailable seat-miles in revenue passenger ser-vices. The term is used to represent the propor-tion of aircraft seating capacity that is actuallysold and utilized.
REVENUE PASSENGER-MILE: One revenuepassenger transported one mile.
REVENUE PASSENGER TON-MILE (air): Oneton of revenue passenger weight (including allbaggage) transported one mile. The passengerweight standard for both domestic and interna-tional operations is 200 pounds.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
186
REVENUE TON-MILE: One short ton offreight transported one mile.
REVENUE VEHICLE-MILES (transit): Onevehicle (bus, trolley bus, or streetcar) travelingone mile, while revenue passengers are on board,generates one revenue vehicle-mile. Revenuevehicle-miles reported represent the totalmileage traveled by vehicles in scheduled orunscheduled revenue-producing services.
ROAD OIL: Any heavy petroleum oil, includingresidual asphaltic oil, that is used as a dust pallia-tive and surface treatment on roads and high-ways. It is generally produced in six grades fromzero, the most liquid, to five, the most viscous.
ROLL ON/ROLL OFF VESSEL (water): Shipsthat are designed to carry wheeled containers orother wheeled cargo and use the roll on/roll offmethod for loading and unloading.
RURAL HIGHWAY: Any highway, road, orstreet that is not an urban highway.
RURAL MILEAGE (highway): Roads outsidecity, municipal district, or urban boundaries.
SCHEDULED SERVICE (air): Transport serviceoperated on published flight schedules.
SCHOOL BUS: A passenger motor vehicle thatis designed or used to carry more than 10 pas-sengers, in addition to the driver, and, as deter-mined by the Secretary of Transportation, islikely to be significantly used for the purpose oftransporting pre-primary, primary, or secondaryschool students between home and school.
SCHOOL BUS-RELATED CRASH: Any crashin which a vehicle, regardless of body designand used as a school bus, is directly or indirectlyinvolved, such as a crash involving school chil-dren alighting from a vehicle.
SCOW (water): Any flat-bottomed, nonself-pro-pelled, rectangular vessel with sloping ends.
Large scows are used to transport sand, gravel,or refuse.
SELF-PROPELLED VESSEL: A vessel that hasits own means of propulsion. Includes tankers,containerships, dry bulk cargo ships, and gener-al cargo vessels.
SERIOUS INJURY (air carrier/general aviation):An injury that requires hospitalization for morethan 48 hours, commencing within 7 days fromthe date when the injury was received; results ina bone fracture (except simple fractures of fin-gers, toes, or nose); involves lacerations thatcause severe hemorrhages, or nerve, muscle, ortendon damage; involves injury to any internalorgan; or involves second- or third-degree burnsor any burns affecting more than 5 percent ofthe body surface.
SMALL CERTIFICATED AIR CARRIER: Anair carrier holding a certificate issued under sec-tion 401 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, asamended, that operates aircraft designed to havea maximum seating capacity of 60 seats or feweror a maximum payload of 18,000 pounds orless.
STATE AND LOCAL HIGHWAY EXPENDI-TURES: Disbursements for capital outlays,maintenance and traffic surfaces, administrationand research, highway law enforcement andsafety, and interest on debt.
STREETCARS: Relatively lightweight passengerrailcars operating singly or in short trains, or onfixed rails in rights-of-way that are not alwaysseparated from other traffic. Streetcars do notnecessarily have the right-of-way at grade cross-ings with other traffic.
SUPPLEMENTAL AIR CARRIER: An air carri-er authorized to perform passenger and cargocharter services.
TANKER: An oceangoing ship designed to haulliquid bulk cargo in world trade.
Appendix A
187
TON-MILE (truck): The movement of one tonof cargo the distance of one mile. Ton-miles arecalculated by multiplying the weight in tons ofeach shipment transported by the miles hauled.
TON-MILE (water): The movement of one tonof cargo the distance of one statute mile. Domes-tic ton-miles are calculated by multiplying tonsmoved by the number of statute miles moved onthe water (e.g., 50 short tons moving 200 mileson a waterway would yield 10,000 ton-miles forthat waterway). Ton-miles are not computed forports. For coastwise traffic, the shortest routethat safe navigation permits between the port oforigin and destination is used to calculate ton-miles.
TRAFFICWAY (highway): Any right-of-wayopen to the public as a matter of right or customfor moving persons or property from one placeto another, including the entire width betweenproperty lines or other boundaries.
TRAIN LINE MILEAGE: The aggregate lengthof all line-haul railroads. It does not include themileage of yard tracks or sidings, nor does itreflect the fact that a mile of railroad mayinclude two or more parallel tracks. Jointly-usedtrack is counted only once.
TRAIN-MILE: The movement of a train, whichcan consist of many cars, the distance of onemile. A train-mile differs from a vehicle-mile,which is the movement of one car (vehicle) thedistance of one mile. A 10-car (vehicle) traintraveling 1 mile is measured as 1 train-mile and10 vehicle-miles. Caution should be used whencomparing train-miles to vehicle-miles.
TRANSIT VEHICLE: Includes light, heavy, andcommuter rail; motorbus; trolley bus; van pools;automated guideway; and demand responsivevehicles.
TRANSSHIPMENTS: Shipments that enter orexit the United States by way of a U.S. Customsport on the northern or southern border, but
whose origin or destination is a country otherthan Canada or Mexico.
TRESPASSER (rail): Any person whose presenceon railroad property used in railroad operationsis prohibited, forbidden, or unlawful.
TROLLEY BUS: Rubber-tired electric transitvehicle, manually steered and propelled by amotor drawing current, normally through over-head wires, from a central power source.
TRUST FUNDS: Accounts that are designatedby law to carry out specific purposes and pro-grams. Trust Funds are usually financed withearmarked tax collections.
TUG BOAT: A powered vessel designed for tow-ing or pushing ships, dumb barges, pushed-towed barges, and rafts, but not for the carriageof goods.
U.S.-FLAG CARRIER OR AMERICAN FLAGCARRIER (air): One of a class of air carriersholding a Certificate of Public Convenience andNecessity, issued by the U.S. Department ofTransportation and approved by the President,authorizing scheduled operations over specifiedroutes between the United States (and/or its ter-ritories) and one or more foreign countries.
UNLEADED GASOLINE: See Gasoline.
UNLINKED PASSENGER TRIPS (transit): Thenumber of passengers boarding public trans-portation vehicles. A passenger is counted eachtime he/she boards a vehicle even if the boardingis part of the same journey from origin to desti-nation.
URBAN HIGHWAY: Any road or street withinthe boundaries of an urban area. An urban areais an area including and adjacent to a municipal-ity or urban place with a population of 5,000 ormore. The boundaries of urban areas are fixedby state highway departments, subject to theapproval of the Federal Highway Administra-
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
188
tion, for purposes of the Federal-Aid HighwayProgram.
VANPOOL (transit): Public-sponsored com-muter service operating under prearrangedschedules for previously formed groups of ridersin 8- to 18-seat vehicles. Drivers are also com-muters who receive little or no compensationbesides the free ride.
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE (transit): All activ-ities associated with revenue and nonrevenue(service) vehicle maintenance, including admin-istration, inspection and maintenance, and serv-icing (e.g., cleaning and fueling) vehicles. Inaddition, it includes repairs due to vandalism orto revenue vehicle accidents.
VEHICLE-MILES (highway): Miles of travel byall types of motor vehicles as determined by thestates on the basis of actual traffic counts andestablished estimating procedures.
VEHICLE-MILES (transit): The total number ofmiles traveled by transit vehicles. Commuterrail, heavy rail, and light rail report individualcar-miles, rather than train-miles for vehicle-miles.
VEHICLE OPERATIONS (transit): All activitiesassociated with transportation administration,
including the control of revenue vehicle move-ments, scheduling, ticketing and fare collection,system security, and revenue vehicle operation.
VESSEL CASUALTY (water): An occurrenceinvolving commercial vessels that results in 1)actual physical damage to property in excess of$25,000; 2) material damage affecting theseaworthiness or efficiency of a vessel; 3)stranding or grounding; 4) loss of life; or 5)injury causing any person to remain incapaci-tated for a period in excess of 72 hours, exceptinjury to harbor workers not resulting in deathand not resulting from vessel casualty or vesselequipment casualty.
VESSEL-CASUALTY-RELATED DEATH (water):Fatality that occurs as a result of an incident thatinvolves a vessel or its equipment, such as a col-lision, fire, or explosion. Includes drowningdeaths.
WATERBORNE TRANSPORTATION: Trans-port of freight and/or people by commercial ves-sels under U.S. Coast Guard jurisdiction.
WAYBILL: A document that lists goods andshipping instructions relative to a shipment.
Appendix A
189
Appendix B: Tables
Appendix B
193
TAB
LE
1
Lab
or
Pro
du
ctiv
ity
of
Maj
or
Sec
tors
: 19
90–2
000
Outp
ut p
er h
our
Inde
x: 1
990
=100
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Tran
spor
tatio
n10
0.0
103.
510
8.8
112.
111
5.2
115.
311
9.1
121.
111
7.4
120.
511
9.7
Man
ufac
turin
g10
0.0
102.
310
7.6
109.
711
3.0
117.
312
1.4
126.
613
2.7
139.
614
5.2
Busi
ness
100.
010
1.2
105.
010
5.6
107.
010
7.8
110.
711
3.2
116.
211
9.2
122.
8
NO
TE
S:
Labo
r pr
oduc
tivity
for
tran
spor
tatio
n is
cal
cula
ted
by d
ivid
ing
an in
dex
of o
utpu
t by
an in
dex
of e
mpl
oyee
hou
rs.
Tran
spor
tatio
n ou
tput
inde
x is
a w
eigh
ted
aver
age
of o
utpu
t ind
exes
of r
ailro
ad, t
ruck
ing,
air,
bus
and
pip
elin
e tr
ansp
orta
tion.
The
sh
ares
of e
ach
mod
e in
tota
l tra
nspo
rtat
ion
valu
e ad
ded
(GD
P)
are
used
as
annu
al w
eigh
ting
fact
ors.
Inde
x of
tran
spor
tatio
n em
ploy
ee h
ours
is c
ompu
ted
by w
eigh
ting
the
empl
oyee
hou
r in
dexe
s of
eac
h m
ode
by it
s sh
are
in to
tal t
rans
port
atio
n em
ploy
ees.
T
he m
odal
out
put a
nd e
mpl
oyee
hou
r in
dexe
s w
ere
initi
ally
est
imat
ed b
y th
e B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics
usin
g 19
87 a
s th
e ba
se
year
. Raw
dat
a ar
e no
t ava
ilabl
e fr
om th
e so
urce
s.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
late
d ba
sed
on d
ata
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or, B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics,
Offi
ce o
f Pro
duct
ivity
and
Tec
hnol
ogy,
"In
dust
ry P
rodu
ctiv
ity D
atab
ase,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ls.g
ov, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03; a
nd U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Gro
ss
Dom
estic
Pro
duct
by
Indu
stry
," a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov, a
s of
Mar
ch 2
003.
Man
ufa
ctu
rin
g a
nd
bu
sin
ess—
U.S
. D
epar
tmen
t of L
abor
, Bur
eau
of L
abor
Sta
tistic
s, O
ffice
of P
rodu
ctiv
ity a
nd T
echn
olog
y, "
Indu
stry
Pro
duct
ivity
Dat
abas
e,"
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bls
.gov
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
194
TAB
LE
2
Lab
or
Pro
du
ctiv
ity
of
the
Fo
r-H
ire
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
Ind
ust
ries
: 19
90–2
000
Inde
x: 1
990
= 10
0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Railr
oad
100.
010
7.8
117.
812
2.7
126.
813
1.8
140.
914
3.3
146.
215
4.0
165.
2
Truc
king
, ex
cept
loca
l10
0.0
105.
211
1.1
114.
011
6.6
112.
911
7.8
119.
211
6.9
118.
511
8.1
Loca
l tru
ckin
g10
0.0
104.
912
0.7
123.
412
9.0
134.
813
8.0
141.
615
4.6
163.
016
5.3
Bus
carr
iers
, Cl
ass
I10
0.0
107.
510
9.5
113.
510
3.2
114.
011
0.3
129.
510
9.3
139.
911
6.2
Air
100.
099
.610
4.3
107.
911
3.8
116.
911
9.6
120.
111
6.7
117.
411
9.2
Pipe
line
100.
096
.697
.810
1.9
105.
511
3.3
127.
513
1.1
134.
014
1.9
137.
7
NO
TE
S:
Labo
r pr
oduc
tivity
for
tran
spor
tatio
n m
easu
res
qual
ity-a
djus
ted
ton-
and
pas
seng
er-m
iles
per
hour
. Qua
lity-
adju
stm
ent
corr
ects
for
diffe
renc
es in
ser
vice
s an
d ha
ndlin
g, e
.g.,
the
diffe
renc
e be
twee
n fly
ing
first
cla
ss a
nd c
oach
or
diffe
renc
es in
the
hand
ling
requ
irem
ents
and
rev
enue
gen
erat
ion
of h
igh-
and
low
-val
ue c
omm
oditi
es. P
ipel
ine
labo
r pr
oduc
tivity
is m
easu
red
by
outp
ut p
er e
mpl
oyee
. No
data
are
ava
ilabl
e fo
r w
ater
tran
spor
tatio
n. R
aw d
ata
are
not a
vaila
ble
from
the
sour
ces.
Loca
l tru
ckin
g in
clud
es e
stab
lishm
ents
that
gen
eral
ly p
rovi
de tr
ucki
ng s
ervi
ces
with
in a
sin
gle
mun
icip
ality
, con
tiguo
us
mun
icip
aliti
es, o
r a
mun
icip
ality
and
its
subu
rban
are
as. T
ruck
ing,
exc
ept l
ocal
, inc
lude
s co
mm
on o
r co
ntra
ct c
arrie
rs th
at g
ener
ally
pr
ovid
e tr
ucki
ng s
ervi
ce b
eyon
d a
sing
le m
unic
ipal
ity, c
ontig
uous
mun
icip
aliti
es, o
r a
mun
icip
ality
and
its
subu
rban
are
as.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tion
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S.
Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or, B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics'
Offi
ce o
f Pro
duct
ivity
and
Tec
hnol
ogy,
"In
dust
ry P
rodu
ctiv
ity D
atab
ase,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ls.g
ov, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03; a
nd U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Gro
ss D
omes
tic
Pro
duct
by
Indu
stry
," a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov, a
s of
Mar
ch 2
003.
Appendix B
195
TAB
LE
3
Mu
ltif
acto
r P
rod
uct
ivit
y: 1
990–
2001
Inde
x: 1
990
=100
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Railr
oad
indu
stry
100.
010
3.3
109.
911
3.5
115.
912
2.8
127.
412
7.4
126.
113
0.1
Busi
ness
se
ctor
(all
indu
strie
s)10
0.0
98.9
101.
210
1.7
102.
810
3.0
104.
710
5.9
107.
310
8.3
109.
910
8.8
NO
TE
: R
ail p
rodu
ctiv
ity d
ata
are
only
ava
ilabl
e th
roug
h 19
99. S
ourc
e da
ta a
re in
dexe
s w
ith b
ase
year
s of
198
7 (r
ail)
and
1996
(b
usin
ess)
. The
y ha
ve b
een
rein
dexe
d so
that
199
0 =
100
.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or S
tatis
tics,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bls
.gov
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
. Bu
sin
ess
sect
or—
“Mul
tifac
tor
Pro
duct
ivity
Tre
nds,
” ta
ble
1. R
ail—
“Ind
ustr
y M
ultif
acto
r P
rodu
ctiv
ity D
ata
Tabl
e by
Indu
stry
, 198
7–19
99.”
TAB
LE
4
Pas
sen
ger
-Mile
s by
Mo
de:
200
0M
illio
n pa
ssen
ger-
mile
s
2000
Air c
arrie
r51
6,12
9
Gene
ral a
viat
ion
14,0
00
Pass
enge
r car
2,54
4,45
7
Ligh
t tru
ck1,
467,
664
Mot
orcy
cle
11,5
16
Bus
160,
919
Tran
sit,
excl
udin
g bu
s26
,425
Amtra
k5,
498
NO
TES
: Tra
nsit
incl
udes
mot
or b
us, h
eavy
rail,
co
mm
uter
rail,
ligh
t rai
l, fe
rryb
oat,
trolle
y bu
s, d
eman
d re
spon
sive
, and
oth
ers.
Mot
or b
us a
nd d
eman
d re
spon
sive
figu
res
are
also
incl
uded
in th
e bu
s fig
ure
for
high
way
.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 1
-34,
av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
196
TAB
LE
5a
Ch
ang
e in
Pas
sen
ger
-Mile
s by
Sel
ecte
d M
od
eIn
dex
1990
= 1
.00
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Air c
arrie
r1.
000.
981.
031.
051.
121.
171.
261.
301.
341.
411.
49
Pass
enge
r car
1.00
0.96
0.97
0.97
0.99
1.00
1.02
1.05
1.08
1.09
1.12
Ligh
t tru
ck1.
001.
121.
201.
251.
271.
261.
301.
351.
381.
431.
47
Bus
1.00
1.00
1.01
1.07
1.12
1.12
1.15
1.19
1.22
1.34
1.33
Tran
sit
1.00
0.99
0.98
0.96
0.96
0.97
1.01
1.03
1.07
1.11
1.16
Amtra
k1.
001.
041.
011.
020.
980.
920.
830.
850.
880.
880.
91
NO
TE
S:
Tran
sit i
nclu
des
mot
or b
us, h
eavy
rai
l, co
mm
uter
rai
l, lig
ht r
ail,
ferr
yboa
t, tr
olle
y bu
s, d
eman
d re
spon
sive
, and
oth
ers.
M
otor
bus
and
dem
and
resp
onsi
ve fi
gure
s ar
e al
so in
clud
ed in
the
bus
figur
e fo
r hi
ghw
ay.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 1
-34,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of A
pril
2003
.
TAB
LE
5b
P
asse
ng
er-M
iles
by S
elec
ted
Mo
de
Mill
ion
pass
enge
r-m
iles
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Air c
arrie
r 3
58,8
73 3
50,1
85 3
65,5
64 3
72,1
30 3
98,1
99 4
14,6
88 4
46,6
52 4
63,1
12 4
76,3
62 5
01,8
57 5
30,1
29
Pass
enge
r car
2,2
81,3
91 2
,200
,260
2,2
08,2
26 2
,213
,281
2,2
49,7
42 2
,286
,887
2,3
37,0
68 2
,389
,065
2,4
63,8
28 2
,494
,870
2,5
44,4
57
Ligh
t tru
ck 9
99,7
54 1
,116
,958
1,2
01,6
67 1
,252
,860
1,2
69,2
92 1
,256
,146
1,2
98,2
99 1
,352
,675
1,3
80,5
57 1
,432
,625
1,4
67,6
64
Bus
121
,398
121
,906
122
,496
129
,852
135
,871
136
,104
139
,136
145
,060
148
,558
162
,445
160
,919
Tran
sit
41,
143
40,
703
40,
241
39,
384
39,
585
39,
808
41,
378
42,
339
44,
128
45,
857
47,
666
Amtra
k 6
,057
6,2
73 6
,091
6,1
99 5
,921
5,5
45 5
,050
5,1
66 5
,304
5,3
30 5
,498
NO
TE
S:
Tran
sit i
nclu
des
mot
or b
us, h
eavy
rai
l, co
mm
uter
rai
l, lig
ht r
ail,
ferr
yboa
t, tr
olle
y bu
s, d
eman
d-re
spon
sive
, and
oth
ers.
Mot
or b
us a
nd d
eman
d-re
spon
sive
figu
res
are
also
in
clud
ed in
the
bus
figur
e fo
r hi
ghw
ay.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 1
-34,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of A
pril
2003
.
Appendix B
197
TAB
LE
6a
To
tal U
.S. P
op
ula
tio
n a
nd
Gro
ss D
om
esti
c P
rod
uct
: 19
90–2
000
Inde
x 19
90 =
1.0
0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Gros
s do
mes
tic
prod
uct (
GDP)
1.00
1.00
1.03
1.05
1.10
1.12
1.16
1.22
1.27
1.32
1.37
Tota
l U.S
. pop
ulat
ion
1.00
1.01
1.03
1.04
1.05
1.07
1.08
1.09
1.11
1.12
1.13
GDP
per c
apita
1.00
0.98
1.00
1.01
1.04
1.05
1.08
1.11
1.15
1.18
1.22
SO
UR
CE
S:
Gro
ss D
om
esti
c P
rod
uct
—B
ased
on
chai
ned
1996
dol
lar
data
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nts,
sum
mar
y G
DP
tabl
e, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.d
oc.g
ov/b
ea/
dn1.
htm
, as
of M
ay 2
003.
Po
pu
lati
on
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, U.S
. Cen
sus
Bur
eau,
Nat
iona
l Int
erce
nsal
Est
imat
es
1990
–200
0, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
eire
.cen
sus.
gov/
pope
st/d
ata/
natio
nal/t
able
s/in
terc
ensa
l/US
-ES
T90
INT-
01.p
hp, a
s of
May
200
3.
TAB
LE
6b
To
tal U
.S. P
op
ula
tio
n a
nd
Gro
ss D
om
esti
c P
rod
uct
: 19
90–2
000
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Gros
s do
mes
tic p
rodu
ct (G
DP)
(Bill
ions
of c
hain
ed
1996
dol
lars
) 6
,708
6,6
76 6
,880
7,0
63 7
,348
7,5
44 7
,813
8,1
60 8
,509
8,8
59 9
,191
Tota
l res
iden
t U.S
. pop
ulat
ion
(Tho
usan
ds)
249,
623
252
,981
256,
514
259
,919
263,
126
266,
278
269,
394
272,
647
275,
854
279,
040
282,
125
GDP
per c
apita
26,
872
26,
391
26,
821
27,
172
27,
925
28,
331
29,
003
29,
927
30,
846
31,
748
32,
579
SO
UR
CE
S:
Gro
ss D
om
esti
c P
rod
uct
—B
ased
on
chai
ned
1996
dol
lar
data
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
Nat
iona
l Inc
ome
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s, s
umm
ary
GD
P ta
ble,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn1
.htm
, as
of M
ay 2
003.
Po
pu
lati
on
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, U.S
. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, N
atio
nal I
nter
cens
al E
stim
ates
199
0–20
00, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
eire
.cen
sus.
gov/
pope
st/d
ata/
natio
nal/t
able
s/in
terc
ensa
l/US
-ES
T90
INT-
01.p
hp, a
s of
M
ay 2
003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
198
TAB
LE
7a
Ch
ang
e in
Do
mes
tic
Fre
igh
t To
n-M
iles
by M
od
e: 1
990–
2000
Inde
x 19
90 =
1.0
0
Year
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Air
1.00
0.98
1.08
1.18
1.30
1.38
1.42
1.50
1.53
1.57
1.63
Truc
k1.
001.
021.
051.
091.
161.
221.
251.
311.
341.
391.
41
Railr
oad
1.00
0.98
1.03
1.07
1.15
1.24
1.29
1.31
1.36
1.41
1.45
Wat
er1.
001.
021.
030.
950.
980.
970.
920.
850.
810.
790.
77
Oil p
ipel
ine
1.00
0.99
1.01
1.02
1.01
1.03
1.06
1.06
1.06
1.06
1.06
TOTA
L1.
001.
001.
031.
031.
091.
131.
151.
151.
171.
191.
20
TAB
LE
7b
D
om
esti
c F
reig
ht
Ton
-Mile
s by
Mo
de:
199
0–20
00Bi
llion
s
Year
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Air
99
1011
1213
1314
1414
15
Truc
k84
886
788
992
798
71,
033
1,06
01,
109
1,13
81,
175
1,19
3
Railr
oad
1,06
41,
042
1,09
81,
135
1,22
11,
317
1,37
71,
391
1,44
81,
504
1,54
6
Wat
er83
484
885
779
081
580
876
570
767
365
664
6
Oil p
ipel
ine
584
579
589
593
591
601
619
617
620
618
617
TOTA
L3,
339
3,34
53,
443
3,45
63,
626
3,77
23,
834
3,83
83,
893
3,96
74,
017
SO
UR
CE
S:
Air
, pip
elin
e, a
nd
wat
er—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-4
4. T
ruck
—B
TS
cal
cula
tion
base
d on
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tr
ansp
orta
tion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s A
nnua
l Rep
ort 2
000
(Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
1), p
age
124;
and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Fed
eral
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Hig
hway
Sta
tistic
s 20
01 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2),
tabl
e V
M-1
. Rai
l—B
TS
cal
cula
tion
base
d on
Sur
face
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Boa
rd, C
arlo
ad W
aybi
ll S
ampl
e; T
rans
port
Can
ada,
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
In C
anad
a (A
nnua
l Rep
ort)
, tab
le 1
2-1;
Am
eric
an A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C:
1991
–200
1 is
sues
), p
age
36.
Appendix B
199
TAB
LE
8
Mo
dal
Sh
ares
of
Do
mes
tic
Fre
igh
t To
n-M
iles:
200
0
2000
Air
0.4
Truc
k29
.7
Railr
oad
38.5
Wat
er16
.1
Oil p
ipel
ine
15.4
SO
UR
CE
S:
Air
, pip
elin
e, a
nd
wat
er—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-4
4. T
ruck
—B
TS
cal
cula
tion
base
d on
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tr
ansp
orta
tion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s A
nnua
l Rep
ort 2
000
(Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
1), p
age
124;
and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Fed
eral
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Hig
hway
Sta
tistic
s 20
01 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2),
tabl
e V
M-1
. Rai
l—B
TS
cal
cula
tion
base
d on
Sur
face
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Boa
rd, C
arlo
ad W
aybi
ll S
ampl
e; T
rans
port
Can
ada,
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
In C
anad
a (A
nnua
l Rep
ort)
, tab
le 1
2-1;
Am
eric
an A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C:
1991
–200
1 is
sues
), p
age
36.
[NO
TE
: F
igur
es 9
, 10,
and
11
are
truc
k, r
ail,
and
wat
er fr
eigh
t flo
w m
aps,
res
pect
ivel
y,
and
corr
espo
ndin
g ta
bles
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.]
TAB
LE
12
Ch
ang
es in
Ave
rag
e C
ity-
Pai
r S
ched
ule
Tim
e:
Feb
ruar
y 19
95 a
nd
Feb
ruar
y 20
02Nu
mbe
r of c
ity-p
airs
Incr
ease
d sc
hedu
le ti
me
Decr
ease
d or
unc
hang
ed
sche
dule
tim
e
Air
177
84
Rail
154
92
Bus
115
135
NO
TE
: A
ir da
ta c
over
non
-sto
p se
rvic
e on
ly. B
us a
nd r
ail d
ata
incl
ude
dire
ct a
nd c
onne
ctin
g se
rvic
e.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Nat
iona
l Pas
seng
er R
ailro
ad C
opor
atio
ns (
Am
trak
), N
atio
nal,
Nor
thea
st a
nd S
ched
ule
Cha
nge
Tim
etab
les
(Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 199
4/19
95 a
nd 2
001/
2002
issu
es);
Rus
sell’
s G
uide
s, O
ffici
al N
atio
nal M
otor
Coa
ch G
uide
s (C
edar
Rap
ids,
IA:
Janu
ary
1995
and
Jan
uary
200
2 ed
ition
s); G
reyh
ound
Lin
es, S
yste
m T
imet
able
(D
alla
s, T
X: J
anua
ry 1
995)
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
200
TAB
LE
13/
14
Trav
el T
ime
Ind
ex a
nd
Ch
ang
e by
Met
ro A
rea
Po
pu
lati
on
for
75 M
etro
Are
as:
1990
an
d 2
000
Popu
latio
n (0
00)
Trav
el T
ime
Inde
x Ch
ange
Urba
n ar
eas
2000
1990
2000
1990
–200
0
New
Yor
k NY
-Nor
thea
ster
n NJ
17,0
901.
311.
410.
10Lo
s An
gele
s CA
12,6
801.
911.
90–0
.01
Chic
ago
IL-N
orth
wes
tern
IN8,
090
1.37
1.47
0.10
Phila
delp
hia
PA-N
J4,
590
1.18
1.28
0.10
San
Fran
cisc
o-Oa
klan
d CA
4,03
01.
501.
590.
09
Detro
it M
I4,
025
1.28
1.34
0.06
Dalla
s-Fo
rt W
orth
TX
3,80
01.
181.
330.
15W
ashi
ngto
n DC
-MD-
VA3,
560
1.34
1.46
0.12
Hous
ton
TX3,
375
1.31
1.38
0.07
Bost
on M
A3,
025
1.27
1.45
0.18
Atla
nta
GA2,
975
1.14
1.36
0.22
San
Dieg
o CA
2,71
01.
251.
370.
12Ph
oeni
x AZ
2,60
01.
211.
400.
19M
inne
apol
is-S
t. Pa
ul M
N2,
475
1.12
1.38
0.26
Mia
mi-H
iale
ah F
L2,
270
1.32
1.45
0.13
Balti
mor
e M
D2,
170
1.21
1.29
0.08
St. L
ouis
MO-
IL2,
040
1.11
1.23
0.12
Seat
tle-E
vere
tt W
A2,
000
1.34
1.45
0.11
Tam
pa-S
t Pet
ersb
urg-
Clea
rwat
er F
L1,
950
1.26
1.29
0.03
Denv
er C
O1,
910
1.17
1.42
0.25
Clev
elan
d OH
1,88
51.
061.
130.
07Pi
ttsbu
rgh
PA1,
790
1.10
1.10
0.00
San
Jose
CA
1,67
51.
441.
42–0
.02
Ft. L
aude
rdal
e-Ho
llyw
ood-
Pom
pano
Bch
FL
1,56
01.
141.
370.
23No
rfol
k-Ne
wpo
rt Ne
ws-
Virg
inia
Bea
ch V
A1,
500
1.15
1.18
0.03
Portl
and-
Vanc
ouve
r OR-
WA
1,50
01.
161.
400.
24Ka
nsas
City
MO-
KS1,
420
1.03
1.10
0.07
San
Bern
ardi
no-R
iver
side
CA
1,41
01.
241.
340.
10Sa
cram
ento
CA
1,39
51.
201.
310.
11M
ilwau
kee
WI
1,36
51.
121.
260.
14
Cinc
inna
ti OH
-KY
1,28
51.
121.
260.
14Sa
n An
toni
o TX
1,25
01.
081.
230.
15La
s Ve
gas
NV1,
200
1.23
1.35
0.12
Orla
ndo
FL1,
200
1.16
1.29
0.13
Buffa
lo-N
iaga
ra F
alls
NY
1,11
01.
041.
080.
04
New
Orle
ans
LA1,
105
1.16
1.18
0.02
Okla
hom
a Ci
ty O
K1,
080
1.03
1.09
0.06
Colu
mbu
s OH
1,04
01.
101.
190.
09W
Pal
m B
ch-B
oca
Rato
n-De
lray
Bch
FL1,
030
1.12
1.25
0.13
Indi
anap
olis
IN1,
020
1.06
1.24
0.18
Appendix B
201
Popu
latio
n (0
00)
Trav
el T
ime
Inde
x Ch
ange
Urba
n ar
eas
2000
1990
2000
1990
-200
0
Mem
phis
TN-
AR-M
S97
51.
091.
210.
12Pr
ovid
ence
-Paw
tuck
et R
I-MA
915
1.12
1.21
0.09
Salt
Lake
City
UT
900
1.08
1.17
0.09
Jack
sonv
ille
FL86
51.
111.
150.
04Lo
uisv
ille
KY-IN
840
1.08
1.24
0.16
Tuls
a OK
800
1.05
1.12
0.07
Aust
in T
X73
01.
121.
270.
15Na
shvi
lle T
N70
01.
101.
180.
08Ho
nolu
lu H
I69
51.
221.
20–0
.02
Tucs
on A
Z68
01.
111.
200.
09
Birm
ingh
am A
L67
01.
061.
170.
11El
Pas
o TX
-NM
655
1.04
1.17
0.13
Roch
este
r NY
650
1.03
1.06
0.03
Char
lotte
NC
645
1.16
1.27
0.11
Hartf
ord-
Mid
dlet
own
CT64
51.
091.
120.
03
Rich
mon
d VA
640
1.05
1.10
0.05
Omah
a NE
-IA62
51.
091.
150.
06Ta
com
a W
A60
51.
111.
230.
12Al
buqu
erqu
e NM
595
1.10
1.26
0.16
Fres
no C
A55
51.
131.
200.
07
Alba
ny-S
chen
ecta
dy-T
roy
NY51
51.
041.
060.
02Co
lora
do S
prin
gs C
O46
51.
041.
200.
16Ch
arle
ston
SC
455
1.15
1.19
0.04
Bake
rsfie
ld C
A40
51.
031.
060.
03Sp
okan
e W
A33
01.
041.
080.
04
Corp
us C
hris
ti TX
315
1.03
1.04
0.01
Pens
acol
a FL
305
1.08
1.14
0.06
Fort
Mye
rs-C
ape
Cora
l FL
290
1.09
1.15
0.06
Anch
orag
e AK
260
1.05
1.04
–0.0
1Eu
gene
-Spr
ingf
ield
OR
220
1.04
1.12
0.08
Sale
m O
R19
51.
041.
100.
06La
redo
TX
185
1.03
1.06
0.03
Brow
nsvi
lle T
X15
51.
041.
080.
04Be
aum
ont T
X14
51.
031.
050.
02Bo
ulde
r CO
110
1.03
1.09
0.06
NO
TE
: T
he T
rave
l Tim
e In
dex
is th
e ra
tio o
f pea
k pe
riod
trav
el ti
me
to fr
ee-f
low
trav
el ti
me.
The
Tra
vel T
ime
Inde
x ex
pres
ses
the
aver
age
amou
nt o
f ext
ra ti
me
it ta
kes
to tr
avel
in th
e pe
ak r
elat
ive
to fr
ee-f
low
trav
el.
SO
UR
CE
: T
exas
A&
M U
nive
rsity
, Tex
as T
rans
port
atio
n In
stitu
tue,
200
2 U
rban
Mob
ility
Rep
ort
(Col
lege
Sta
tion,
TX
: 20
02),
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://tti
.tam
u.ed
u/, a
s of
May
200
3.
TAB
LE
13/
14
Trav
el T
ime
Ind
ex a
nd
Ch
ang
e by
Met
ro A
rea
Po
pu
lati
on
for
75 M
etro
Are
as:
1990
an
d 2
000
(con
tinue
d)
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
202
TAB
LE
15
U.S
. A
ir C
arri
er O
n-T
ime
Per
form
ance
: 19
96–2
002
Num
ber o
f flig
hts 1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
On-ti
me
fligh
ts 3
,989
,281
4
,218
,165
4
,156
,980
4
,207
,293
4
,130
,185
4
,619
,234
4
,329
,635
Late
arr
ival
s 1
,220
,045
1
,083
,834
1
,070
,071
1
,152
,725
1
,356
,450
1
,104
,439
8
68,2
25
Dive
rted
fligh
ts 1
4,12
1 1
2,08
1 1
3,16
1 1
3,55
5 1
4,25
4 1
2,90
9 8
,356
Canc
eled
flig
hts
128
,536
97,
763
144
,509
154
,311
187
,599
231
,198
65,
143
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, A
irlin
e O
n-T
ime
Per
form
ance
Dat
abas
e, p
erso
nal
com
mun
icat
ion,
Nov
embe
r 20
00 a
nd N
ovem
ber
2002
.
TAB
LE
16
Am
trak
On
-Tim
e P
erfo
rman
ce:
1993
–200
2Pe
rcen
t
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Syst
em o
n-tim
e pe
rfor
man
ce72
7276
7174
7979
7875
77
Shor
t dis
tanc
e (<
400
mi)
7978
8176
7981
8081
NA1
NA1
Long
dis
tanc
e (>
=400
mi)
4749
5749
5359
6156
NA1
NA1
1 A
s of
200
1, A
mtr
ak n
o lo
nger
rep
orts
sho
rt-
and
long
-hau
l dat
a se
para
tely
.
KE
Y:
NA
= n
ot a
pplic
able
. N
OT
E:
Am
trak
on-
time
perf
orm
ance
dat
a is
pro
vide
d as
a p
erce
ntag
e. R
aw d
ata
are
not r
eadi
ly a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
S:
1993
–199
9—A
mtr
ak, N
atio
nal R
ailro
ad P
asse
nger
Cor
pora
tion,
Ann
ual R
epor
ts (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
0 an
d 20
01 is
sues
).
2000
–200
2—A
mtr
ak, p
erso
nal c
omm
unic
atio
n, M
ar. 3
, 200
3.
Appendix B
203
TAB
LE
17
Am
trak
Ho
urs
of
Del
ay b
y C
ause
: 19
90–1
999
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Amtra
k13,
565
5,91
56,
433
8,48
88,
538
5,52
75,
193
5,31
04,
796
4,89
1
Frei
ght2
4,24
47,
743
8,22
912
,827
14,3
1911
,224
11,4
3812
,904
14,2
0216
,158
Othe
r34,
316
7,42
68,
185
11,6
7511
,871
8,49
78,
425
7,61
18,
291
8,20
3
Tota
l12
,125
21,0
8422
,847
32,9
9134
,729
25,2
4825
,056
25,8
2527
,289
29,2
52
1 In
clud
es e
quip
men
t mal
func
tions
, tra
in s
ervi
cing
in s
tatio
ns, a
nd p
asse
nger
-rel
ated
del
ays.
2 In
clud
es d
elay
s fo
r tr
ack
repa
irs/tr
ack
cond
ition
s, fr
eigh
t tra
in in
terf
eren
ce, a
nd s
igna
l del
ays.
3 In
clud
es p
asse
nger
trai
n in
terf
eren
ce, w
aitin
g fo
r co
nnec
tions
, run
ning
tim
e, w
eath
er-r
elat
ed d
elay
s, a
nd m
isce
llane
ous.
NO
TE
: Am
trak
cha
nged
its
met
hod
for
repo
rtin
g de
lays
in 2
000.
The
refo
re, d
ata
afte
r 19
99 a
re n
ot c
ompa
rabl
e to
prio
r ye
ars
and
are
not
pres
ente
d he
re.
SO
UR
CE
: 19
93–1
999—
Nat
iona
l Rai
lroad
Pas
seng
er C
orpo
ratio
n (A
mtr
ak),
Ann
ual R
epor
t (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
000
and
2001
issu
es).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
204
TAB
LE
18
Nu
mb
er o
f Tr
uck
s by
Veh
icle
Wei
gh
t: 1
992
and
199
7
Thou
sand
s of
truc
ks
1992
1997
Ligh
t tru
cks
(< 6
,001
lb)
50,5
45.7
62,7
98.4
Med
ium
truc
ks (6
,001
to 1
9,50
0 lb
)5,
906.
56,
737.
1
Ligh
t-hea
vy tr
ucks
(19,
501
to 2
6,00
0 lb
)73
2.0
729.
3
Heav
y tru
cks
(> 2
6,00
0 lb
)3,
074.
53,
986.
9
KE
Y:
lb =
pou
nd.
NO
TE
S:
Wei
ght i
s th
e em
pty
wei
ght o
f the
veh
icle
plu
s th
e av
erag
e ve
hicl
e lo
ad.
Exc
lude
s ve
hicl
es o
wne
d by
fede
ral,
stat
e, o
r lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts;
ambu
lanc
es; b
uses
; mot
or h
omes
; far
m tr
acto
rs; u
npow
ered
trai
ler
units
; an
d tr
ucks
rep
orte
d to
hav
e be
en s
old,
junk
ed, o
r w
reck
ed p
rior
to J
uly
1 of
th
e ye
ar p
rece
ding
the
surv
ey.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2),
tabl
e 1-
21, a
lso
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of A
pril
2003
.T
he o
rigin
al s
ourc
e of
thes
e da
ta a
re th
e U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u’s
Veh
icle
In
vent
ory
and
Use
Sur
vey
(VIU
S).
The
truc
k ca
tego
ries
in N
atio
nal
Tran
spor
tatio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
and
this
rep
ort d
iffer
from
thos
e in
the
VIU
S,
whi
ch h
as th
e fo
llow
ing
cate
gorie
s: li
ght t
ruck
s—10
,000
lbs
or le
ss; m
ediu
m
truc
ks—
10,0
01 lb
s–19
,500
lbs;
ligh
t-he
avy
truc
ks—
19,5
01 lb
s–26
,000
lbs;
an
d he
avy-
heav
y tr
ucks
—26
,001
lbs
or m
ore.
Appendix B
205
TAB
LE
19/
20
Sh
are
of
Lo
adin
gs
on
Inte
rsta
te H
igh
way
s: 2
001
Perc
ent
Loca
tion
Pass
enge
r car
s,bu
ses,
and
ligh
ttru
cks
Heav
ysi
ngle
-uni
ttru
cks
3- a
nd 4
-axl
eco
mbi
natio
ntru
cks
5-ax
le o
r mor
eco
mbi
natio
ntru
cks
Rura
l2
64
89
Urba
n3
145
77
NO
TE
S:
Bas
ed o
n da
ta fr
om th
e Tr
uck
Wei
ght S
tudy
whi
ch a
re c
olle
cted
by
the
Sta
tes
for
vary
ing
time
perio
ds e
ach
year
and
are
not
adj
uste
d to
typi
fy a
nnua
l ave
rage
s. L
oadi
ngs
are
base
d on
equ
ival
ent s
ingl
e ax
le lo
ads
(ES
ALs
), a
st
anda
rd u
nit o
f pav
emen
t dam
age
base
d on
the
amou
nt o
f for
ce a
pplie
d to
pav
emen
t by
an 1
8,00
0-po
und
axle
, w
hich
is r
ough
ly e
quiv
alen
t to
a st
anda
rd tr
uck
axle
. Raw
dat
a ar
e no
t ava
ilabl
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Fed
eral
Hig
hway
Adm
inst
ratio
n, H
ighw
ay S
tatis
tics
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
TC
-3.
Tab
le 2
1 A
vera
ge
Cap
acit
y o
f V
esse
ls C
allin
g a
t U
.S. P
ort
s: 1
998–
2001
Dead
wei
ght t
ons
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tank
er78
,534
78,0
2778
,782
79,0
04
Dry
bulk
40,9
3041
,211
41,0
3141
,072
Cont
aine
rshi
p35
,671
36,5
8037
,814
38,9
22
Ro-R
o19
,848
18,7
3418
,402
19,1
04
Chem
ical
tank
ers
27,3
0327
,499
27,7
5027
,544
Gas
carr
iers
30,4
3530
,973
31,3
3933
,898
Othe
r29
,364
32,1
5133
,790
33,8
95
Tota
l44
,519
44,9
5145
,467
46,2
38
KE
Y:
Ro-
Ro
= r
oll-o
n, r
oll-o
ff ve
ssel
s, w
hich
are
esp
ecia
lly d
esig
ned
to c
arry
whe
eled
con
tain
ers
trai
lers
, or
othe
r w
heel
ed c
argo
, and
use
the
roll-
on/r
oll-o
ff m
etho
d fo
r lo
adin
g an
d un
load
ing.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
n ba
sed
on U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, M
ariti
me
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Ves
sel C
alls
at U
.S. P
orts
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: A
nnua
l iss
ues)
, tab
les
H-6
and
H-8
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
206
TAB
LE
22
Mea
sure
s o
f U
.S. R
ailr
oad
Fre
igh
t Vo
lum
e: 1
991–
2001
Mill
ions
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tons
1,
383
1,39
91,
397
1,47
01,
550
1,61
11,
585
1,64
91,
717
1,73
81,
742
Carlo
ads
2121
2223
2424
2526
2728
27
SO
UR
CE
: A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Am
eric
an o
f Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
200
1 an
d 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
1 an
d 20
02 is
sues
).
TAB
LE
23
Ave
rag
e L
oad
ed U
.S. R
ailc
ar W
eig
ht:
199
1–20
01
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tons
per
car
load
6666
6463
6567
6364
6363
64
NO
TE
: A
vera
ge r
ailc
ar w
eigh
t is
tota
l ton
s tr
ansp
orte
d di
vide
d by
tota
l car
load
s tr
ansp
orte
d.
SO
UR
CE
: A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Am
eric
an o
f Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
200
1 an
d 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
1 an
d 20
02
issu
es).
Appendix B
207
TAB
LE
24
Ave
rag
e L
oad
ed U
.S. R
ailc
ar W
eig
ht
for
Sel
ecte
d C
om
mo
dit
ies:
199
1 an
d 2
001
Tons
per
car
1991
2001
Farm
pro
duct
s 9
0 9
4
Coal
99
110
Nonm
etal
lic m
iner
als
92
96
Food
and
kin
dred
pro
duct
s 6
3 6
8
Chem
ical
s an
d al
lied
prod
ucts
81
84
Tran
spor
tatio
n eq
uipm
ent
21
21
Mis
cella
neou
s m
ixed
shi
pmen
ts 1
7 1
5
NO
TE
S:
Mis
cella
neou
s m
ixed
shi
pmen
ts is
mos
tly in
term
odal
tr
affic
. Som
e in
term
odal
traf
fic is
incl
uded
in c
omm
odity
-spe
cific
ca
tego
ries
inst
ead.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
of R
ailro
ads,
Rai
lroad
Fa
cts
2001
and
200
2 (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
001
and
2002
issu
es).
19
91 d
ata—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of
Tran
spor
tatio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n A
ssoc
iatio
n of
A
mer
ican
of R
ailro
ads,
Rai
lroad
Ten
-Yea
r Tr
ends
199
0–19
99
(Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
0).
TAB
LE
25
Mile
s Tr
avel
ed P
er D
ay:
2001
Pers
on m
iles
for a
ll m
odes
40
Pers
on m
iles
in p
erso
nal v
ehic
les
35
NO
TE: D
ata
are
from
the
daily
trav
el s
egm
ent o
f the
20
01 N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel S
urve
y. L
ong-
dist
ance
tra
vel d
ata
(i.e.
, trip
s of
50
mile
s or
mor
e co
llect
ed
durin
g a
4-w
eek
trave
l per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l S
urve
y, P
relim
inar
y D
ata
Rel
ease
Ver
sion
1,
avai
labl
e at
http
://nh
ts.o
rnl.g
ov, a
s of
Jan
uary
200
3.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
208
TAB
LE
27
Ave
rag
e Tr
ip D
ista
nce
by
Pu
rpo
se:
2001
Mile
s
Purp
ose
Aver
age
trip
leng
th
Vaca
tion
(incl
udes
rest
and
rela
xatio
n)37
Wor
k-re
late
d bu
sine
ss
29
Visi
t frie
nds/
rela
tives
14
To/fr
om w
ork
12
Med
ical
/den
tal
10
Tota
l rep
orte
d10
Othe
r soc
ial/r
ecre
atio
nal
8
Othe
r fam
ily/p
erso
nal
7
Shop
ping
7
Scho
ol/c
hurc
h 6
NO
TE
S: T
he 2
001
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey
defin
ed a
trip
as
each
tim
e a
pers
on w
ent f
rom
one
add
ress
to a
noth
er. “
Com
mut
e”
trip
s w
ere
defin
ed a
s th
ose
trip
s m
ade
for
the
purp
ose
of g
oing
to o
r re
turn
ing
from
wor
k. H
owev
er, g
iven
the
defin
ition
of a
trip
, tho
se
repo
rted
as
com
mut
ing
trip
s w
ere
not n
eces
saril
y an
chor
ed b
y th
e ho
me
or w
orkp
lace
(fo
r re
turn
com
mut
es).
The
refo
re, c
are
shou
ld b
e ta
ken
in a
naly
zing
wor
k tr
ips,
rec
ogni
zing
that
the
dist
ance
for
thes
e tr
ips
is o
ften,
but
not
alw
ays,
the
dist
ance
from
hom
e to
wor
k. D
ata
are
from
the
daily
trav
el s
egm
ent o
f the
200
1 N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tr
avel
Sur
vey.
Lon
g-di
stan
ce tr
avel
dat
a (i.
e., t
rips
of 5
0 m
iles
or m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n,
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se V
ersi
on
1 (d
ay tr
ip d
ata
only
), a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
nhts
.orn
l.gov
/, as
of J
anua
ry
2003
.
TAB
LE
26
Tri
ps
Co
mp
lete
d P
er D
ay:
2001
Pers
on tr
ips
for a
ll m
odes
4.1
Pers
on tr
ips
in p
erso
nal v
ehic
les
3.5
NO
TE
: Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of t
he
2001
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey.
Lon
g-di
stan
ce tr
avel
dat
a (i.
e., t
rips
of 5
0 m
iles
or m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
in
clud
ed h
ere.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l S
urve
y, P
relim
inar
y D
ata
Rel
ease
Ver
sion
1,
avai
labl
e at
http
://nh
ts.o
rnl.g
ov, a
s of
Jan
uary
200
3.
Appendix B
209
TAB
LE
28
Per
son
Tri
ps
by P
urp
ose
: 20
01
Trip
pur
pose
Tota
l per
son
trips
(m
illio
ns)
Perc
ent
To/fr
om w
ork
60,8
9314
.9
Wor
k-re
late
d bu
sine
ss
11,7
172.
9
Shop
ping
79
,715
19.5
Othe
r fam
ily/p
erso
nal b
usin
ess
94,8
8623
.2
Med
ical
/den
tal
8,86
32.
2
Scho
ol/c
hurc
h 40
,220
9.8
Vaca
tion
(incl
udes
rest
and
re
laxa
tion)
2,67
50.
7
Visi
t frie
nds/
rela
tives
32
,269
7.9
Othe
r soc
ial/r
ecre
atio
nal
75,7
7918
.5
Othe
r 2,
250
0.6
All r
epor
ted
409,
267
100.
0
NO
TE
S:
The
200
1 N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel S
urve
y de
fined
a tr
ip a
s ea
ch
time
a pe
rson
wen
t fro
m o
ne a
ddre
ss to
ano
ther
. “C
omm
ute”
trip
s w
ere
defin
ed a
s th
ose
trip
s m
ade
for
the
purp
ose
of g
oing
to o
r re
turn
ing
from
w
ork.
How
ever
, giv
en th
e de
finiti
on o
f a tr
ip, t
hose
rep
orte
d as
com
mut
ing
trip
s w
ere
not n
eces
saril
y an
chor
ed b
y th
e ho
me
or w
orkp
lace
(fo
r re
turn
co
mm
utes
). T
here
fore
, car
e sh
ould
be
take
n in
ana
lyzi
ng to
/from
wor
k tr
ips,
re
cogn
izin
g th
at th
e di
stan
ce fo
r th
ese
trip
s is
ofte
n, b
ut n
ot a
lway
s, th
e di
stan
ce fr
om h
ome
to w
ork.
Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of t
he
2001
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey.
Lon
g-di
stan
ce tr
avel
dat
a (i.
e., t
rips
of 5
0 m
iles
or m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
he
re. E
xclu
ded
from
wor
k-re
late
d bu
sine
ss tr
ips
are
trip
s m
ade
by p
eopl
e w
ho a
re d
irect
ly p
rovi
ding
the
tran
spor
tatio
n of
pas
seng
ers
or g
oods
, suc
h as
bu
s or
truc
k dr
iver
s, d
eliv
ery
pers
ons,
etc
.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel
Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se V
ersi
on 1
(da
y tr
ip d
ata
only
), a
vaila
ble
at
http
://nh
ts.o
rnl.g
ov/,
as o
f Jan
uary
200
3.
TAB
LE
29a
M
od
al S
har
e o
f P
erso
n T
rip
s: 2
001
Num
ber
(mill
ions
)Pe
rcen
tage
of
tota
l
Pers
onal
veh
icle
355,
260
86.5
Air
405
0.1
Tran
sit
6,45
51.
6
Scho
ol b
us6,
986
1.7
Bicy
cle/
wal
k38
,848
9.5
Othe
r2,
748
0.7
Tota
l41
0,70
210
0.0
NO
TE
: D
ata
are
from
the
daily
trav
el s
egm
ent o
f the
20
01 N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel S
urve
y. L
ong-
dist
ance
tr
avel
dat
a (i.
e., t
rips
of 5
0 m
iles
or m
ore
colle
cted
du
ring
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey,
P
relim
inar
y D
ata
Rel
ease
Ver
sion
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
nhts
.orn
l.gov
/, as
of J
anua
ry 2
003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
210
TAB
LE
29b
P
erso
n T
rip
s by
Per
son
al V
ehic
le:
2001
Tran
spor
tatio
n m
ode
Num
ber
(mill
ions
)Pe
rcen
t
Pers
onal
veh
icle
(inc
ludi
ng m
otor
cycl
e)35
5,26
010
0.0
Ca
r20
8,87
558
.8
Va
n50
,116
14.1
SU
V46
,265
13.0
Pi
ckup
truc
k46
,990
13.2
Ot
her t
ruck
, RV,
mot
orcy
cle
3,01
40.
8
KE
Y:
RV
= r
ecre
atio
nal v
ehic
le; S
UV
= s
port
util
ity v
ehic
le.
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of t
he 2
001
Nat
iona
l H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel S
urve
y. L
ong-
dist
ance
trav
el d
ata
(i.e.
, trip
s of
50
mile
s or
m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel
Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se V
ersi
on 1
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://nh
ts.o
rgnh
ts.o
rnl.g
ov/,
as o
f Jan
uary
200
3.
TAB
LE
29c
P
erso
n T
rip
s by
Tra
nsi
t: 2
001
Tran
spor
tatio
n m
ode
Num
ber
(mill
ions
)Pe
rcen
t
Tran
sit
6,45
510
0.0
Bu
s4,
295
66.5
Su
bway
/ele
vate
d ra
il 1,
643
25.5
St
reet
car
/trol
ley
101
1.6
Co
mm
uter
trai
n37
05.
7
Pa
ssen
ger l
ine/
ferr
y 46
0.7
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of t
he 2
001
Nat
iona
l H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel S
urve
y. L
ong-
dist
ance
trav
el d
ata
(i.e.
, trip
s of
50
mile
s or
m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel
Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se V
ersi
on 1
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://nh
ts.o
rnl.g
ov/,
as o
f Jan
uary
200
3.
Appendix B
211
TAB
LE
30b
P
erso
n-M
iles
by P
erso
nal
Veh
icle
Tran
spor
tatio
n m
ode
Mile
s (m
illio
ns)
Perc
ent
Pers
onal
veh
icle
(inc
ludi
ng m
otor
cycl
e)3,
531,
205
100.
0
Car
1,94
9,10
055
.2
Van
477,
915
13.5
SUV
468,
598
13.3
Pic
kup
truck
544,
411
15.4
Oth
er tr
uck,
RV,
mot
orcy
cle
91,1
812.
6
KE
Y:
RV
= r
ecre
atio
nal v
ehic
le; S
UV
= s
port
util
ity v
ehic
le.
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of t
he 2
001
Nat
iona
l H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel S
urve
y. L
ong-
dist
ance
trav
el d
ata
(i.e.
, trip
s of
50
mile
s or
m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel
Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se V
ersi
on 1
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://nh
ts.o
rnl.g
ov/,
as o
f Jan
uary
200
3.
TAB
LE
30a
M
od
al S
har
e o
f P
erso
n-M
iles:
200
1
Mile
s (m
illio
ns)
Perc
ent o
f tot
al
Pers
onal
veh
icle
3,53
1,20
588
.1
Air
322,
801
8.1
Tran
sit
44,8
901.
1
Scho
ol b
us45
,431
1.1
Bicy
cle/
wal
k32
,397
0.8
Othe
r32
,821
0.8
Tota
l rep
orte
d4,
009,
545
100.
0
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of t
he
2001
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey.
Lon
g-di
stan
ce tr
avel
dat
a (i.
e., t
rips
of 5
0 m
iles
or m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
in
clud
ed h
ere.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
and
Fed
eral
H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel
Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se V
ersi
on 1
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://nh
ts.o
rnl.g
ov/,
as o
f Jan
uary
200
3.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
212
TAB
LE
31a
U
.S. H
ou
seh
old
s by
Nu
mb
er o
f V
ehic
les:
200
1
Num
ber o
f veh
icle
s M
illio
nsPe
rcen
t
None
8.5
7.9
1 3
3.7
31.4
2 3
9.9
37.1
3 1
6.2
15.1
4 6
.05.
6
5 or
mor
e 3
.23.
0
All
107
.410
0.0
NO
TE
S: D
ata
are
from
the
daily
trav
el s
egm
ent o
f the
200
1 N
atio
nal
Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey.
Lon
g-di
stan
ce tr
avel
dat
a (i.
e., t
rips
of 5
0 m
iles
or m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tra
vel p
erio
d) a
re n
ot in
clud
ed
here
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tra
vel p
erio
d) a
re n
ot in
clud
ed h
ere.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n,
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se
Ver
sion
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
nhts
.orn
l.gov
/, as
of J
anua
ry 2
003.
TAB
LE
30c
P
erso
n-M
iles
by T
ran
sit:
200
1
Tran
spor
tatio
n m
ode
Mile
s(m
illio
ns)
Perc
ent
Tran
sit
44,8
9010
0.00
Bus
23,6
4952
.7
Sub
way
/ele
vate
d ra
il 11
,488
25.6
Stre
et c
ar/tr
olle
y 61
51.
4
Com
mut
er tr
ain
8,19
118
.2
Pas
seng
er li
ne/fe
rry
947
2.1
NO
TE
S: D
ata
are
from
the
daily
trav
el s
egm
ent o
f the
200
1 N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tra
vel S
urve
y. L
ong-
dist
ance
trav
el
data
(i.e
., tr
ips
of 5
0 m
iles
or m
ore
colle
cted
dur
ing
a 4-
wee
k tr
avel
per
iod)
are
not
incl
uded
her
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey,
P
relim
inar
y D
ata
Rel
ease
Ver
sion
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
nhts
.orn
l.gov
/, as
of J
anua
ry 2
003.
Ap
pen
dix B
213
TABLE 31b Person Trips by Mode by Households: 2001
Households without vehicles Households with one or more vehicles
Transportation modePerson trips (millions)
Person trips (percent) Transportation mode
Person trips (millions)
Person trips (percent)
Personal vehicle 5,008 35.6 Personal vehicle 349,672 88.2
Motorcycle 0 0.0 Motorcycle 579 0.1
Air 21 0.2 Air 384 0.1
Transit 2,859 20.3 Transit 3,597 0.9
Bus 2,033 14.5 Bus 2,262 0.6
Subway/elevated rail 754 5.4 Subway/elevated rail 890 0.2
Street car/trolley 34 0.2 Street car/trolley 67 0.0
Commuter train 38 0.3 Commuter train 333 0.1
Passenger line/ferry 0 0.0 Passenger line/ferry 45 0.0
Charter/tour/intercity bus 109 0.8 Charter/tour/intercity bus 349 0.1
School bus 298 2.1 School bus 6,689 1.7
Taxi, limo, shuttle bus 148 1.1 Taxi, limo, shuttle bus 573 0.1
Intercity train 6 0.0 Intercity train 107 0.0
Bicycle 307 2.2 Bicycle 3,214 0.8
Walk 5,155 36.7 Walk 30,170 7.6
Other 150 1.1 Other 1,306 0.3
Total reported 14,061 100.0 Total reported 396,640 100.0
NOTES: Data are from the daily travel segment of the 2001 National Household Travel Survey. Long-distance travel data (i.e., trips of 50 miles or more collected during a 4-week travel period) are not included here.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics and Federal Highway Administration, National Household Travel Survey, Preliminary Data Release Version 1, available at http://nhts.ornl.gov/, as of January 2003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
214
TAB
LE
32a
P
rop
ort
ion
of
Ho
use
ho
lds
Wit
ho
ut
Veh
icle
s by
Ho
use
ho
ld T
ype:
200
1
Perc
ent
Hous
ehol
d in
com
e 25
K or
mor
e2.
3
Hous
ehol
d in
com
e le
ss th
an 2
5K20
.3
Resi
denc
e is
ow
ned/
othe
r3.
1
Resi
denc
e is
rent
ed17
.7
Resi
denc
e is
not
a c
ondo
/apt
.4.
0
Resi
denc
e is
a c
ondo
/apt
.21
.9
Mul
ti-pe
rson
hou
seho
ld4.
1
Sing
le-p
erso
n ho
useh
old
18.7
Hous
ehol
d in
rura
l are
a3.
6
Hous
ehol
d in
urb
an a
rea
9.0
All h
ouse
hold
s7.
9K
EY
: co
ndo
= c
ondo
min
ium
; apt
. = a
part
men
t.
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of
the
2001
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey.
Lo
ng-d
ista
nce
trav
el d
ata
(i.e.
, trip
s of
50
mile
s or
mor
e co
llect
ed d
urin
g a
4-w
eek
trav
el p
erio
d)
are
not i
nclu
ded
here
.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
and
Fed
eral
H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal H
ouse
hold
Tr
avel
Sur
vey,
Pre
limin
ary
Dat
a R
elea
se V
ersi
on
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
nhts
.orn
l.gov
/, as
of J
anua
ry
2003
.
TAB
LE
32b
A
vera
ge
Trip
s an
d M
iles
by H
ou
seh
old
s
Wit
h a
nd
Wit
ho
ut
Veh
icle
s: 2
001
Hous
ehol
ds
with
out
vehi
cles
Hous
ehol
ds
with
one
or
mor
e ve
hicl
es
Trip
s pe
r per
son
1,00
51,
508
Mile
s pe
r per
son
6,87
314
,931
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e fr
om th
e da
ily tr
avel
seg
men
t of t
he
2001
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey.
Lon
g-di
stan
ce
trav
el d
ata
(i.e.
, trip
s of
50
mile
s or
mor
e co
llect
ed d
urin
g a
4-w
eek
trav
el p
erio
d) a
re n
ot in
clud
ed h
ere.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s an
d F
eder
al H
ighw
ay
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Hou
seho
ld T
rave
l Sur
vey,
P
relim
inar
y D
ata
Rel
ease
Ver
sion
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
nhts
.orn
l.gov
/, as
of J
anua
ry 2
003.
Appendix B
215
TAB
LE
33a
A
vera
ge
Ho
use
ho
ld T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Exp
end
itu
res:
199
1–20
01Ch
aine
d 19
96 d
olla
rs 1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Vehi
cle
purc
hase
s2,
445
2,46
82,
528
2,86
82,
682
2,81
52,
743
2,99
63,
335
3,43
63,
585
Gaso
line
and
mot
or o
il1,
063
1,04
31,
058
1,06
31,
068
1,08
21,
098
1,16
81,
113
1,06
61,
095
Othe
r veh
icle
exp
ense
s1,
716
1,73
91,
835
1,95
62,
011
2,05
82,
243
2,23
82,
300
2,32
02,
356
Othe
r tra
nspo
rtatio
n35
032
033
439
836
142
738
040
937
740
337
0
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e ba
sed
on s
urve
y re
sults
. The
Bur
eau
of L
abor
Sta
tistic
s us
es th
e te
rm "
cons
umer
uni
t" r
athe
r th
an "
hous
ehol
d."
The
re a
re a
n av
erag
e of
2.
5 pe
rson
s in
eac
h co
nsum
er u
nit,
whi
ch is
def
ined
as
mem
bers
of a
hou
seho
ld r
elat
ed b
y bl
ood,
mar
riage
, ado
ptio
n, o
r ot
her
lega
l arr
ange
men
t; a
sing
le
pers
on li
ving
alo
ne o
r sh
arin
g a
hous
ehol
d w
ith a
noth
er b
ut w
ho is
fina
ncia
lly in
depe
nden
t; or
two
or m
ore
pers
ons
livin
g to
geth
er w
ho s
hare
res
pons
ibili
ty fo
r at
leas
t tw
o-th
irds
of m
ajor
type
s of
exp
ense
s—fo
od, h
ousi
ng, a
nd o
ther
exp
ense
s.
Oth
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
incl
udes
bot
h lo
cal t
rans
it, s
uch
as b
us a
nd ta
xi tr
avel
, and
long
-dis
tanc
e tr
avel
, suc
h as
air
plan
e tr
ips.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of L
abor
, Bur
eau
of L
abor
Sta
tistic
s, C
onsu
mer
Exp
endi
ture
Sur
vey
data
que
ry, F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
33b
A
vera
ge
Ho
use
ho
ld T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Exp
end
itu
res:
199
1–20
01Cu
rren
t dol
lars
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Vehi
cle
purc
hase
s2,
111
2,18
92,
319
2,72
52,
638
2,81
52,
736
2,96
43,
305
3,41
83,
579
Gaso
line
and
mot
or o
il99
597
397
798
61,
006
1,08
21,
098
1,01
71,
055
1,29
11,
279
Othe
r veh
icle
exp
ense
s1,
741
1,77
61,
843
1,95
32,
015
2,05
82,
230
2,20
62,
254
2,28
12,
375
Othe
r tra
nspo
rtatio
n30
429
031
438
135
542
739
342
939
742
740
0
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a ar
e ba
sed
on s
urve
y re
sults
. The
Bur
eau
of L
abor
Sta
tistic
s us
es th
e te
rm "
cons
umer
uni
t" r
athe
r th
an "
hous
ehol
d."
The
re a
re a
n av
erag
e of
2.
5 pe
rson
s in
eac
h co
nsum
er u
nit,
whi
ch is
def
ined
as
mem
bers
of a
hou
seho
ld r
elat
ed b
y bl
ood,
mar
riage
, ado
ptio
n, o
r ot
her
lega
l arr
ange
men
t; a
sing
le
pers
on li
ving
alo
ne o
r sh
arin
g a
hous
ehol
d w
ith a
noth
er b
ut w
ho is
fina
ncia
lly in
depe
nden
t; or
two
or m
ore
pers
ons
livin
g to
geth
er w
ho s
hare
res
pons
ibili
ty fo
r at
leas
t tw
o-th
irds
of m
ajor
type
s of
exp
ense
s—fo
od, h
ousi
ng, a
nd o
ther
exp
ense
s.
Oth
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
incl
udes
bot
h lo
cal t
rans
it, s
uch
as b
us a
nd ta
xi tr
avel
, and
long
-dis
tanc
e tr
avel
, suc
h as
air
plan
e tr
ips.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of L
abor
, Bur
eau
of L
abor
Sta
tistic
s, C
onsu
mer
Exp
endi
ture
Sur
vey
data
que
ry, F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
216
TAB
LE
34a
A
vera
ge
per
Mile
Co
st o
f O
wn
ing
an
d O
per
atin
g a
n A
uto
mo
bile
: 19
91–2
001
Chai
ned
1996
dol
lars
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tota
l0.
430.
430.
420.
420.
420.
430.
450.
470.
480.
480.
50
Varia
ble
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.06
Fixe
d0.
320.
340.
320.
320.
320.
330.
340.
360.
370.
370.
37
NO
TE
: D
ata
are
the
cost
per
mile
bas
ed o
n 15
,000
mile
s pe
r ye
ar.
SO
UR
CE
S: 1
991–
1998
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-14.
199
9–20
01—
Am
eric
an A
utom
obile
Ass
ocia
tion,
"Yo
ur D
rivin
g C
osts
" (H
eath
row
, FL:
199
9–20
02
issu
es).
TAB
LE
34b
A
vera
ge
per
Mile
Co
st o
f O
wn
ing
an
d O
per
atin
g a
n A
uto
mo
bile
: 19
91–2
002
Curr
ent d
olla
rs
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Tota
l0.
370.
390.
390.
390.
410.
430.
450.
460.
470.
490.
510.
50
Varia
ble
0.10
0.09
0.09
0.09
0.10
0.10
0.11
0.11
0.11
0.12
0.14
0.12
Fixe
d0.
280.
300.
300.
300.
320.
330.
340.
350.
360.
370.
370.
38
NO
TE
: D
ata
are
the
cost
per
mile
bas
ed o
n 15
,000
mile
s pe
r ye
ar.
SO
UR
CE
S:
1991
–199
8—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-14.
199
9–20
02—
Am
eric
an A
utom
obile
Ass
ocia
tion,
"Yo
ur D
rivin
g C
osts
" (H
eath
row
, FL:
199
9–20
02 is
sues
).
Appendix B
217
TAB
LE
35a
A
mtr
ak A
vera
ge
Rev
enu
e p
er R
even
ue
P
asse
ng
er-M
ile:
1993
–200
1Cu
rren
t dol
lars
Yea
rRe
venu
e pe
r RPM
1993
0.13
1994
0.12
1995
0.14
1996
0.15
1997
0.15
1998
0.15
1999
0.20
2000
0.22
2001
0.23
TAB
LE
35b
A
mtr
ak A
vera
ge
Rev
enu
e p
er
R
even
ue
Pas
sen
ger
-Mile
: 19
93–2
001
Chai
ned
1996
dol
lars
Yea
rRe
venu
e pe
r RPM
1993
0.15
1994
0.14
1995
0.14
1996
0.15
1997
0.15
1998
0.15
1999
0.19
2000
0.20
2001
0.20
KE
Y F
OR
TA
BLE
S 3
5a a
nd 3
5b: R
PM
= re
venu
e pa
ssen
ger-
mile
.
NO
TES
FO
R T
AB
LES
35a
and
35b
: Am
trak
data
are
not
ava
ilabl
e pr
ior t
o 19
93. R
even
ue in
clud
es re
venu
e fro
m c
once
ssio
ns a
nd o
ther
pa
ssen
ger s
ervi
ces
in a
dditi
on to
pas
seng
er fa
res.
RP
M is
reve
nue
pass
enge
r-m
iles,
or t
he n
umbe
r of r
even
ue p
asse
nger
s m
ultip
lied
by th
e av
erag
e nu
mbe
r of m
iles
trave
led
by e
ach
pass
enge
r.
Cur
rent
dol
lar a
mou
nts
wer
e ad
just
ed to
elim
inat
e th
e ef
fect
s of
infla
tion
over
tim
e. A
mtra
k re
venu
e da
ta w
ere
adju
sted
for i
nfla
tion
usin
g th
e in
terc
ity ra
il de
flato
r fro
m th
e B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis'
Cha
in-T
ype
Qua
ntity
and
Pric
e In
dexe
s fo
r Per
sona
l Con
sum
ptio
n E
xpen
ditu
res.
SO
UR
CE
FO
R T
AB
LES
35a
and
35b
: A
mer
ican
Ass
ocia
tion
of R
ailro
ads,
Rai
lroad
Fac
ts (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 1
994–
2002
issu
es).
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
218
TAB
LE
36a
A
vera
ge
Cla
ss I
Inte
rcit
y B
us
Fare
: 19
90–2
000
Curr
ent d
olla
rs
1990
1
991
1
992
19
93
1994
199
5
1996
19
97
1998
19
99
2000
Clas
s I i
nter
city
bus
20.2
221
.86
21.1
521
.32
19.7
720
.10
22.8
520
.71
23.0
025
.43
29.4
6
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-15a
.
TAB
LE
36b
A
vera
ge
Cla
ss I
Inte
rcit
y B
us
Fare
: 19
90–2
000
Chai
ned
1996
dol
lars
1990
1
991
1
992
19
93
1994
199
5
1996
19
97
1998
19
99
2000
Clas
s I i
nter
city
bus
20.5
721
.25
20.2
321
.05
19.5
520
.49
22.8
520
.62
21.7
223
.47
26.0
2
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-15b
.
Appendix B
219
TAB
LE
37/
38a
Ave
rag
e Tr
ansi
t Fa
re p
er P
asse
ng
er-M
ile:
Fis
cal Y
ears
199
0–20
00Cu
rren
t dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Bus
0.14
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.17
0.17
0.18
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.21
Com
mut
er ra
il0.
130.
130.
130.
140.
140.
130.
140.
150.
140.
150.
15
Dem
and
resp
onsi
ve0.
090.
150.
150.
170.
300.
240.
240.
230.
190.
200.
20
Heav
y ra
il0.
150.
160.
170.
190.
190.
190.
200.
200.
190.
180.
18
Ligh
t rai
l0.
140.
150.
140.
150.
160.
150.
150.
130.
130.
140.
13
Trol
ley
bus
0.24
0.26
0.24
0.28
0.29
0.29
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.32
0.31
Othe
r0.
150.
140.
160.
150.
180.
170.
130.
140.
110.
120.
13
Tota
l0.
140.
150.
150.
160.
170.
170.
180.
180.
180.
180.
18
NO
TE
S: D
ata
for
2000
are
pre
limin
ary.
Beg
inni
ng in
199
1, fa
res
incl
ude
subs
idie
s fo
rmer
ly c
lass
ified
as
"Oth
er"
oper
atin
g fu
ndin
g.C
om
mu
ter
rail:
Urb
an/s
ubur
ban
pass
enge
r tr
ain
serv
ice
for
shor
t-di
stan
ce tr
avel
bet
wee
n a
cent
ral c
ity a
nd a
djac
ent s
ubur
bs r
un o
n tr
acks
of a
tr
aditi
onal
rai
lroad
sys
tem
. Doe
s no
t inc
lude
hea
vy-
or li
ght-
rail
tran
sit s
ervi
ce.
Hea
vy r
ail:
Hig
h-sp
eed
tran
sit r
ail o
pera
ted
on r
ight
s-of
-way
that
exl
cude
all
othe
r ve
hicl
es a
nd p
edes
tria
ns.
Lig
ht
rail:
Urb
an tr
ansi
t rai
l ope
rate
d on
a r
eser
ved
right
-of-
way
that
may
be
cros
sed
by r
oads
use
d by
mot
or v
ehic
les
and
pede
stria
ns.
Dem
and
res
po
nsi
ve:
A n
onfix
ed-r
oute
, non
fixed
-sch
edul
e fo
rm o
f tra
nspo
rtat
ion
that
ope
rate
s in
res
pons
e to
cal
ls fr
om p
asse
nger
s or
thei
r ag
ents
to th
e tr
ansi
t ope
rato
r or
dis
patc
her.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Am
eric
an P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Ass
ocia
tion,
Pub
lic T
rans
port
atio
n Fa
ct B
ook
2001
, Tab
les
18 a
nd 2
6, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.a
pta.
com
/sta
ts/fa
res/
fare
mod
e.ht
m, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. M
od
al d
efin
itio
ns—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
on, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, P
ocke
t Gui
de to
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
2003
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
003)
, glo
ssar
y.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
220
TAB
LE
37/
38b
A
vera
ge
Tran
sit
Fare
per
Pas
sen
ger
-Mile
: F
isca
l Yea
rs 1
990–
2000
Chai
ned
1996
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Bus
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.19
0.19
0.18
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.20
Com
mut
er ra
il0.
170.
160.
150.
160.
150.
140.
140.
140.
140.
150.
15
Dem
and
resp
onsi
ve0.
120.
190.
180.
190.
330.
260.
240.
220.
190.
200.
20
Heav
y ra
il0.
190.
200.
200.
210.
210.
210.
200.
190.
190.
180.
18
Ligh
t rai
l0.
180.
180.
160.
170.
180.
160.
150.
130.
130.
140.
13
Trol
ley
bus
0.30
0.33
0.29
0.32
0.33
0.32
0.30
0.30
0.30
0.32
0.31
Othe
r0.
190.
180.
180.
170.
200.
190.
130.
140.
110.
120.
13
Tota
l0.
180.
180.
180.
180.
190.
190.
180.
180.
180.
180.
18
NO
TE
S: D
ata
for
2000
are
pre
limin
ary.
Beg
inni
ng in
199
1, fa
res
incl
ude
subs
idie
s fo
rmer
ly c
lass
ified
as
"Oth
er"
oper
atin
g fu
ndin
g.
Co
mm
ute
r ra
il: U
rban
/sub
urba
n pa
ssen
ger
trai
n se
rvic
e fo
r sh
ort-
dist
ance
trav
el b
etw
een
a ce
ntra
l city
and
adj
acen
t sub
urbs
run
on
trac
ks o
f a
trad
ition
al r
ailro
ad s
yste
m. D
oes
not i
nclu
de h
eavy
- or
ligh
t-ra
il tr
ansi
t ser
vice
.H
eavy
rai
l: H
igh-
spee
d tr
ansi
t rai
l ope
rate
d on
rig
hts-
of-w
ay th
at e
xlcu
de a
ll ot
her
vehi
cles
and
ped
estr
ians
.L
igh
t ra
il: U
rban
tran
sit r
ail o
pera
ted
on a
res
erve
d rig
ht-o
f-w
ay th
at m
ay b
e cr
osse
d by
roa
ds u
sed
by m
otor
veh
icle
s an
d pe
dest
rians
.D
eman
d r
esp
on
sive
: A
non
fixed
-rou
te, n
onfix
ed-s
ched
ule
form
of t
rans
port
atio
n th
at o
pera
tes
in r
espo
nse
to c
alls
from
pas
seng
ers
or th
eir
agen
ts to
the
tran
sit o
pera
tor
or d
ispa
tche
r.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Am
eric
an P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Ass
ocia
tion,
Pub
lic T
rans
port
atio
n Fa
ct B
ook
2001
, Tab
les
18 a
nd 2
6, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.a
pta.
com
/sta
ts/fa
res/
fare
mod
e.ht
m, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. M
od
al d
efin
itio
ns—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
on, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, P
ocke
t Gui
de to
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
2003
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
003)
, glo
ssar
y.
Appendix B
221
TAB
LE
39
Sh
are
of
Per
son
al In
com
e S
pen
t o
n
C
om
mu
tin
g b
y In
com
e G
rou
p:
1999
Curr
ent d
olla
rs
Year
ly p
erso
nal i
ncom
eM
edia
n sp
ent
Perc
ent
< $8
,000
339
9.5
$8,0
00–$
14,9
9976
26.
0
$15,
000–
$21,
999
800
4.6
$22,
000–
$29,
999
1,04
04.
1
$30,
000–
$44,
999
1,28
03.
5
>$45
,000
1,60
02.
2
Tota
l pop
ulat
ion
960
3.9
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
U.S
. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, U.S
. Cen
sus
Bur
eau,
Sur
vey
of
Inco
me
and
Pro
gram
Par
ticip
atio
n (H
yatts
ville
, MD
: 200
1), a
lso
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bls
.cen
sus.
gov/
sipp
/, as
of A
pril
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
222
TAB
LE
40
Sh
are
of
Per
son
al In
com
e S
pen
t o
n C
om
mu
tin
g b
y In
com
e G
rou
p a
nd
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n M
od
e: 1
999
Curr
ent d
olla
rs
Own
vehi
cle
Publ
ic tr
ansi
t
Year
ly p
erso
nal i
ncom
eM
edia
n sp
ent
Perc
ent
Med
ian
spen
tPe
rcen
t
< $8
,000
678
20.5
540
12.8
$8,0
00–$
14,9
9984
78.
070
25.
7
$15,
000–
$21,
999
960
5.6
765
3.9
$22,
000–
$29,
999
1,28
05.
176
53.
0
$30,
000–
$44,
999
1,60
04.
276
52.
2
> $45
,000
1,69
42.
61,
080
1.5
Tota
l pop
ulat
ion
1,28
04.
976
53.
3
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
U.S
. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, U.S
. Cen
sus
Bur
eau,
Sur
vey
of In
com
e an
d P
rogr
am P
artic
ipat
ion
(Hya
ttsvi
lle, M
D: 2
001)
, als
o av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ls.c
ensu
s.go
v/si
pp/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03.
Appendix B
223
TAB
LE
41
Ori
gin
an
d D
esti
nat
ion
Su
rvey
Ind
ex b
y C
ity
of
Ori
gin
for
Th
ree
Med
ium
-siz
ed U
.S. C
itie
s: 1
995–
2000
All
clas
ses
of s
ervi
ce, d
omes
tic c
arrie
rs o
nly
Q1
1995
= 1
00
Quar
ter
Char
lest
on, S
CCo
lora
do S
prin
gs, C
ODe
s M
oine
s, IA
95Q1
100.
010
0.0
100.
0
95Q2
102.
595
.510
2.5
95Q3
104.
590
.097
.1
95Q4
104.
981
.895
.7
96Q1
103.
276
.495
.5
96Q2
93.2
83.0
96.1
96Q3
98.8
83.8
95.7
96Q4
97.8
79.6
101.
3
97Q1
100.
280
.810
6.1
97Q2
102.
481
.910
5.5
97Q3
99.2
86.3
107.
1
97Q4
104.
993
.311
5.3
98Q1
104.
594
.610
3.0
98Q2
102.
493
.696
.5
98Q3
96.8
98.5
94.9
98Q4
98.9
98.0
91.1
99Q1
102.
110
4.8
93.1
99Q2
104.
410
6.2
94.9
99Q3
101.
610
5.9
92.8
99Q4
102.
010
7.8
91.9
00Q1
105.
011
1.9
94.8
00Q2
105.
311
3.0
100.
7
00Q3
103.
611
3.0
99.7
00Q4
108.
611
0.9
96.3
NO
TES
: The
se d
ata
have
bee
n de
velo
ped
for r
esea
rch
purp
oses
onl
y an
d ar
e no
t offi
cial
BT
S d
ata.
T
he O
&D
Sur
vey
indi
ces
are
com
pute
d us
ing
the
Fis
her I
ndex
form
ula,
whi
ch d
iffer
s fr
om th
e fo
rmul
as
used
to c
ompu
te th
e B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics
(BLS
) airl
ine
fare
Con
sum
er P
rice
Inde
x (C
PI).
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or, B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics,
Airl
ine
Fare
Con
sum
er P
rice
Inde
x,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bls
.gov
/cpi
/hom
e.ht
m, a
s of
Mar
ch 2
003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
224
TAB
LE
42
Ori
gin
an
d D
esti
nat
ion
Su
rvey
Ind
ex b
y C
ity
of
Ori
gin
for
Th
ree
Lar
ge
Inte
rnat
ion
al C
itie
s: 1
995–
2000
All
clas
ses
of s
ervi
ce c
ombi
ned
Q1
1995
= 1
00
Quar
ter
Fran
kfur
t, Ge
rman
yLo
ndon
, Eng
land
Toky
o, J
apan
95Q1
100.
010
0.0
100.
0
95Q2
108.
711
8.7
114.
9
95Q3
119.
613
2.1
122.
3
95Q4
106.
112
1.3
94.6
96Q1
97.4
120.
791
.9
96Q2
103.
311
3.1
91.2
96Q3
116.
311
2.3
100.
4
96Q4
93.3
106.
086
.4
97Q1
91.6
99.8
81.1
97Q2
88.3
108.
078
.8
97Q3
103.
012
3.8
93.5
97Q4
92.2
105.
473
.5
98Q1
80.0
91.0
67.4
98Q2
88.0
96.8
63.4
98Q3
101.
797
.468
.9
98Q4
86.4
81.5
67.7
99Q1
81.2
74.1
70.9
99Q2
83.6
71.6
70.6
99Q3
92.0
81.8
84.2
99Q4
84.0
71.3
79.2
00Q1
76.7
67.3
78.8
00Q2
79.5
70.9
81.9
00Q3
88.3
80.0
94.3
00Q4
74.0
67.4
80.4
NO
TES
: The
se d
ata
have
bee
n de
velo
ped
for r
esea
rch
purp
oses
onl
y an
d ar
e no
t offi
cial
BT
S d
ata.
T
he O
&D
Sur
vey
indi
ces
are
com
pute
d us
ing
the
Fis
her I
ndex
form
ula,
whi
ch d
iffer
s fr
om th
e fo
rmul
as
used
to c
ompu
te th
e B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics
(BLS
) airl
ine
fare
Con
sum
er P
rice
Inde
x (C
PI).
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
(BT
S)
and
U.S
. D
epar
tmen
t of L
abor
, Bur
eau
of L
abor
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
BT
S's
qua
rter
ly
Pas
seng
er O
rigin
& D
estin
atio
n S
urve
y, M
arch
200
3.
Appendix B
225
TAB
LE
43
Co
mp
aris
on
of
Air
fare
Ind
ices
: 19
95–2
000
Not s
easo
nally
adj
uste
d, d
omes
tic c
arrie
rs o
nly
Q1 1
995
= 10
0
BLS
airli
ne fa
re C
PI,
O&D
surv
ey,
O&D
surv
ey,
O&D
surv
ey,
Quar
ter
quar
terly
ave
rage
all o
rigin
sU.
S. o
rigin
onl
yfo
reig
n or
igin
onl
y
95Q1
100
.0
100
.0 1
00.0
100
.0
95Q2
106
.1
101
.9 1
01.1
106
.7
95Q3
105
.7
102
.3 1
00.4
113
.6
95Q4
102
.6
98.
6 9
9.0
97.
6
96Q1
101
.1
98.
4 9
8.7
97.
3
96Q2
103
.6
97.
8 9
7.8
98.
4
96Q3
105
.5
99.
3 9
8.4
105
.6
96Q4
110
.1
98.
2 9
9.3
93.
4
97Q1
107
.9
100
.5 1
02.0
93.
3
97Q2
110
.1
101
.9 1
03.5
94.
4
97Q3
108
.4
101
.9 1
02.2
101
.9
97Q4
108
.8
105
.2 1
07.8
91.
8
98Q1
112
.4
101
.4 1
04.6
84.
5
98Q2
112
.1
97.
5 1
00.0
85.
2
98Q3
113
.1
97.
3 9
9.5
86.
3
98Q4
110
.8
96.
2 9
9.1
81.
1
99Q1
116
.3
98.
9 1
02.2
81.
6
99Q2
119
.4
98.
7 1
02.1
80.
7
99Q3
119
.1
98.
4 1
00.4
88.
0
99Q4
123
.1
98.
8 1
01.7
83.
6
00Q1
126
.1
102
.5 1
06.1
83.
0
00Q2
132
.1
104
.6 1
08.2
85.
1
00Q3
135
.1
106
.4 1
09.0
92.
8
00Q4
129
.7
107
.3 1
11.6
84.
4
NO
TE
S:
The
se d
ata
have
bee
n de
velo
ped
for
rese
arch
pur
pose
s on
ly a
nd a
re n
ot o
ffici
al B
TS
dat
a. T
he O
&D
Sur
vey
indi
ces
are
com
pute
d us
ing
the
Fis
her
Inde
x fo
rmul
a, w
hich
diff
ers
from
the
form
ulas
use
d to
com
pute
the
Bur
eau
of L
abor
S
tatis
tics
(BLS
) A
irlin
e fa
re C
onsu
mer
Pric
e In
dex
(CP
I).
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
(BT
S)
and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or,
Bur
eau
of L
abor
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
BT
S's
qua
rter
ly P
asse
nger
Orig
in &
Des
tinat
ion
Sur
vey,
Mar
ch
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
226
TAB
LE
44
Pas
sen
ger
-Mile
s by
Typ
e o
f S
ervi
ce:
1991
–200
1M
illio
ns
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Bus
18,1
0417
,494
17,3
6417
,195
17,0
2416
,802
17,5
0917
,874
18,6
8418
,807
19,5
83
Heav
y ra
il10
,488
10,7
3710
,231
10,6
6810
,559
11,5
3012
,056
12,2
8412
,902
13,8
4414
,178
Com
mut
er ra
il7,
383
7,32
06,
912
7,99
68,
244
8,35
08,
037
8,70
28,
764
9,40
09,
544
Ligh
t rai
l66
170
070
483
185
995
51,
024
1,11
51,
190
1,33
91,
427
Othe
r83
790
21,
015
1,19
11,
285
1,34
61,
554
1,62
91,
739
1,71
01,
776
Tota
l37
,473
37,1
5336
,225
37,8
8237
,971
38,9
8440
,180
41,6
0543
,279
45,1
0046
,508
NO
TE
: O
ther
incl
udes
mod
es s
uch
as d
eman
d re
spon
sive
, aut
omat
ed g
uide
way
, Ala
ska
Rai
lroad
, cab
le c
ar, f
erry
boat
, inc
lined
pla
ne, m
onor
ail,
trol
leyb
us, a
nd v
anpo
ol.
SO
UR
CE
S: 1
991–
1994
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, 1
994
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Sum
mar
ies
and
Tren
ds (
Was
hing
ton,
D
C: 1
996)
; 199
5—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, 1
997
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Sum
mar
ies
and
Tren
ds (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 19
99);
199
6–20
01—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Fed
eral
Tra
nsit
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Dat
abas
e, D
ata
Tabl
es (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 199
6–20
01 is
sues
).
TAB
LE
45/
46
Tran
sit
Rid
ersh
ip b
y S
elec
ted
Typ
e o
f S
ervi
ce:
1991
–200
1M
illio
ns
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Bus
4,82
64,
749
4,63
94,
629
4,57
94,
506
4,60
24,
754
4,99
25,
040
5,21
5
Com
mut
er ra
il32
431
432
133
934
435
235
738
139
641
341
8
Heav
y ra
il2,
167
2,20
72,
046
2,16
92,
034
2,15
72,
430
2,39
32,
521
2,63
22,
728
Ligh
t rai
l18
418
818
828
224
925
925
927
328
931
633
4
Tota
l7,
738
7,69
67,
433
7,70
27,
504
7,56
57,
954
8,11
58,
523
8,72
09,
008
NO
TE
: To
tal i
nclu
des
othe
r m
odes
not
sho
wn,
suc
h as
ferr
yboa
ts, d
eman
d re
spon
sive
, inc
lined
pla
nes,
and
trol
ley
buse
s.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, "
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Sum
mar
ies
and
Tren
ds,"
200
2 dr
aft,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.ntd
prog
ram
.com
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
227
TAB
LE
47
To
p 3
0 Tr
ansi
t A
uth
ori
ties
by
Un
linke
d P
asse
ng
er T
rip
s: 2
001
Agen
cyNu
mbe
r of u
nlin
ked
trips
(tho
usan
ds)
New
Yor
k Ci
ty T
rans
it, N
Y2,
667,
001
Chic
ago
Tran
sit A
utho
rity,
IL48
4,82
1
LA C
ount
y M
etro
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Au
thor
ity, C
A39
8,11
1
Was
hing
ton-
Met
ro A
rea
Tran
sit A
utho
rity,
DC
378,
936
Mas
sach
uset
ts B
ay T
rans
it Au
thor
ity, M
A36
4,33
7
SE P
enns
ylva
nia
Tran
spor
tatio
n Au
thor
ity, P
A31
8,05
1
San
Fran
cisc
o M
unic
ipal
Rai
lway
, CA
235,
078
New
Jer
sey
Tran
sit,
NJ22
5,93
9
Met
ro A
tlant
a Ra
pid
Tran
sit A
utho
rity,
GA
164,
078
Mar
ylan
d Tr
ansi
t Adm
inis
tratio
n, M
D11
1,04
8
San
Fran
cisc
o Ba
y Ar
ea R
apid
Tra
nsit,
CA
103,
919
Long
Isla
nd R
ail R
oad,
NY
101,
923
King
Cou
nty
DOT,
Met
ro T
rans
it Di
stric
t, W
A10
1,00
0
Oreg
on T
ri-Co
unty
Dis
trict
, OR
91,1
86
Met
ro T
rans
it Au
thor
ity H
arris
Cou
nty,
TX
88,2
46
Mia
mi-D
ade
Tran
sit A
genc
y, F
L84
,005
Gree
n Tr
ansi
t Jam
aica
Cor
pora
tion,
NY
82,1
91
Port
Auth
ority
Tra
ns-H
udso
n Co
rpor
atio
n, N
J82
,038
Denv
er R
egio
nal T
rans
porta
tion
Dist
rict,
CO79
,651
Port
Auth
ority
Alle
ghen
y, P
A74
,827
Met
ro T
rans
it, M
N73
,348
Met
ro N
orth
Rai
l Roa
d, N
Y73
,213
NE IL
Reg
iona
l Com
mut
er R
ailro
ad, I
L72
,122
Milw
auke
e Co
unty
Tra
nspo
rtatio
n Sy
stem
, WI
71,2
50
City
and
Cou
nty
of H
onol
ulu,
HI
71,1
15(T
able
con
tinue
s on
the
next
pag
e)
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
228
Agen
cyNu
mbe
r of u
nlin
ked
trips
(tho
usan
ds)
Alam
eda-
Cont
ra C
osta
Tra
nsit
Dist
rict,
CA70
,809
Dalla
s Ar
ea R
apid
Tra
nsit,
TX
61,4
34
Grea
ter C
leve
land
Reg
iona
l Tra
nsit
Auth
ority
, OH
60,0
94
Oran
ge C
ount
y Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Auth
ority
, CA
57,3
28
Sant
a Cl
ara
Valle
y Tr
ansi
t Aut
horit
y, C
A57
,300
Tota
l, to
p 30
aut
horit
ies
6,78
9,77
0
Tota
l, al
l aut
horit
ies
9,00
7,80
0
Top
30 a
utho
ritie
s as
per
cent
of a
ll au
thor
ities
75.4
NO
TE
S: T
he 3
0 la
rges
t tra
nsit
agen
cies
as
of 2
001.
Tri-
Cou
nty
Met
ropo
litan
is a
mun
icip
al
corp
orat
ion
of th
e S
tate
of O
rego
n. G
reen
Tra
nsit
Jam
aica
Cor
pora
tion
is a
con
trac
tor
for
the
New
Yor
k C
ity D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Fed
eral
Tra
nsit
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Dat
abas
e, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.n
tdpr
ogra
m.c
om, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03.
TAB
LE
48
Lif
t- o
r R
amp
-Eq
uip
ped
Tra
nsi
t B
use
s: 1
993–
2001
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tota
l num
ber o
f bus
es1
55,7
2657
,023
57,3
2257
,369
58,9
7560
,830
63,6
1865
,324
67,3
79
ADA-
lift o
r ram
p-eq
uipp
ed b
uses
29,0
8831
,065
35,3
8138
,316
40,9
3246
,278
51,2
1354
,585
58,7
85
ADA-
lift o
r ram
p-eq
uipp
ed b
uses
(per
cent
)52
5462
6769
7681
8487
1 In
clud
es b
uses
of t
rans
it ag
enci
es r
ecei
ving
fede
ral f
undi
ng fo
r bu
s pu
rcha
ses,
as
wel
l as
buse
s of
age
ncie
s no
t rec
eivi
ng fe
dera
l fun
ds th
at v
olun
taril
y re
port
dat
a to
the
Fed
eral
Tra
nsit
Adm
inis
trat
ion.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, "
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Sum
mar
ies
and
Tren
ds,"
200
2 dr
aft,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.ntd
prog
ram
.com
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
47
To
p 3
0 Tr
ansi
t A
uth
ori
ties
by
Un
linke
d P
asse
ng
er T
rip
s: 2
001
(con
tinue
d)
Appendix B
229
TAB
LE
49a
L
ift-
or
Ram
p-E
qu
ipp
ed T
ran
sit
Bu
ses
by T
ype:
199
3–20
01Pe
rcen
t
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Larg
e bu
ses
79.4
80.1
84.5
87.8
90.4
91.6
93.4
94.5
95.4
Med
ium
bus
es54
.058
.366
.072
.880
.786
.990
.192
.993
.7
Smal
l bus
es50
.351
.959
.263
.865
.272
.676
.879
.984
.5
Artic
ulat
ed b
uses
38.4
44.6
50.2
57.6
61.4
68.4
81.3
85.5
88.5
NO
TE
S:
Larg
e bu
ses
have
mor
e th
an 3
5 se
ats,
med
ium
bus
es h
ave
25–3
5 se
ats,
and
sm
all b
uses
hav
e le
ss th
an 2
5 se
ats.
A
rtic
ulat
ed b
uses
are
ext
ra-lo
ng b
uses
that
mea
sure
bet
wee
n 54
and
60
feet
.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, "
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Sum
mar
ies
and
Tren
ds,"
200
2 dr
aft,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.ntd
prog
ram
.com
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
49b
L
ift-
or
Ram
p-E
qu
ipp
ed T
ran
sit
Bu
ses
by T
ype:
199
3–20
01Nu
mbe
r
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Larg
e bu
ses
23,
338
24,
398
27,
420
29,
073
29,
684
33,
512
36,
029
37,
581
40,
501
Med
ium
bus
es 1
,911
2,1
53 2
,561
3,0
81 4
,143
5,1
50 5
,959
6,9
26 7
,337
Smal
l bus
es 3
,146
3,7
95 4
,539
5,2
69 6
,194
6,5
45 7
,722
8,3
66 9
,176
Artic
ulat
ed b
uses
693
719
861
893
911
1,0
71 1
,503
1,7
12 1
,771
NO
TE
S:
Larg
e bu
ses
have
mor
e th
an 3
5 se
ats,
med
ium
bus
es h
ave
25–3
5 se
ats,
and
sm
all b
uses
hav
e le
ss th
an 2
5 se
ats.
A
rtic
ulat
ed b
uses
are
ext
ra-lo
ng b
uses
that
mea
sure
bet
wee
n 54
and
60
feet
.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, "
Nat
iona
l Tra
nsit
Sum
mar
ies
and
Tren
ds,"
200
2 dr
aft,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.ntd
prog
ram
.com
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
230
TAB
LE
50
Ro
adsi
de
Tru
ck In
spec
tio
ns:
199
0–20
01Th
ousa
nds
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Insp
ecte
d1,
601
1,57
41,
616
1,94
71,
974
1,84
02,
039
2,14
81,
763
1,86
21,
928
2,08
7
Truc
ks ta
ken
out o
f ser
vice
542
497
462
506
472
417
437
439
448
453
457
486
NO
TE
: D
ata
for
truc
ks ta
ken
out o
f ser
vice
in 2
001
not a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al M
otor
Car
rier
Saf
ety
Adm
inis
trat
ion
(FM
CS
A),
Mot
or C
arrie
r M
anag
emen
t Inf
orm
atio
n S
yste
m, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.fm
csa.
dot.g
ov, a
s of
Jun
e 20
03. 1
999–
2001
dat
a—pe
rson
al c
omm
unic
atio
n, F
MC
SA
, Aug
. 11,
200
3.
TAB
LE
51
In
spec
ted
Tru
cks
Take
n O
ut
of
Ser
vice
for
Rep
airs
: 19
90–2
001
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Perc
ent
33.8
31.6
28.6
26.0
23.9
22.7
21.4
20.4
25.4
24.3
23.7
23.3
NO
TE
: D
ata
for
truc
ks ta
ken
out o
f ser
vice
in 2
001
not a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al M
otor
Car
rier
Saf
ety
Adm
inis
trat
ion
(FM
CS
A),
Mot
or C
arrie
r M
anag
emen
t Inf
orm
atio
n S
yste
m, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.fm
csa.
dot.g
ov, a
s of
Jun
e 20
03. 2
001
dat
a—pe
rson
al c
omm
unic
atio
n, F
MC
SA
, Aug
. 11,
200
3.
Appendix B
231
TAB
LE
52
Fed
eral
-Aid
Ro
adw
ay P
roje
cts
Un
der
way
by
Imp
rove
men
t Ty
pe:
200
1
Impr
ovem
ent t
ype
Mile
s
Rest
orat
ion
5,16
7
Resu
rfac
ing
12,5
49
Min
or w
iden
ing
492
Reco
nstru
ctio
n3,
937
Maj
or w
iden
ing
1,47
6
Relo
catio
n24
6
New
rout
e73
8
TAB
LE
53
Fed
eral
, Sta
te, a
nd
Lo
cal G
over
nm
ent
Hig
hw
ay M
ain
ten
ance
Exp
end
itu
res:
199
1–20
01Bi
llion
s of
dol
lars
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tota
l in
curr
ent $
21,2
2222
,578
22,8
9423
,553
24,3
1925
,564
26,7
7728
,173
29,9
9730
,636
31,6
77
Tota
l in
cons
tant
198
7 $
17,7
0018
,282
17,9
9818
,048
18,1
2118
,514
18,9
5219
,635
20,4
5520
,400
20,3
19
NO
TE
S: A
lthou
gh d
olla
r va
lues
in m
ost o
ther
sec
tions
of t
his
book
hav
e be
en c
onve
rted
to c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs, t
hese
dat
a ar
e pr
esen
ted
in c
onst
ant 1
987
dolla
rs.
The
Fed
eral
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
whi
ch c
olle
cts
the
data
, adj
usts
cur
rent
dol
lar
data
to c
onst
ant 1
987
dolla
rs u
sing
an
inde
x th
at th
ey h
ave
desi
gned
for
that
pu
rpos
e.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, H
ighw
ay S
tatis
tics
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, "H
ighw
ay E
xpen
ditu
res
by
Gov
ernm
ent T
ype,
Cur
rent
and
Con
stan
t Dol
lars
" ch
art,
also
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/ohi
m, a
s of
Jun
e 20
03.
NO
TE
S:
Mai
nten
ance
incl
udes
any
wor
k re
quire
d to
kee
p hi
ghw
ays
in u
sabl
e co
nditi
on th
at d
oes
not e
xten
d th
e se
rvic
e lif
e of
the
road
way
bey
ond
the
orig
inal
des
ign.
R
esto
ratio
n in
clud
es r
enov
atio
n. A
lthou
gh th
e fo
llow
ing
cate
gorie
s ar
e no
t gen
eral
ly c
onsi
dere
d m
aint
enan
ce, t
hey
are
incl
uded
for
com
paris
on: m
ajor
wid
enin
g,
relo
catio
n, n
ew r
oute
.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, H
ighw
ay S
tatis
tics
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C),
"M
iles
of F
eder
al-A
id R
oadw
ay P
roje
cts
Und
erw
ay b
y Im
prov
emen
t Typ
e" c
hart
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/ohi
m, a
s of
Jun
e 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
232
TAB
LE
54
Rai
l In
stal
led
or
Rep
lace
d b
y U
.S. C
lass
I R
ailr
oad
s: 1
990–
2001
Thou
sand
s of
tons
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Repl
acem
ent
781.
266
6.7
875.
382
4.3
728.
865
7.6
803.
364
2.7
679.
076
9.3
726.
166
0.1
Addi
tion
19.5
16.7
14.2
26.2
62.9
61.3
68.7
113.
820
4.8
213.
419
6.3
197.
0
SO
UR
CE
: Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad T
en-Y
ear
Tren
ds, 1
990–
2000
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
000)
; 200
0–20
01 d
ata—
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
R
ailro
ads,
Ana
lysi
s of
Cla
ss I
Rai
lroad
s (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
000
and
2001
).
TAB
LE
55
Cro
ssti
es In
stal
led
or
Rep
lace
d b
y U
.S. C
lass
I R
ailr
oad
s: 1
990–
2001
Mill
ions
of c
ross
ties
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Repl
acem
ents
14.1
12.6
13.5
12.8
12.3
12.1
13.4
11.9
10.4
10.8
10.8
11.4
Addi
tions
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.8
1.5
1.8
1.3
0.7
0.5
SO
UR
CE
S:
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad T
en-Y
ear
Tren
ds, 1
990–
2000
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
000)
; 200
0–20
01 d
ata—
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
R
ailro
ads,
Ana
lysi
s of
Cla
ss I
Rai
lroad
s (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
000
and
2001
).
TAB
LE
56
New
or
Reb
uilt
Lo
com
oti
ves
and
Fre
igh
t C
ars:
199
0–20
01
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Loco
mot
ives
706
584
460
707
1214
1129
821
811
1061
865
721
755
Per
cent
age
of fl
eet
3.7
3.2
2.6
3.9
6.6
6.0
4.3
4.1
5.2
4.3
3.6
3.8
Frei
ght c
ars
37,7
6932
,083
28,8
7643
,332
51,0
7966
,052
59,9
9351
,963
83,0
7677
,901
58,2
4535
,475
Per
cent
age
of fl
eet
3.1
2.7
2.5
3.7
4.3
5.4
4.8
4.1
6.3
5.7
4.2
2.7
NO
TE
: Lo
com
otiv
e da
ta a
re fo
r C
lass
I ra
ilroa
ds o
nly.
Fre
ight
car
dat
a co
ver
Cla
ss I
railr
oads
, oth
er r
ailro
ads,
and
priv
ate
car
owne
rs.
SO
UR
CE
: A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Am
eric
an R
ailro
ads,
Rai
lroad
Fac
ts (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 199
9 an
d 20
02).
Appendix B
233
TAB
LE
57
In
terr
up
tio
ns
of
Ser
vice
by
Typ
e o
f Tr
ansi
t: 1
995–
2000
Num
ber p
er 1
00,0
00 re
venu
e ve
hicl
e-m
iles
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Mot
or b
us 2
8 2
7 2
7 2
9 2
8 2
8
Ligh
t rai
l 3
2 2
6 2
0 1
4 1
7 1
5
Heav
y ra
il 4
4 3
7 7
6
Com
mut
er ra
il 4
3 3
3 3
3
Dem
and
resp
onsi
ve 2
2 3
3 3
3
Aver
age
18.
8 1
8.1
17.
6 1
8.7
18.
6 1
8.1
NO
TE
S: I
nter
rupt
ions
of s
ervi
ce in
clud
e m
ajor
and
min
or m
echn
ical
failu
res.
If th
e ve
hicl
e op
erat
or w
as a
ble
to fi
x th
e pr
oble
m a
nd r
etur
n th
e ve
hicl
e to
ser
vice
with
out a
ssis
tanc
e, th
e in
cide
nt is
not
con
side
red
an in
terr
uptio
n of
ser
vice
.
Lig
ht
rail
incl
udes
str
eetc
ar-t
ype
vehi
cles
ope
rate
d on
city
str
eets
, sem
iexc
lusi
ve r
ight
s-of
-way
, or
excl
usiv
e rig
hts-
of-w
ay. S
ervi
ce m
ay
be p
rovi
ded
by s
tep-
entr
y ve
hicl
es o
r by
leve
l boa
rdin
g. C
om
mu
ter
rail
incl
udes
urb
an p
asse
nger
trai
n se
rvic
e fo
r sh
ort-
dist
ance
trav
el
betw
een
a ce
ntra
l city
and
adj
acen
t sub
urb.
Hea
vy r
ail i
nclu
des
elec
tric
rai
lway
s w
ith th
e ca
paci
ty to
tran
spor
t a h
eavy
vol
ume
of
pass
enge
r tra
ffic
and
char
acte
rized
by
excl
usiv
e rig
hts-
of-w
ay, m
ultic
ar tr
ains
, hig
h sp
eed,
rapi
d ac
cele
ratio
n, s
ophi
stic
ated
sig
nalin
g, a
nd
high
-pla
tform
load
ing.
Als
o kn
own
as “
subw
ay,”
“ele
vate
d (r
ailw
ay),”
or
“met
ropo
litan
rai
lway
(m
etro
).” D
eman
d r
esp
on
sive
tran
sit
incl
udes
non
fixed
-rou
te, a
non
fixed
-sch
edul
e ve
hicl
es th
at o
pera
tes
in r
espo
nse
to c
alls
from
pas
seng
ers
or th
eir
agen
ts to
the
tran
sit
oper
ator
or
disp
atch
er.
SO
UR
CE
S: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal T
rans
it Li
brar
y, 2
001
Rep
ortin
g M
anua
l, av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.n
tdpr
ogra
m.c
om/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03; a
nd A
mer
ican
Pub
lic T
rans
port
atio
n A
ssoc
iatio
n, M
aint
enan
ce d
ata
tabl
es, a
vaila
ble
at
http
://w
ww
.apt
a.co
m/r
esea
rch/
stat
s/m
aint
/inde
x.cf
m, a
s of
Apr
il 20
03.
TAB
LE
58
Sai
nt
Law
ren
ce S
eaw
ay L
ock
Del
ays
by C
ause
: 19
90–2
001
Hour
s
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Wea
ther
rela
ted
112.
018
7.0
125.
710
0.9
88.5
143.
465
.243
.22.
053
.756
.8
All o
ther
56
.042
.019
9.4
62.7
49.3
44.2
66.8
55.4
47.6
30.4
54.0
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, S
aint
Law
renc
e S
eaw
ay D
evel
opm
ent C
orpo
ratio
n, A
nnua
l Rep
orts
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: v
ario
us y
ears
).
Rep
orts
for
year
s 19
93–2
000
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.gre
atla
kes-
seaw
ay.c
om/e
n/ab
outu
s/sl
sdc_
annr
ept.h
tml,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
234
TAB
LE
59
U.S
. Do
mes
tic
Flig
ht
Op
erat
ion
s:
Sep
tem
ber
5–1
7, 2
001
Date
Actu
al fl
ight
sCa
ncel
latio
ns
Sept
embe
r 517
,325
324
Sept
embe
r 617
,330
318
Sept
embe
r 717
,078
594
Sept
embe
r 815
,322
375
Sept
embe
r 916
,522
300
Sept
embe
r 10
16,9
0566
1
Sept
embe
r 11
2,54
214
,962
Sept
embe
r 12
017
,535
Sept
embe
r 13
1,44
516
,109
Sept
embe
r 14
7,74
59,
611
Sept
embe
r 15
9,63
45,
573
Sept
embe
r 16
12,2
434,
297
Sept
embe
r 17
13,7
083,
518
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s, F
orm
234
Del
ay D
ata
for
Sep
tem
-be
r 20
01, t
abul
ated
Nov
. 5, 2
001,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
60
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n F
atal
ity
Rat
es b
y M
od
e: 2
001
Per 1
00,0
00 U
.S. r
esid
ents
Mod
e
Air
0.32
High
way
14.7
9
Railr
oad
0.34
Tran
sit
0.11
Wat
erbo
rne
0.29
Pipe
line
0.00
2
Tota
l15
.8
NO
TE
S:
Air
fata
litie
s in
clud
e ai
r ca
rrie
r se
rvic
e,
com
mut
er s
ervi
ce, a
ir ta
xi s
evic
e, a
nd g
ener
al
avia
tion.
Hig
hway
fata
litie
s in
clud
e al
l typ
es o
f hi
ghw
ay m
otor
veh
icle
s, b
icyc
les,
and
ped
estr
i-an
s. R
ailro
ad fa
talit
ies
incl
ude
railr
oad
and
high
-w
ay-r
ail g
rade
cro
ssin
g in
cide
nts.
Tra
nsit
fata
litie
s in
clud
e m
otor
bus
, hea
vy r
ail,
light
rai
l, co
mm
uter
rai
l, de
man
d re
spon
sive
, tro
lley
bus,
ae
rial t
ram
way
, aut
omat
ed g
uide
way
tran
sit,
cabl
ecar
, fer
rybo
at, i
nclin
ed p
lane
, mon
orai
l, an
d va
npoo
l. W
ater
born
e fa
talit
ies
incl
ude
fata
litie
s du
e to
ves
sel-r
elat
ed in
cide
nts
or n
onve
ssel
- re
late
d in
cide
nts
on c
omm
erci
al a
nd r
ecre
atio
nal
vess
els.
Pip
elin
e fa
talit
ies
incl
ude
haza
rdou
s liq
-ui
d pi
pelin
es a
nd g
as p
ipel
ines
.
SO
UR
CE
S: E
xcep
t as
no
ted
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
(US
DO
T),
Bur
eau
of T
rans
por-
tatio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tis-
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 2
-1,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of A
pril
2003
. P
op
ula
tio
n—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce,
U.S
. Cen
sus
Bur
eau,
Cen
sus
2000
, ava
ilabl
e at
ht
tp://
ww
w.c
ensu
s.go
v/m
ain/
ww
w/c
en20
00.h
tml,
as o
f Jun
e 20
03. 2
001
wat
erb
orn
e—U
.S.
Dep
artm
ent o
f Hom
elan
d S
ecur
ity, U
.S. C
oast
G
uard
, Dat
a A
dmin
istr
atio
n D
ivis
ion,
per
sona
l co
mm
unic
atio
n, J
une
6, 2
003.
200
1 tr
ansi
t—
US
DO
T, F
eder
al T
rans
it A
dmin
istr
atio
n, N
atio
nal
Tran
sit D
atab
ase,
Nat
iona
l Tre
nds
and
Sum
ma-
ries
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
.
Appendix B
235
TAB
LE
61
Hig
hw
ay F
atal
itie
s p
er 1
00,0
00 R
esid
ents
for
Sel
ecte
d V
ehic
le T
ypes
: 19
91–2
001
Per 1
00,0
00 U
.S. r
esid
ents
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Pass
enge
r car
occ
upan
ts8.
88.
38.
38.
48.
48.
48.
17.
77.
57.
37.
1
Ligh
t tru
ck o
ccup
ants
3.3
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
4.0
4.1
4.1
Larg
e tru
ck o
ccup
ants
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
Mot
orcy
cle
occu
pant
s1.
10.
90.
90.
90.
80.
80.
80.
80.
91.
01.
1
NO
TE
S:
Larg
e tr
ucks
are
def
ined
as
truc
ks o
ver
10,0
00 p
ound
s gr
oss
vehi
cle
wei
ght r
atin
g, in
clud
ing
sing
le-u
nit t
ruck
s an
d tr
uck
trac
tors
. Lig
ht tr
ucks
are
de
fined
as
truc
ks o
f 10,
000
poun
ds g
ross
veh
icle
wei
ght r
atin
g or
less
, inc
ludi
ng p
ick-
up tr
ucks
, van
s, tr
uck-
base
d st
atio
n w
agon
s, a
nd s
port
util
ity v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le2-
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03.
TAB
LE
62
Hig
hw
ay F
atal
itie
s p
er 1
00 M
illio
n V
ehic
le-M
iles
for
Sel
ecte
d V
ehic
le T
ypes
: 19
91–2
001
Per 1
00,0
00 U
.S. r
esid
ents
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Pass
enge
r car
occ
upan
ts1.
61.
61.
61.
61.
61.
51.
51.
41.
31.
31.
3
Ligh
t tru
ck o
ccup
ants
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.2
Larg
e tru
ck o
ccup
ants
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
Mot
orcy
cle
occu
pant
s30
.625
.124
.722
.722
.721
.821
.022
.323
.527
.733
.4
NO
TE
S:
Larg
e tr
ucks
are
def
ined
as
truc
ks o
ver
10,0
00 p
ound
s gr
oss
vehi
cle
wei
ght r
atin
g, in
clud
ing
sing
le-u
nit t
ruck
s an
d tr
uck
trac
tors
. Lig
ht tr
ucks
are
de
fined
as
truc
ks o
f 10,
000
poun
ds g
ross
veh
icle
wei
ght r
atin
g or
less
, inc
ludi
ng p
ick-
up tr
ucks
, van
s, tr
uck-
base
d st
atio
n w
agon
s, a
nd s
port
util
ity v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
S: E
xcep
t as
no
ted
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(Was
hing
ton,
D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 2
-1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03. P
op
ula
tio
n—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, C
ensu
s 20
00,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov/
mai
n/w
ww
/cen
2000
.htm
l, as
of J
une
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
236
TAB
LE
63
Dea
ths
and
Yea
rs o
f P
ote
nti
al L
ife
Lo
st D
ue
to T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Acc
iden
ts: 1
991–
2000
Perc
enta
ge o
f tot
al d
eath
s of
peo
ple
unde
r 65
year
s
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Deat
hs6.
25.
85.
85.
85.
96.
16.
26.
25.
86.
0
YPLL
10.4
9.8
9.7
9.8
9.9
10.4
10.5
10.4
10.0
10.2
NO
TE
: Yea
rs o
f pot
entia
l life
lost
(Y
PLL
) is
the
diffe
renc
e be
twee
n th
e ag
e of
dea
th a
nd 6
5 ye
ars
of a
ge. F
atal
ities
of p
eopl
e 65
yea
rs o
ld a
nd o
lder
are
no
t inc
lude
d in
this
cal
cula
tion.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of H
ealth
and
Hum
an S
ervi
ces,
Cen
ters
for
Dis
ease
Con
trol
, Nat
iona
l Cen
ter
for
Inju
ry P
reve
ntio
n an
d C
ontr
ol, W
eb-
base
d In
jury
Sta
tistic
s Q
uery
and
Rep
ortin
g S
yste
m (
WIS
QA
RS
), a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.c
dc.g
ov/n
cipc
/wis
qars
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
64
Yea
rs o
f P
ote
nti
al L
ife
Lo
st D
ue
to M
oto
r V
ehic
le a
nd
Oth
er T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Acc
iden
ts:
1991
–200
0Pe
rcen
tage
of t
otal
dea
ths
of p
eopl
e un
der 6
5 ye
ars
Acci
dent
s19
9119
9219
9319
9419
9519
9619
9719
9819
9920
00
Mot
or v
ehic
le10
.09.
39.
39.
39.
59.
910
.110
.09.
79.
9
Othe
r tra
nspo
rtatio
n0.
40.
50.
40.
40.
40.
50.
40.
40.
30.
3
NO
TE
: Yea
rs o
f pot
entia
l life
lost
(Y
PLL
) is
the
diffe
renc
e be
twee
n th
e ag
e of
dea
th a
nd 6
5 ye
ars
of a
ge. F
atal
ities
of p
eopl
e 65
yea
rs o
ld a
nd
olde
r ar
e no
t inc
lude
d in
this
cal
cula
tion.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of H
ealth
and
Hum
an S
ervi
ces,
Cen
ters
for
Dis
ease
Con
trol
, Nat
iona
l Cen
ter
for
Inju
ry P
reve
ntio
n an
d C
ontr
ol,
Web
-bas
ed In
jury
Sta
tistic
s Q
uery
and
Rep
ortin
g S
yste
m (
WIS
QA
RS
), a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.c
dc.g
ov/n
cipc
/wis
qars
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
237
TAB
LE
65
In
jury
Rat
es fo
r O
ccu
pan
ts o
fH
igh
way
Veh
icle
s: 2
001
Inju
ries
per 1
00 m
illio
n pa
ssen
ger-
mile
s
Vehi
cle
type
Pass
enge
r car
74.8
Mot
orcy
clis
ts57
4.7
Ligh
t tru
ck57
.7
Larg
e tru
ck14
.0
Bus
10.1
Tota
l 68
.4
SO
UR
CE
S:
200
1—ba
sed
on d
ata
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
(US
DO
T),
Fed
eral
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Hig
hway
Sta
tistic
s 20
01
(Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
VM
-1; U
SD
OT,
Nat
iona
l Hig
hway
Tra
ffic
Saf
ety
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Tra
ffic
Saf
ety
Fact
s 20
01—
Ove
rvie
w (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 20
02),
pag
e 2;
EN
O T
rans
port
atio
n F
ound
atio
n, T
rans
port
atio
n in
Am
eric
a, 1
9th
Edi
tion
(Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), p
age
45; U
SD
OT,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
-po
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, A
ir C
arrie
r Tr
affic
Sta
tistic
s, D
ecem
ber
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
003)
, dom
estic
dat
a; a
nd U
SD
OT,
Fed
eral
Tra
nsit
Adm
inis
tra-
tion,
Nat
iona
l Tre
nds
and
Sum
mar
ies
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, pag
e 21
.
TAB
LE
66
In
jury
Rat
es fo
r O
ccu
pan
ts o
f S
elec
ted
Hig
hw
ay V
ehic
les
and
Mo
torc
yclis
ts:
1991
–200
1In
jurie
s pe
r 100
mill
ion
pass
enge
r-m
iles
Vehi
cle
type
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Pass
enge
r car
101.
610
1.1
102.
310
5.1
108.
010
5.2
98.0
89.3
85.7
80.6
74.8
Ligh
t tru
ck50
.445
.348
.049
.757
.558
.755
.855
.259
.160
.457
.7
Mot
orcy
cle
690.
154
4.9
487.
846
3.3
533.
450
6.6
474.
143
3.0
429.
450
1.2
574.
7
Larg
e tru
ck18
.722
.020
.117
.717
.017
.916
.114
.616
.215
.014
.0
Bus
17.2
16.4
13.1
11.6
14.1
14.6
11.6
10.5
13.5
11.0
10.1
SO
UR
CE
S:
1991
–200
0—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n (U
SD
OT
), B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
les
1-34
and
2-2
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of A
pril
2003
. 200
1—ba
sed
on d
ata
from
: US
DO
T, F
eder
al H
ighw
ay
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Hig
hway
Sta
tistic
s 20
01 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
VM
-1; U
SD
OT,
Nat
iona
l Hig
hway
Tra
ffic
Saf
ety
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Tra
ffic
Saf
ety
Fact
s 20
01—
Ove
rvie
w (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), p
age
2; E
NO
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Fou
ndat
ion,
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
in A
mer
ica,
19t
h E
ditio
n (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C:
2002
), p
age
45; U
SD
OT,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Air
Car
rier
Traf
fic S
tatis
tics,
Dec
embe
r 20
01 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
3), d
omes
tic d
ata;
an
d U
SD
OT,
Fed
eral
Tra
nsit
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Nat
iona
l Tre
nds
and
Sum
mar
ies
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, pag
e 21
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
238
TAB
LE
67
Min
or
Mo
tor
Veh
icle
-Rel
ated
Inju
ries
by
Ag
e an
d G
end
er:
2001
Age
Mal
es(n
umbe
r)Fe
mal
es(n
umbe
r)
0–4
55,8
8655
,855
5–9
63,0
6053
,269
10–1
478
,288
70,4
15
15–1
923
0,73
027
5,22
0
20–2
423
7,79
024
9,81
4
25–2
917
1,20
419
1,16
2
30–3
415
4,88
916
5,35
4
35–3
914
7,07
215
8,73
3
40–4
412
5,38
913
8,33
1
45–4
995
,898
113,
938
50–5
469
,647
83,1
55
55–5
948
,655
59,0
08
60–6
432
,454
40,2
28
65–6
924
,925
33,5
20
70–7
420
,533
26,4
74
75–7
917
,098
22,3
15
80–8
410
,058
14,3
96
85–8
94,
418
5,76
2
90–9
41,
320
1,73
3
95–9
934
826
4
100+
011
9
TAB
LE
68
Ser
iou
s M
oto
r V
ehic
le-R
elat
ed In
juri
es b
y A
ge
and
Gen
der
: 20
01
Age
Mal
es(n
umbe
r)Fe
mal
es(n
umbe
r)
0–4
3,54
33,
329
5–9
6,28
74,
037
10–1
46,
834
4,80
9
15–1
925
,279
16,7
01
20–2
426
,360
16,1
58
25–2
915
,410
10,2
23
30–3
414
,214
8,83
1
35–3
914
,382
8,19
9
40–4
414
,384
9,39
4
45–4
910
,836
7,34
0
50–5
410
,988
6,96
6
55–5
96,
985
4,48
6
60–6
45,
154
4,22
6
65–6
93,
637
4,54
5
70–7
43,
423
3,70
2
75–7
94,
331
4,09
2
80–8
43,
383
3,89
4
85–8
91,
222
1,78
6
90–9
435
410
0
95–9
913
532
5
100+
00
NO
TE
for
Tab
les
67 a
nd
68:
A m
inor
inju
ry is
one
in w
hich
the
vict
im w
as tr
eate
d an
d re
leas
ed.
A s
erio
us in
jury
is o
ne in
whi
ch th
e vi
ctim
w
as e
ither
hos
pita
lized
or
trea
ted
and
tran
sfer
red
to a
noth
er fa
cilit
y.
SO
UR
CE
for
Tab
les
67 a
nd
68:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n da
ta fr
om
U.S
. Con
sum
er P
rodu
ct S
afet
y C
omm
issi
on, N
atio
nal E
lect
roni
c In
jury
Sur
veill
ance
(N
EIS
S)
Sys
tem
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cps
c.go
v/N
eiss
/ora
cle.
htm
l, as
of J
une
2003
.
Appendix B
239
TAB
LE
69
Ser
iou
s M
oto
r V
ehic
le-R
elat
ed In
juri
es
by T
ype:
200
1
Type
Tota
l nu
mbe
r of
Inju
ries
Num
ber
of se
rious
in
jurie
sPe
rcen
t se
rious
Vehi
cle
occu
pant
s3,
350,
837
249,
309
7.4
Mot
orcy
cle
occu
pant
s11
0,66
521
,957
19.8
Peda
lcyc
lists
60,3
136,
412
10.6
Pede
stria
ns13
0,81
225
,025
19.1
NO
TE
S:
A p
edal
cycl
ist i
s a
pers
on o
n a
vehi
cle
that
is
pow
ered
sol
ely
by p
edal
s.
A m
inor
inju
ry is
one
in w
hich
the
vict
im w
as tr
eate
d an
d re
leas
ed.
A s
erio
us in
jury
is o
ne in
whi
ch th
e vi
ctim
was
ei
ther
hos
pita
lized
or
trea
ted
and
tran
sfer
red
to a
noth
er
faci
lity.
Dat
a ar
e th
e sh
are
of in
jurie
s th
at w
ere
serio
us
for
one
pers
on ty
pe (
e.g.
, the
sha
re o
f ser
ious
ly in
jure
d pe
dest
rians
of a
ll in
jure
d pe
dest
rians
).
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of
Tran
spor
tatio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n da
ta
from
U.S
. Con
sum
er P
rodu
ct S
afet
y C
omm
issi
on,
Nat
iona
l Ele
ctro
nic
Inju
ry S
urve
illan
ce (
NE
ISS
) S
yste
m,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cps
c.go
v/N
eiss
/ora
cle.
htm
l, as
of
June
200
3.
TAB
LE
70
Co
mp
on
ents
of
the
Eco
no
mic
Co
sts
of
Mo
tor
Veh
icle
Cra
shes
: 20
00M
illio
ns o
f cur
rent
dol
lars
Type
of c
ost
Cost
Mar
ket p
rodu
ctiv
ity60
,991
Prop
erty
dam
age
59,0
36
Med
ical
cos
ts32
,622
Trav
el d
elay
25,5
60
Hous
ehol
d pr
oduc
tivity
20,1
51
Insu
ranc
e ad
min
istra
tion
15,1
67
Lega
l cos
ts11
,118
Wor
kpla
ce c
osts
4,47
2
Emer
genc
y se
rvic
es1,
453
Tota
l23
0,56
8
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
N
atio
nal H
ighw
ay T
raffi
c S
afet
y A
dmin
istr
atio
n, T
he
Eco
nom
ic Im
pact
of M
otor
Veh
icle
Cra
shes
200
0,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.nht
sa.d
ot.g
ov/p
eopl
e/ec
onom
ic/,
as o
f Dec
embe
r 20
02.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
240
TAB
LE
71
Est
imat
ed S
ou
rces
of
Pay
men
t fo
r M
oto
r V
ehic
le C
rash
es:
2000
Mill
ions
of c
urre
nt d
olla
rs
Fede
ral
gove
rnm
ent
Stat
e go
vern
men
tTo
tal
gove
rnm
ent
Insu
rer
Othe
rSe
lf
Emer
genc
y se
rvic
esNA
11
NANA
NA
Mar
ket p
rodu
ctiv
ity10
212
251
23
Med
ical
53
818
25
Hous
ehol
d pr
oduc
tivity
NANA
NA8
NA12
Insu
ranc
e ad
min
istra
tion
NANA
NA15
NANA
Wor
kpla
ce c
osts
NANA
NANA
4NA
Lega
l/cou
rtNA
NANA
11NA
NA
Trav
el d
elay
NANA
NANA
26NA
Prop
erty
dam
age
NANA
NA38
NA21
Tota
l15
621
116
3360
KE
Y: N
A =
not
app
licab
le.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, N
atio
nal H
ighw
ay T
raffi
c S
afet
y A
dmin
istr
atio
n, T
he E
cono
mic
Impa
ct o
f Mot
or V
ehic
le C
rash
es
2000
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.nht
sa.d
ot.g
ov/p
eopl
e/ec
onom
ic/,
as o
f Dec
embe
r 20
02.
Appendix B
241
TAB
LE
72
Sh
are
of
Sel
ecte
d A
ir P
ollu
tio
n E
mis
sio
ns
by M
od
e: 2
001
Perc
ent
CONO
xVO
CPM
-10
High
way
gas
olin
e92
.941
.774
.727
.1
High
way
die
sel
1.4
37.5
3.6
37.8
Airc
raft
5.1
0.8
0.3
0.9
Mar
ine
vess
els
0.3
9.7
0.0
13.1
Railr
oad
0.2
9.6
0.6
7.4
Othe
r0.
10.
820
.213
.7
KE
Y:
CO
= c
arbo
n m
onox
ide;
NO
x =
nitr
ogen
oxi
des;
VO
C =
vol
atile
or
gani
c co
mpo
unds
; PM
-10
= p
artic
ulat
e m
atte
r 10
mic
rons
in d
iam
eter
or
smal
ler.
NO
TE
S:
EPA
no
long
er e
stim
ates
lead
em
issi
ons.
Mod
al s
hare
s in
200
0 w
ere:
hig
hway
gas
olin
e ve
hicl
es, 4
.1%
; airc
raft,
95.
9%. H
ighw
ay g
asol
ine
vehi
cles
incl
ude:
ligh
t-du
ty g
as v
ehic
les
and
mot
orcy
cles
, lig
ht-d
uty
gas
truc
ks, a
nd h
eavy
-dut
y ga
s ve
hicl
es. H
ighw
ay d
iese
l inc
lude
s he
avy-
duty
di
esel
veh
icle
s, li
ght-
duty
die
sel t
ruck
s an
d ve
hicl
es. M
arin
e ve
ssel
s in
clud
e: c
oal,
dies
el, r
esid
ual o
il, g
asol
ine
and
othe
r. O
ther
incl
udes
: di
esel
and
gas
olin
e re
crea
tiona
l veh
icle
s, a
irpo
rt s
ervi
ce, r
ailw
ay m
aint
e-na
nce,
and
rec
reat
iona
l mar
ine
serv
ice.
Thi
s ta
ble
does
not
incl
ude
farm
, co
nstr
uctio
n, in
dust
rial,
logg
ing,
ligh
t com
mer
cial
, and
law
n an
d ga
rden
eq
uipm
ent.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. E
nviro
nmen
tal P
rote
ctio
n A
genc
y (E
PA),
Offi
ce o
f Air
Qua
lity
Pla
nnin
g an
d S
tand
ards
, "N
atio
nal E
mis
sion
s In
vent
ory,
Air
Pol
luta
nt E
mis
sion
Tre
nds,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.e
pa.g
ov/tt
n/ch
ief/
tren
ds/in
dex.
htm
l/, a
s of
Dec
embe
r 20
02.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
242
TAB
LE
73a
Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n A
ir E
mis
sio
ns
by T
ype
of
Po
lluta
nt:
199
1–20
01In
dex:
199
1 =
1.00
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
CO
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.86
0.81
0.76
0.74
0.71
0.71
0.66
0.73
NOx
1.00
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.96
0.95
0.95
0.94
0.91
0.91
0.90
VOC
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.85
0.80
0.75
0.73
0.72
0.70
0.66
0.62
PM-1
01.
000.
970.
940.
940.
900.
870.
830.
790.
760.
730.
70
PM-2
.5
1.00
0.96
0.93
0.90
0.86
0.83
0.80
0.76
0.73
0.69
0.66
Lead
11.
000.
990.
920.
920.
950.
890.
880.
880.
910.
95U
NH3
1.00
1.08
1.15
1.23
1.31
1.40
1.57
1.52
1.54
1.61
1.64
TAB
LE
73b
Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n A
ir E
mis
sio
ns
by T
ype
of
Po
lluta
nt:
199
1–20
01Th
ousa
nd s
hort
tons
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
CO
109,
113
103,
833
98,6
6793
,440
88,2
1782
,988
80,2
2277
,644
77,1
7872
,493
79,3
36
NO x
11
,558
11,4
4511
,332
11,2
1711
,101
10,9
9011
,021
10,8
1910
,537
10,5
7210
,423
VOC
10,0
499,
549
9,05
08,
553
8,05
67,
554
7,32
67,
212
7,06
76,
681
6,22
6
PM-1
047
846
444
944
743
241
739
537
736
334
833
6
PM-2
.5
407
392
378
366
351
338
325
308
296
279
268
Lead
10.
60.
60.
50.
50.
60.
50.
50.
50.
50.
6U
NH3
173
186
199
213
226
242
271
263
267
278
283
1 D
ata
not a
vaila
ble.
EPA
is n
o lo
nger
est
imat
ing
lead
em
issi
ons.
The
dat
a pr
esen
ted
here
app
eare
d in
prio
r ye
ar E
PA r
epor
ts.
KE
Y F
OR
TA
BL
ES
73a
AN
D 7
3b:
CO
= c
arbo
n m
onox
ide;
NO
x =
nitr
ogen
oxi
des;
VO
C =
vol
atile
org
anic
com
poun
ds; P
M-1
0 =
par
ticul
ate
mat
ter
10 m
icro
ns in
di
amet
er o
r sm
alle
r; U
= d
ata
are
unav
aila
ble.
NO
TE
S F
OR
TA
BL
ES
73a
AN
D 7
3b: R
evis
ions
to p
revi
ous
estim
ates
are
all
rela
ted
to th
e de
velo
pmen
t of t
he 1
999
Nat
iona
l Em
issi
ons
Inve
ntor
y (N
EI)
. T
he 1
999
estim
ates
In th
e ta
ble
are
take
n fr
om V
ersi
on 2
of t
he 1
999
NE
I and
ref
lect
man
y ne
w d
ata
subm
issi
ons
from
sta
te a
nd lo
cal a
ir m
anag
emen
t age
ncie
s. T
he 1
999
emis
sion
s es
timat
es fr
om m
obile
sou
rces
are
in m
ost c
ases
bas
ed o
n th
e ne
w M
OB
ILE
6 an
d th
e dr
aft N
ON
RO
AD
2002
em
issi
ons
mod
els.
Thi
s is
the
first
tim
e th
at
estim
ates
usi
ng th
ese
mod
els
have
app
eare
d in
this
form
at.
Som
e bu
t rel
ativ
ely
few
mob
ile s
ourc
e es
timat
es w
ere
prov
ided
by
stat
e ai
r ag
enci
es. T
he la
rges
t set
of
sta
te-s
ubm
itted
dat
a in
199
9 w
as fr
om C
alifo
rnia
. Est
imat
es fo
r m
obile
sou
rces
for
year
s pr
ior
to 1
999
wer
e m
ade
cons
iste
nt w
ith th
e es
timat
es fo
r 19
99 a
nd
late
r, al
low
ing
for
a ge
nera
lly c
onsi
sten
t tim
e tr
end
exce
pt th
at s
tate
-sub
mitt
ed d
ata
was
inco
rpor
ated
for
1999
onl
y.
SO
UR
CE
FO
R T
AB
LE
S 7
3a A
ND
73b
: U
.S. E
nviro
nmen
tal P
rote
ctio
n A
genc
y (E
PA),
Offi
ce o
f Air
Qua
lity
Pla
nnin
g an
d S
tand
ards
, "N
atio
nal E
mis
sion
s In
vent
ory,
A
ir P
ollu
tant
Em
issi
on T
rend
s,"
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.epa
.gov
/ttn/
chie
f/tre
nds/
inde
x.ht
ml/,
as
of A
ugus
t 200
2.
Appendix B
243
TAB
LE
74a
N
itro
gen
Oxi
de
Em
issi
on
s by
Mo
de:
199
1–20
01In
dex:
199
1 =
1.00
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
High
way
gas
olin
e1.
000.
960.
910.
870.
830.
780.
770.
740.
710.
690.
72
High
way
die
sel
1.00
1.04
1.07
1.11
1.14
1.18
1.21
1.22
1.19
1.24
1.16
Airc
raft
1.00
1.01
1.03
1.04
1.04
1.06
1.19
1.30
1.43
1.26
1.16
Mar
ine
vess
els
1.00
1.01
1.02
1.03
1.04
1.05
1.00
0.95
0.90
1.00
1.00
Railr
oad
1.00
1.02
1.04
1.05
1.07
1.09
1.10
1.12
1.13
1.04
1.04
Othe
r non
road
1.00
0.97
1.03
1.03
1.03
1.10
1.19
1.11
1.37
1.19
1.19
TAB
LE
74b
N
itro
gen
Oxi
de
Em
issi
on
s by
Mo
de:
199
1–20
01Th
ousa
nds
of s
hort
tons
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
High
way
gas
olin
e6,
072
5,81
15,
548
5,28
75,
026
4,76
54,
705
4,50
94,
312
4,20
14,
345
High
way
die
sel
3,37
73,
495
3,61
43,
732
3,85
03,
968
4,08
74,
111
4,03
54,
192
3,90
4
Airc
raft
7071
7273
7374
8391
100
8881
Mar
ine
vess
els
1,01
21,
021
1,03
01,
039
1,04
91,
058
1,00
895
890
81,
008
1,01
1
Railr
oad
962
979
996
1,01
41,
031
1,04
81,
061
1,07
31,
085
1,00
199
9
Othe
r non
road
7068
7272
7277
8378
9683
83
NO
TE
S:
Hig
hway
gas
olin
e ve
hicl
es in
clud
e: li
ght-
duty
gas
veh
icle
s an
d m
otor
cycl
es, l
ight
-dut
y ga
s tr
ucks
, and
hea
vy d
uty
gas
vehi
cles
. H
ighw
ay d
iese
l inc
lude
s he
avy-
duty
die
sel v
ehic
les,
ligh
t-du
ty d
iese
l tru
cks
and
vehi
cles
. M
arin
e ve
ssel
s in
clud
e: c
oal,
dies
el, r
esid
ual o
il, g
asol
ine
and
othe
r. O
ther
incl
udes
: die
sel a
nd
gaso
line
recr
eatio
nal v
ehic
les,
air
port
ser
vice
, rai
lway
mai
nten
ance
, and
rec
reat
iona
l mar
ine
serv
ice.
The
se ta
bles
do
not i
nclu
de fa
rm, c
onst
ruct
ion,
indu
stria
l, lo
g-gi
ng, l
ight
com
mer
cial
, and
law
n an
d ga
rden
equ
ipm
ent.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. E
nviro
nmen
tal P
rote
ctio
n A
genc
y (E
PA),
Offi
ce o
f Air
Qua
lity
Pla
nnin
g an
d S
tand
ards
, "N
atio
nal E
mis
sion
s In
vent
ory,
Air
Pol
luta
nt E
mis
sion
Tr
ends
," a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.e
pa.g
ov/tt
n/ch
ief/t
rend
s/in
dex.
htm
l/, a
s of
Aug
ust
2002
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
244
TAB
LE
75/
76a
Car
bo
n D
ioxi
de
Em
issi
on
s by
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n M
od
e: 1
991–
2001
In
dex:
199
1 =
1.00
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Pass
enge
r car
s1.
001.
001.
031.
041.
041.
061.
051.
081.
101.
111.
13
Ligh
t-dut
y tru
cks
1.00
1.06
1.10
1.13
1.18
1.22
1.26
1.29
1.34
1.35
1.38
All o
ther
truc
ks1.
001.
021.
051.
121.
171.
221.
271.
331.
401.
451.
47
Buse
s1.
001.
011.
071.
131.
131.
171.
191.
231.
371.
331.
23
T
otal
hig
hway
1.00
1.02
1.05
1.08
1.11
1.14
1.16
1.19
1.23
1.25
1.27
Alte
rnat
ive
fuel
veh
icle
s1.
000.
921.
081.
751.
000.
920.
921.
080.
921.
081.
00
Airc
raft1
1.00
0.99
0.99
1.04
1.01
1.06
1.06
1.08
1.10
1.15
1.09
Boat
s an
d ve
ssel
s1.
001.
221.
061.
071.
131.
050.
730.
600.
841.
301.
27
Loco
mot
ives
1.00
1.03
1.06
1.17
1.21
1.25
1.24
1.28
1.34
1.33
1.35
Othe
r21.
001.
011.
021.
071.
081.
111.
141.
061.
041.
071.
15
Tota
l1.
001.
021.
041.
081.
101.
131.
131.
151.
191.
231.
24
Inte
rnat
iona
l bun
ker f
uels
31.
000.
920.
830.
820.
840.
850.
920.
940.
880.
840.
81
1 A
ircra
ft em
issi
ons
are
from
all
jet f
uel (
less
bun
ker
fuel
s) a
nd a
viat
ion
gas
cons
umpt
ion.
2 "O
ther
" ca
rbon
dio
xide
em
issi
ons
are
from
mot
orcy
cles
, con
stru
ctio
n eq
uipm
ent,
agric
ultu
ral m
achi
nery
, pip
elin
es, a
nd lu
bric
ants
.3
Em
issi
ons
from
inte
rnat
iona
l bun
ker
fuel
s in
clud
e em
issi
ons
from
bot
h ci
vilia
n an
d m
ilita
ry a
ctiv
ities
, but
are
not
incl
uded
in to
tals
.
NO
TE
: H
ighw
ay to
tal i
nclu
des
pass
enge
r ca
rs, b
uses
, lig
ht-d
uty
truc
ks, a
nd o
ther
truc
ks.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. E
nviro
nmen
tal P
rote
ctio
n A
genc
y, In
vent
ory
of U
.S. G
reen
hous
e G
as E
mis
sion
s an
d S
inks
: 199
0–20
01 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: Apr
il 20
03),
tabl
e 1-
14,
also
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.epa
.gov
, as
of J
une
2003
.
Appendix B
245
TAB
LE
75/
76b
C
arb
on
Dio
xid
e E
mis
sio
ns
by M
od
e: 1
991–
2001
Te
ragr
ams
of C
O 2 e
quiv
alen
t1
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Pass
enge
r car
s56
2.4
564.
857
7.6
584.
358
7.2
594.
359
2.8
607.
961
8.6
621.
763
2.7
Ligh
t-dut
y tru
cks
332.
735
1.7
367.
537
6.7
392.
940
6.5
419.
142
7.6
446.
145
0.2
460.
0
All o
ther
truc
ks20
2.6
206.
221
2.0
227.
123
7.0
246.
525
7.6
269.
328
4.2
294.
729
8.3
Buse
s7.
07.
17.
57.
97.
98.
28.
38.
69.
69.
38.
6
T
otal
hig
hway
1,10
5.9
1,13
0.9
1,16
5.9
1,19
8.1
1,22
6.2
1,25
6.6
1,27
8.9
1,31
4.7
1,35
9.6
1,37
7.2
1,40
0.8
Alte
rnat
ive
fuel
veh
icle
s1.
21.
11.
32.
11.
21.
11.
11.
31.
11.
31.
2
Airc
raft2
169.
316
7.0
168.
017
5.9
171.
418
0.2
179.
018
3.0
186.
819
5.3
183.
9
Boat
s an
d ve
ssel
s45
.956
.248
.548
.951
.748
.133
.627
.438
.659
.758
.3
Loco
mot
ives
25.4
26.2
26.9
29.8
30.8
31.8
31.6
32.4
34.1
33.8
34.3
Othe
r393
.594
.495
.010
0.4
100.
710
3.8
107.
099
.597
.110
0.2
107.
2
Tota
l1,
440.
01,
474.
71,
504.
31,
553.
11,
580.
81,
620.
51,
630.
11,
657.
01,
716.
21,
766.
21,
784.
5
Inte
rnat
iona
l bun
ker f
uels
411
9.9
109.
999
.898
.010
1.0
102.
310
9.9
112.
910
5.3
100.
297
.3
1 Te
ragr
ams
of C
O2
equi
vale
nt—
1 T
gCO
2Eq
= 1
mill
ion
met
ric to
n of
car
bon
equi
vale
nt x
(44
/12)
. A te
ragr
am e
qual
s 1
trill
ion
gram
s.2
Airc
raft
emis
sion
s ar
e fr
om a
ll je
t fue
l (le
ss b
unke
r fu
els)
and
avi
atio
n ga
s co
nsum
ptio
n.3
"Oth
er"
carb
on d
ioxi
de e
mis
sion
s ar
e fr
om m
otor
cycl
es, c
onst
ruct
ion
equi
pmen
t, ag
ricul
tura
l mac
hine
ry, p
ipel
ines
, and
lubr
ican
ts.
4 Em
issi
ons
from
inte
rnat
iona
l bun
ker
fuel
s in
clud
e em
issi
ons
from
bot
h ci
vilia
n an
d m
ilita
ry a
ctiv
ities
, but
are
not
incl
uded
in to
tals
.
NO
TE
: H
ighw
ay to
tal i
nclu
des
pass
enge
r ca
rs, b
uses
, lig
ht-d
uty
truc
ks, a
nd o
ther
truc
ks.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Env
ironm
enta
l Pro
tect
ion
Age
ncy,
Inve
ntor
y of
U.S
. Gre
enho
use
Gas
Em
issi
ons
and
Sin
ks: 1
990–
2001
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: A
pril
2003
), ta
ble
1-14
, als
o av
ail-
able
at h
ttp://
ww
w.e
pa.g
ov, a
s of
Jun
e 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
246
TAB
LE
77
Vo
lum
e o
f O
il S
pill
s R
epo
rted
to
th
e U
.S. C
oas
t G
uar
d b
y S
ou
rce:
199
1–20
00Ga
llons
Mod
e or
sou
rce
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d11,
624,
043
1,44
0,17
71,
893,
188
2,04
0,85
82,
543,
706
3,03
5,13
876
7,43
983
2,68
999
1,31
31,
373,
538
M
ariti
me
vess
els
and
faci
litie
s1,
565,
492
1,15
9,26
61,
462,
701
1,96
6,78
22,
484,
891
2,05
0,31
753
7,66
877
2,26
194
0,21
21,
342,
630
A
ll ot
her t
rans
porta
tion
58,5
5128
0,91
143
0,48
774
,076
58,8
1598
4,82
122
9,77
160
,428
51,1
0130
,908
Pipe
line
49,
382
200
,396
362
,399
62,
340
11,
894
978
,392
224
,122
47,
863
36,
140
17,
021
Air
760
63,
717
63,
384
3,3
60 1
,716
2,2
21 6
83 9
43 3
55 2
,224
High
way
7,2
03 1
3,57
7 7
48 3
,219
758
690
1,4
32 1
0,11
1 1
3,03
7 7
,148
Rail
1,2
06 1
23 3
,419
2,1
17 4
3,95
5 6
10 3
4 3
05 5
63 7
Othe
r tra
nspo
rtatio
n20
3,0
98 5
37 3
,040
492
2,9
08 3
,500
1,2
06 1
,006
4,5
08
Nont
rans
porta
tion
77,8
7215
2,24
910
2,34
848
,161
27,6
0243
,540
102,
671
20,9
8790
,779
25,8
90
Unkn
own
and
othe
r17
4,03
828
3,24
171
,852
400,
254
66,9
2139
,153
72,4
6431
,627
90,3
5731
,942
Tota
l1,
875,
953
1,87
5,66
72,
067,
388
2,48
9,27
32,
638,
229
3,11
7,83
194
2,57
488
5,30
31,
172,
449
1,43
1,37
0
Tran
spor
tatio
n as
per
cent
of t
otal
86.6
76.8
91.6
82.0
96.4
97.3
81.4
94.1
84.6
96.0
1 O
il sp
illed
from
tran
spor
tatio
n ve
ssel
s, v
ehic
les,
and
equ
ipm
ent,
as w
ell a
s fr
om tr
ansp
orta
tion-
rela
ted
faci
litie
s (e
.g.,
at p
orts
and
fuel
sta
tions
).2
Oth
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
incl
udes
non
vess
el c
omm
on c
arrie
rs.
NO
TE
: D
ata
are
prel
imin
ary.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
U.S
. Coa
st G
uard
, Pol
lutio
n In
cide
nts
in a
nd A
roun
d U
.S.
Wat
ers,
ava
ilabl
e at
: http
://w
ww
.usc
g.m
il/hq
/g-m
/nm
c/re
spon
se/s
tats
/ac.
htm
, as
of S
epte
mbe
r 20
02.
Appendix B
247
TAB
LE
78
Ave
rag
e Vo
lum
e o
f O
il S
pill
s by
So
urc
e: 1
991–
2000
Gallo
ns
Mod
e or
sou
rce
Volu
me
of a
ll oi
l spi
lls
(199
1–20
00)
Perc
ent s
hare
of a
ll sp
ills
(199
1–20
00)
Mar
itim
e 1
4,28
2,22
077
.2
Faci
litie
s 4
,020
,880
21.7
Mar
itim
e no
ntan
k ve
ssel
s an
d ot
her
3,3
53,8
4018
.1
Wat
erbo
rne
tank
ve
ssel
s 6
,907
,500
37.3
Pipe
line
1,9
89,9
4910
.8
Non-
trans
porta
tion
stru
ctur
es a
nd fa
cilit
ies
692
,099
3.7
Unkn
own
and
othe
r 1
,261
,849
6.8
High
way
, airc
raft,
rail,
an
d ot
her
269
,920
1.5
Tota
l 1
8,49
6,03
710
0.0
NO
TE
: D
ata
are
prel
imin
ary.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tis-
tics,
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n U
.S. C
oast
Gua
rd, P
ollu
tion
Inci
dent
s in
and
Aro
und
U.S
. Wat
ers,
ava
ilabl
e at
: http
://w
ww
.usc
g.m
il/hq
/g-m
/nm
c/re
spon
se/s
tats
/ac
.htm
, as
of S
epte
mbe
r 20
02.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
248
TAB
LE
79
Haz
ard
ou
s M
ater
ials
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n In
cid
ents
by
Mo
de:
199
1–20
01Nu
mbe
r
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Air
299
414
622
931
817
919
1,02
91,
386
1,58
41,
420
1,08
0
High
way
7,64
47,
843
11,0
9514
,011
12,8
6811
,962
11,8
6413
,110
15,0
0415
,126
15,8
07
Rail
1,15
51,
128
1,11
31,
157
1,15
51,
112
1,10
398
91,
074
1,05
989
6
Wat
er12
88
612
65
148
175
Tota
l9,
110
9,39
312
,838
16,1
0514
,852
13,9
9914
,001
15,4
9917
,670
17,6
2217
,788
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, R
esea
rch
and
Spe
cial
Pro
gram
s A
dmin
istr
atio
n, H
azar
dous
Mat
eria
ls In
form
atio
n S
yste
m
data
base
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://ha
zmat
.dot
.gov
/file
s/ha
zmat
/10y
ear/
10ye
arfr
m.h
tm, a
s of
Jan
uary
200
3.
Appendix B
249
TAB
LE
80a
H
azar
do
us
Mat
eria
ls T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Inju
ries
by
Mo
de:
199
1–20
01Nu
mbe
r
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Air
3123
5057
3333
2420
125
13
High
way
333
465
511
425
296
216
152
151
217
164
101
Rail
7511
666
9571
926
4522
3582
29
Wat
er0
00
00
00
20
00
Tota
l43
960
462
757
740
01,
175
221
195
264
251
143
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, R
esea
rch
and
Spe
cial
Pro
gram
s A
dmin
istr
atio
n, H
azar
dous
Mat
eria
ls In
form
atio
n S
yste
m
data
base
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://ha
zmat
.dot
.gov
/file
s/ha
zmat
/10y
ear/
10ye
arfr
m.h
tm, a
s of
Jan
uary
200
3.
TAB
LE
80b
H
azar
do
us
Mat
eria
ls T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Fat
alit
ies
by M
od
e: 1
991–
2001
Num
ber
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Air
00
00
011
00
00
00
High
way
1016
1511
78
1213
1015
7
Rail
00
00
02
00
00
0
Wat
er0
00
00
00
00
00
Tota
l10
1615
117
120
1213
1015
7
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, R
esea
rch
and
Spe
cial
Pro
gram
s A
dmin
istr
atio
n, H
azar
dous
Mat
eria
ls In
form
atio
n S
yste
m
data
base
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://ha
zmat
.dot
.gov
/file
s/ha
zmat
/10y
ear/
10ye
arfr
m.h
tm, a
s of
Jan
uary
200
3.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
250
TAB
LE
81/
82a
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n C
apit
al S
tock
for
Sel
ecte
d M
od
es:
1990
–200
0Bi
llion
s of
cha
ined
199
6 do
llars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Railr
oad
trans
porta
tion
stoc
k36
335
835
334
934
734
434
334
334
434
334
2
In-h
ouse
tran
spor
tatio
n st
ock
336
350
364
382
408
432
462
486
521
571
609
High
way
s an
d st
reet
s1,
009
1,01
51,
038
1,06
31,
105
1,12
11,
129
1,14
81,
169
1,20
71,
234
Cons
umer
mot
or
vehi
cles
704
680
666
659
665
657
663
676
709
760
811
Loca
l and
inte
rurb
an
trans
it st
ock
2424
2425
2525
2627
2829
31
Truc
king
and
w
areh
ousi
ng s
tock
8380
7982
9199
104
113
115
118
121
Wat
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
stoc
k40
3938
3838
3837
3838
3939
Air t
rans
porta
tion
stoc
k10
110
411
011
311
311
612
112
914
316
518
3
Pipe
lines
sto
ck, e
xcep
t na
tura
l gas
44
4444
4444
4545
4545
4546
Tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
es
stoc
k29
2929
3031
3436
3843
4753
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a in
clud
e on
ly p
rivat
ely
owne
d ca
pita
l sto
ck, e
xcep
t for
hig
hway
s an
d st
reet
s. C
onsu
mer
mot
or v
ehic
les
are
cons
umer
dur
able
goo
ds.
In-h
ouse
tran
s-po
rtat
ion
incl
udes
tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
e pr
ovid
ed w
ithin
a fi
rm w
hose
mai
n bu
sine
ss is
not
tran
spor
tatio
n. F
or e
xam
ple,
gro
cery
com
pani
es o
ften
use
thei
r ow
n tr
uck
fleet
s to
mov
e go
ods
from
thei
r w
areh
ouse
s to
thei
r re
tail
outle
ts.
Dat
a ha
ve b
een
adju
sted
for
infla
tion
usin
g pr
ice
defla
tors
from
the
follo
win
g so
urce
s: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, N
atio
nal
Inco
me
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s, Q
uant
ity a
nd P
rice
Inde
xes;
and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or, B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics,
Pro
duce
r P
rice
Inde
xes.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, F
ixed
Ass
ets
and
Con
sum
er D
urab
le G
oods
in th
e U
nite
d S
tate
s, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov, a
s of
Mar
ch 2
003.
Appendix B
251
TAB
LE
81/
82b
Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n C
apit
al S
tock
for
Sel
ecte
d M
od
es:
1990
–200
0Bi
llion
s of
cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Railr
oad
trans
porta
tion
stoc
k30
430
330
732
432
933
734
935
234
734
134
1
In-h
ouse
tra
nspo
rtatio
n st
ock
286
309
331
360
396
429
463
481
517
573
618
High
way
s an
d st
reet
s86
988
991
094
11,
004
1,07
51,
129
1,19
31,
238
1,32
21,
420
Cons
umer
mot
or
vehi
cles
574
567
574
599
629
646
663
673
703
748
796
Loca
l and
inte
rurb
an
trans
it st
ock
2121
2223
2425
2728
2830
32
Truc
king
and
w
areh
ousi
ng s
tock
7171
7277
8999
104
113
117
122
127
Wat
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
stoc
k35
3535
3637
3738
3940
4143
Air t
rans
porta
tion
stoc
k85
9199
104
108
115
122
131
145
169
194
Pipe
lines
sto
ck, e
xcep
t na
tura
l gas
38
3940
4244
4445
4747
4950
Tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
es s
tock
2627
2728
3034
3637
4145
50
NO
TE
S:
Dat
a in
clud
e on
ly p
rivat
ely
owne
d ca
pita
l sto
ck, e
xcep
t for
hig
hway
s an
d st
reet
s. C
onsu
mer
mot
or v
ehic
les
are
cons
umer
dur
able
goo
ds.
In-h
ouse
tran
s-po
rtat
ion
incl
udes
tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
e pr
ovid
ed w
ithin
a fi
rm w
hose
mai
n bu
sine
ss is
not
tran
spor
tatio
n. F
or e
xam
ple,
gro
cery
com
pani
es o
ften
use
thei
r ow
n tr
uck
fleet
s to
mov
e go
ods
from
thei
r w
areh
ouse
s to
thei
r re
tail
outle
ts.
Dat
a ha
ve b
een
adju
sted
for
infla
tion
usin
g pr
ice
defla
tors
from
the
follo
win
g so
urce
s: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, N
atio
nal
Inco
me
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s, Q
uant
ity a
nd P
rice
Inde
xes;
and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or, B
urea
u of
Lab
or S
tatis
tics,
Pro
duce
r P
rice
Inde
xes.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, F
ixed
Ass
ets
and
Con
sum
er D
urab
le G
oods
in th
e U
nite
d S
tate
s, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov, a
s of
Mar
ch 2
003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
252
TAB
LE
83
Ru
ral R
oad
s in
Po
or
or
Med
iocr
e C
on
dit
ion
by
Fu
nct
ion
al C
lass
: 19
93–2
001
Perc
ent o
f mile
age
in ro
adw
ay c
lass
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Inte
rsta
tes
34.7
33.0
27.0
23.0
22.7
20.6
16.4
14.3
13.6
Othe
r prin
cipa
l arte
rials
12.1
10.6
12.0
7.3
6.5
6.1
4.5
4.0
3.7
Min
or a
rteria
ls13
.014
.012
.710
.59.
07.
96.
97.
06.
9
Colle
ctor
s19
.217
.818
.017
.020
.121
.821
.421
.220
.4
NO
TE
S:
Bec
ause
of t
he tr
ansi
tion
to a
new
indi
cato
r fo
r pa
vem
ent c
ondi
tion
begi
nnin
g w
ith U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al H
ighw
ay
Adm
inis
trat
ion
(FH
WA
) da
ta p
ublis
hed
in 1
993,
com
paris
ons
betw
een
pre-
1993
dat
a an
d 19
93 a
nd la
ter
data
are
diff
icul
t. D
ata
are
for
the
50 s
tate
s an
d th
e D
istr
ict o
f Col
umbi
a.
SO
UR
CE
: Var
ious
sou
rces
, as
cite
d in
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02
(Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-2
6, a
lso
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of A
pril
2003
.
TAB
LE
84
Urb
an R
oad
s in
Po
or
or
Med
iocr
e C
on
dit
ion
by
Fu
nct
ion
al C
lass
: 19
93–2
001
Perc
ent o
f mile
age
in ro
adw
ay c
lass
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Inte
rsta
tes
41.5
42.9
37.2
36.9
36.0
34.9
30.4
28.2
28.2
Othe
r fre
eway
s an
d ex
pres
sway
13.2
18.0
14.6
12.1
12.0
12.0
10.6
10.9
10.2
Othe
r prin
cipa
l arte
rials
22.5
28.8
27.1
25.9
26.7
31.3
30.6
30.0
29.3
Min
or a
rteria
ls21
.719
.020
.319
.920
.217
.917
.526
.026
.4
Colle
ctor
s27
.426
.026
.526
.326
.620
.922
.032
.131
.9
NO
TE
S:
Bec
ause
of t
he tr
ansi
tion
to a
new
indi
cato
r fo
r pa
vem
ent c
ondi
tion
begi
nnin
g w
ith U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al H
ighw
ay
Adm
inis
trat
ion
(FH
WA
) da
ta p
ublis
hed
in 1
993,
com
paris
ons
betw
een
pre-
1993
dat
a an
d 19
93 a
nd la
ter
data
are
diff
icul
t. D
ata
are
for
the
50 s
tate
s an
d th
e D
istr
ict o
f Col
umbi
a.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, ta
ble
1-26
, als
o av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03.
Appendix B
253
TAB
LE
85
Str
uct
ura
lly D
efic
ien
t an
d F
un
ctio
nal
ly O
bso
lete
Bri
dg
es:
All
Ro
adw
ays—
1991
–200
1Nu
mbe
r
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Stru
ctur
ally
def
icie
nt13
4,53
411
8,69
811
1,98
010
7,68
310
4,31
710
1,51
898
,475
93,0
7288
,150
83,5
7683
,595
Func
tiona
lly o
bsol
ete
97,5
9380
,393
80,0
0079
,832
80,9
5081
,208
77,4
1079
,500
81,9
0081
,510
81,4
39
NO
TE
S:
Fun
ctio
nally
obs
olet
e re
fers
to b
ridge
s th
at d
o no
t hav
e th
e la
ne w
idth
s, s
houl
der
wid
ths,
or
vert
ical
cle
aran
ces
adeq
uate
to s
erve
traf
fic d
eman
d, o
r th
e br
idge
may
not
be
able
to h
andl
e oc
casi
onal
roa
dway
floo
ding
. Str
uctu
rally
def
icie
nt r
efer
s to
brid
ges
need
ing
sign
ifica
nt m
aint
enan
ce a
ttent
ion,
reh
abili
tatio
n, o
r re
plac
emen
t.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Fed
eral
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Offi
ce o
f Eng
inee
ring,
Brid
ge D
ivis
ion,
Nat
iona
l Brid
ge In
vent
ory
data
base
, ava
il-ab
le a
t http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/brid
ge/b
ritab
.htm
, as
of D
ecem
ber
2002
.
TAB
LE
86a
R
ura
l Bri
dg
e C
on
dit
ion
by
Fu
nct
ion
al C
lass
: 20
01Pe
rcen
t
Stru
ctur
ally
defic
ient
Func
tiona
llyob
sole
teTo
tal
Prin
cipa
l arte
rial—
Inte
rsta
te4
1216
Othe
r prin
cipa
l arte
rial
610
16
Min
or a
rteria
l9
1220
Maj
or c
olle
ctor
1211
23
Min
or c
olle
ctor
1411
26
Loca
l22
1234
TAB
LE
86b
R
ura
l Bri
dg
e C
on
dit
ion
by
Fu
nct
ion
al C
lass
: 20
01Nu
mbe
r
Stru
ctur
ally
defic
ient
Func
tiona
llyob
sole
teTo
tal
Prin
cipa
l arte
rial—
In
ters
tate
1,10
83,
193
27,5
79
Othe
r prin
cipa
l arte
rial
1,96
43,
565
35,6
52
Min
or a
rteria
l3,
405
4,66
639
,686
Maj
or c
olle
ctor
11,6
3410
,256
95,7
36
Min
or c
olle
ctor
6,84
45,
442
47,7
82
Loca
l45
,935
24,9
3420
9,84
9
NO
TE
S F
OR
TA
BL
ES
86a
AN
D 8
6b:
Fun
ctio
nally
obs
olet
e re
fers
to b
ridge
s th
at d
o no
t hav
e th
e la
ne w
idth
s, s
houl
der
wid
ths,
or
vert
ical
cle
aran
ces
adeq
uate
to
serv
e tr
affic
dem
and,
or
the
brid
ge m
ay n
ot b
e ab
le to
han
dle
occa
sion
al r
oadw
ay fl
oodi
ng. S
truc
tura
lly d
efic
ient
ref
ers
to b
ridge
s ne
edin
g si
gnifi
cant
mai
nten
ance
at
tent
ion,
reh
abili
tatio
n, o
r re
plac
emen
t.
SO
UR
CE
FO
R T
AB
LE
S 8
6a A
ND
86b
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Fed
eral
Hig
hway
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Offi
ce o
f Eng
inee
ring,
Brid
ge D
ivis
ion,
Nat
iona
l Brid
ge
Inve
ntor
y da
taba
se, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.fh
wa.
dot.g
ov/b
ridge
/brit
ab.h
tm, a
s of
Dec
embe
r 20
02.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
254
TAB
LE
87a
U
rban
Bri
dg
e C
on
dit
ion
by
Fu
nct
ion
al C
lass
: 20
01Pe
rcen
t
Stru
ctur
ally
de
ficie
ntFu
nctio
nally
ob
sole
teTo
tal
Inte
rsta
te6
2027
Othe
r fre
eway
s or
ex
pres
sway
s6
2127
Othe
r prin
cipa
l arte
rial
1022
32
Min
or a
rteria
l11
2637
Colle
ctor
1225
37
Loca
l12
1931
TAB
LE
87b
U
rban
Bri
dg
e C
on
dit
ion
by
Fu
nct
ion
al C
lass
: 20
01Nu
mbe
r
Stru
ctur
ally
defic
ient
Func
tiona
llyob
sole
teTo
tal
Inte
rsta
te1,
760
5,67
527
,875
Othe
r fre
eway
s or
ex
pres
sway
s98
53,
368
16,1
12
Othe
r prin
cipa
l arte
rial
2,41
55,
514
24,8
04
Min
or a
rteria
l2,
500
6,06
423
,158
Colle
ctor
1,83
13,
836
15,4
07
Loca
l3,
214
4,92
626
,045
NO
TE
S F
OR
TA
BL
ES
87a
AN
D 8
7b:
Fun
ctio
nally
obs
olet
e re
fers
to b
ridge
s th
at d
o no
t hav
e th
e la
ne w
idth
s, s
houl
der
wid
ths,
or
vert
ical
cle
aran
ces
adeq
uate
to
serv
e tr
affic
dem
and,
or
the
brid
ge m
ay n
ot b
e ab
le to
han
dle
occa
sion
al r
oadw
ay fl
oodi
ng. S
truc
tura
lly d
efic
ient
ref
ers
to b
ridge
s ne
edin
g si
gnifi
cant
mai
nten
ance
at
tent
ion,
reh
abili
tatio
n, o
r re
plac
emen
t.
SO
UR
CE
FO
R T
AB
LE
S 8
7a A
ND
87b
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al H
ighw
ay A
dmin
istr
atio
n, O
ffice
of E
ngin
eerin
g, B
ridge
Div
isio
n, N
atio
nal B
ridge
In
vent
ory
data
base
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.fhw
a.do
t.gov
/brid
ge/b
ritab
.htm
, as
of D
ecem
ber
2002
.
Appendix B
255
TAB
LE
88
Ru
nw
ay P
avem
ent
Co
nd
itio
n o
f 54
6 C
om
mer
cial
Ser
vice
Air
po
rts:
199
0–20
01Pe
rcen
t
1990
1993
1997
1999
2000
2001
Good
con
ditio
n78
7979
7879
79
Fair
cond
ition
1718
1920
1919
Poor
con
ditio
n5
32
22
2
NO
TE
S:
The
re a
re 5
46 c
omm
erci
al s
ervi
ce a
irpo
rts.
The
re a
re 3
,364
NP
IAS
air
port
s, in
clud
ing
the
com
mer
cial
se
rivic
e ai
rpor
ts. D
ata
only
ava
ilabl
e fo
r ye
ars
show
n. R
aw d
ata
not r
eadi
ly a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n D
C: 2
003)
, als
o av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Jan
uary
200
3. B
ased
on
data
obt
aine
d fr
om th
e U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al A
viat
ion
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Offi
ce o
f Air
port
Pla
nnin
g an
d P
rogr
am-
min
g, N
atio
nal P
lann
ing
Div
isio
n, p
erso
nal c
omm
unic
atio
n, 2
003.
TAB
LE
89
Ru
nw
ay P
avem
ent
Co
nd
itio
n o
f 3,
364
NP
IAS
Air
po
rts:
199
0–20
01Pe
rcen
t
1990
1993
1997
1999
2000
2001
Good
con
ditio
n61
6872
7273
73
Fair
cond
ition
2925
2323
2222
Poor
con
ditio
n10
75
55
5
KE
Y:
NP
IAS
= N
atio
nal P
lan
of In
tegr
ated
Air
port
Sys
tem
s.
NO
TE
S:
The
re a
re 5
46 c
omm
erci
al s
ervi
ce a
irpo
rts.
The
re a
re 3
,364
NP
IAS
air
port
s, in
clud
ing
the
com
mer
cial
se
rivic
e ai
rpor
ts. D
ata
only
ava
ilabl
e fo
r ye
ars
show
n. R
aw d
ata
not r
eadi
ly a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n D
C: 2
003)
, als
o av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Jan
uary
200
3. B
ased
on
data
obt
aine
d fr
om th
e U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, F
eder
al A
viat
ion
Adm
inis
trat
ion,
Offi
ce o
f Air
port
Pla
nnin
g an
d P
rogr
am-
min
g, N
atio
nal P
lann
ing
Div
isio
n, p
erso
nal c
omm
unic
atio
n, 2
003.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
256
TAB
LE
90
Med
ian
Ag
e o
f C
ars
and
Tru
cks
in t
he
Un
ited
Sta
tes:
199
2–20
02Ye
ars
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Cars
7.0
7.3
7.5
7.7
7.9
8.1
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.1
8.4
Truc
ks7.
27.
57.
57.
67.
77.
87.
67.
26.
96.
86.
8
NO
TE
: "T
ruck
s" r
epre
sent
s al
l typ
es o
f tru
cks,
incl
udin
g lig
ht tr
ucks
(sp
ort u
tility
veh
icle
s, v
ans,
and
pic
k-up
truc
ks).
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tis-
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 1
-25,
als
o av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03. R
.L. P
olk
&
Co.
, "M
edia
n A
ge o
f U.S
. Car
s an
d Li
ght T
ruck
s In
crea
ses
Acc
ordi
ng to
R.L
. Pol
k &
Co.
," p
ress
rel
ease
, Feb
ruar
y 11
, 200
3.
TAB
LE
91
Ave
rag
e A
ge
of
Sel
ecte
d U
rban
Tra
nsi
t V
ehic
les:
199
0–20
00Ye
ars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Heav
y-ra
il pa
ssen
ger c
ars
16.2
16.9
17.7
17.8
15.8
19.3
20.2
21.1
22.0
22.5
22.9
Com
mut
er ra
il pa
ssen
ger c
oach
es17
.617
.319
.318
.620
.121
.424
.121
.619
.417
.516
.9
Ligh
t rai
l veh
icle
s (s
treet
cars
)15
.216
.617
.014
.916
.716
.816
.015
.915
.715
.716
.1
Full-
size
tran
sit b
uses
8.2
8.0
8.3
8.5
9.9
8.7
8.8
8.6
8.5
8.4
8.1
Vans
2.8
3.0
3.1
3.1
3.9
3.1
3.1
3.0
2.9
3.1
3.1
Ferr
yboa
ts21
.719
.622
.724
.723
.523
.425
.325
.425
.825
.125
.6
NO
TE
: F
ull-s
ize
buse
s ha
ve m
ore
than
35
seat
s.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, ta
ble
1-28
.
Appendix B
257
TAB
LE
92
Ave
rag
e A
ge
of
Am
trak
Lo
com
oti
ve a
nd
Car
Fle
ets:
199
0–20
00Ye
ars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Loco
mot
ives
12.0
13.0
13.0
13.2
13.4
13.9
14.4
12.0
12.6
12.8
11.2
Pass
enge
r and
oth
er tr
ain
cars
20.0
21.0
21.5
22.6
22.4
21.8
20.7
19.8
21.1
22.2
19.4
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le1-
30, a
lso
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of A
pril
2003
.
TAB
LE
93
Ag
e o
f U
.S. F
lag
Ves
sels
by
Typ
e: 2
000 Ag
e ra
nge
(yea
rs)
Ship
type
(num
ber o
f ves
sels
)<
66–
1011
–15
16–2
021
–25
> 25
Dry
carg
o (7
33)
6650
113
136
105
263
Tank
er (1
35)
114
834
3048
Tow
boat
(4,9
90)
325
143
142
929
954
2,49
7
Pass
enge
r (91
5)13
411
817
812
490
271
Supp
ort (
1,42
0)24
610
658
454
332
214
Dry
barg
e (2
9,00
9)6,
721
3,05
11,
565
5,84
65,
365
6,46
1
Liqu
id b
arge
(3,9
87)
582
329
4860
271
21,
714
Tota
l (41
,182
)8,
085
3,80
22,
112
8,12
57,
588
11,4
70
NO
TE
: S
uppo
rt in
clud
es o
ffsho
re s
uppo
rt a
nd c
rew
boat
s. L
iqui
d ba
rge
incl
udes
tank
bar
ges.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
(US
DO
T),
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
(BT
S),
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-3
1, a
lso
avai
labl
e at
ht
tp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f Apr
il 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
258
TAB
LE
94
Ave
rag
e A
ge
of
U.S
. Co
mm
erci
al a
nd
Maj
or
Air
lines
Air
craf
t: 1
991–
2000
Year
s, u
nles
s no
ted
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
All c
omm
erci
al a
ircra
ft11
.211
.311
.612
.212
.413
.213
.513
.612
.912
.8
Maj
or a
irlin
es' a
ircra
ft10
.710
.510
.410
.811
.312
.312
.412
.311
.811
.8
Maj
or a
irlin
es s
hare
of
com
mer
cial
airc
raft
(per
cent
)86
.884
.182
.179
.976
.172
.578
.777
.878
.578
.8
NO
TE
S:
Com
mer
cial
airl
ines
are
air
carr
iers
pro
vidi
ng s
ched
uled
or
nons
ched
uled
pas
seng
er o
r fr
eigh
t ser
vice
, inc
ludi
ng c
omm
uter
and
air
taxi
on
-dem
and
serv
ices
. Maj
or a
irlin
es in
clud
es o
nly
com
mer
cial
airl
ines
with
ope
ratin
g re
venu
es g
reat
er th
an $
1 bi
llion
in 2
000:
Am
eric
a W
est
Airl
ines
, Am
eric
an A
irlin
es, A
mer
ican
Eag
le A
irlin
es, A
mer
ica
Tran
s A
ir, A
lask
a A
irlin
es, C
ontin
enta
l Airl
ines
, Del
ta A
irlin
es, F
eder
al E
xpre
ss,
Nor
thw
est A
irlin
es, S
outh
wes
t Airl
ines
, Tra
ns W
orld
Airl
ines
, Uni
ted
Airl
ines
, Uni
ted
Par
cel S
ervi
ce, a
nd U
S A
irway
s. A
vera
ge a
ircra
ft ag
e is
ba
sed
on th
e ye
ar th
at a
n ai
rcra
ft w
as d
eliv
ered
to th
e or
igin
al o
wne
r fr
om th
e m
anuf
actu
rer.
It do
es n
ot r
efle
ct th
e ag
e of
the
engi
nes
or o
ther
pa
rts
that
may
hav
e be
en r
epla
ced
mor
e re
cent
ly.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
For
m 4
1, S
ched
ule
B-4
3, 1
991–
2000
.
Appendix B
259
TAB
LE
95
Rel
ativ
e P
rice
s fo
r Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n G
oo
ds
and
Ser
vice
s fo
r th
e U
nit
ed S
tate
s an
d S
elec
ted
Maj
or
Trad
e P
artn
ers:
199
9Un
ited
Stat
es =
1.0
Coun
try
1999
Mex
ico
0.64
Pola
nd0.
76
Hung
ary
0.86
Turk
ey0.
87
Gree
ce0.
90
Aust
ralia
0.95
Cana
da0.
96
New
Zea
land
0.97
Luxe
mbo
urg
1.00
Unite
d St
ates
1.00
Spai
n1.
04
Italy
1.07
Coun
try
1999
Portu
gal
1.12
Germ
any
1.15
Belg
ium
1.18
Fran
ce1.
21
Aust
ria1.
24
Neth
erla
nds
1.25
Irela
nd1.
26
Swed
en1.
32
Switz
erla
nd1.
41
Unite
d Ki
ngdo
m1.
45
Japa
n1.
55
Denm
ark
1.61
Norw
ay1.
75
NO
TE
S:
1999
is th
e m
ost r
ecen
t yea
r for
whi
ch th
ese
data
are
ava
ilabl
e by
cou
ntry
. For
thes
e co
untr
ies,
the
data
are
una
vaila
ble
for g
oods
and
se
rvic
es s
epar
atel
y. R
elat
ive
pric
es a
re b
ased
on
purc
hasi
ng p
ower
par
ity fo
r tr
ansp
orta
tion-
rela
ted
good
s an
d se
rvic
es. A
ll do
llar
amou
nts
are
in c
urre
nt 1
999
dolla
rs. R
aw d
ata
are
not r
eadi
ly a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
n ba
sed
on d
ata
from
Org
anis
atio
n fo
r E
cono
mic
C
o-op
erat
ion
and
Dev
elop
men
t, P
urch
asin
g P
ower
Par
ities
and
Rea
l Exp
endi
ture
s, 1
999
Res
ults
(P
aris
, Fra
nce:
Aug
ust 2
002)
, tab
le 1
1.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
260
TAB
LE
96a
U
.S. T
rad
e in
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed G
oo
ds:
199
0–20
02M
illio
ns o
f cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Impo
rts 8
2,10
1 8
1,10
9 8
5,07
0 9
2,80
410
5,75
411
0,78
111
5,50
412
6,92
7 14
0,05
3 16
6,55
3 18
5,02
7 18
3,00
3 19
0,88
0
Expo
rts 6
4,64
2 7
2,36
4 7
8,77
3 7
6,65
8 8
1,65
8 8
0,09
1 8
9,95
810
3,81
9 11
4,97
1 11
1,46
9 10
5,42
9 10
6,86
0 10
8,74
4
Tota
l14
6,74
415
3,47
316
3,84
316
9,46
218
7,41
219
0,87
220
5,46
223
0,74
5 25
5,02
4 27
8,02
2 29
0,45
6 28
9,86
3 29
9,62
4
NO
TE
S:
Tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d go
ods
are
mot
or v
ehic
les
and
part
s, a
ircra
ft an
d sp
acec
raft
and
part
s, r
ailw
ay v
ehic
les
and
part
s, a
nd s
hips
and
boa
ts. T
otal
s m
ay
not e
qual
the
sum
of p
arts
due
to r
ound
ing.
All
dolla
r am
ount
s ar
e in
cur
rent
dol
lars
. The
se d
ata
have
not
bee
n ad
just
ed fo
r in
flatio
n be
caus
e th
ere
is n
o sp
ecifi
c de
flato
r av
aila
ble
for
tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d go
ods.
In a
dditi
on, i
t is
diffi
cult
to c
ontr
ol fo
r tr
adin
g pa
rtne
rs' i
nfla
tion
rate
s as
wel
l as
curr
ency
exc
hang
e flu
ctua
tions
whe
n ad
just
ing
the
valu
e of
inte
rnat
iona
lly
trad
ed g
oods
and
ser
vice
s fo
r in
flatio
n.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S.
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tra
de C
omm
issi
on, I
nter
activ
e Ta
riff a
nd T
rade
Dat
aWeb
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://da
taw
eb.u
sitc
.gov
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
261
TAB
LE
96b
U
.S. T
rad
e in
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed G
oo
ds
by C
om
mo
dit
y: 2
002
Mill
ions
of c
urre
nt d
olla
rs
Over
all (
expo
rtspl
us im
ports
)Ba
lanc
e (e
xpor
tsm
inus
impo
rts)
Vehi
cles
oth
er th
an ra
ilway
233,
027
–108
,005
Airc
raft,
spa
cecr
aft,
and
parts
61,8
9725
,905
Ship
s, b
oats
, and
floa
ting
stru
ctur
es2,
568
–90
Railw
ay lo
com
otiv
es a
nd p
arts
2,13
353
To
tal,
trans
porta
tion-
rela
ted
good
s29
9,62
4–8
2,13
6
To
tal,
all c
omm
odite
s1,
856,
806
–470
,292
NO
TE
S: T
rans
port
atio
n-re
late
d go
ods
are
mot
or v
ehic
les
and
part
s, a
ircra
ft an
d sp
acec
raft
and
part
s, r
ailw
ay v
ehic
les
and
part
s, a
nd s
hips
and
boa
ts. T
otal
s m
ay n
ot e
qual
the
sum
of p
arts
du
e to
rou
ndin
g.
All
dolla
r am
ount
s ar
e in
cur
rent
dol
lars
. The
se d
ata
have
not
bee
n ad
just
ed fo
r in
flatio
n be
caus
e th
ere
is n
o sp
ecifi
c de
flato
r av
aila
ble
for
tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d go
ods.
In a
dditi
on, i
t is
diffi
cult
to c
ontr
ol fo
r tr
adin
g pa
rtne
rs' i
nfla
tion
rate
s as
wel
l as
curr
ency
exc
hang
e flu
ctua
tions
w
hen
adju
stin
g th
e va
lue
of in
tern
atio
nally
trad
ed g
oods
and
ser
vice
s fo
r in
flatio
n.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, U.S
. Int
erna
tiona
l Tra
de C
omm
issi
on,
Inte
ract
ive
Tarif
f and
Tra
de D
ataW
eb, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
data
web
.usi
tc.g
ov/,
as o
f Feb
ruar
y 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
262
TAB
LE
97
U.S
. Tra
de
Bal
ance
in T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Go
od
s: 1
990–
2002
Tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d go
ods
expo
rts m
inus
impo
rtsM
illio
ns o
f cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Trad
e ba
lanc
e–1
7,45
9–8
,745
–6,2
96–1
6,14
5–2
4,09
6–3
0,68
9–2
5,54
6–2
3,10
8–2
5,08
2–5
5,08
3–7
9,59
8–7
6,14
3–8
2,13
6
NO
TE
S:
Tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d go
ods
are
mot
or v
ehic
les
and
part
s, a
ircra
ft an
d sp
acec
raft
and
part
s, r
ailw
ay v
ehic
les
and
part
s, a
nd s
hips
and
boa
ts. T
otal
s m
ay n
ot
equa
l the
sum
of p
arts
due
to r
ound
ing.
All
dolla
r am
ount
s ar
e in
cur
rent
dol
lars
. The
se d
ata
have
not
bee
n ad
just
ed fo
r inf
latio
n be
caus
e th
ere
is n
o sp
ecifi
c de
flato
r ava
ilabl
e fo
r tr
ansp
orta
tion-
rela
ted
good
s.
In a
dditi
on, i
t is
diffi
cult
to c
ontr
ol fo
r tr
adin
g pa
rtne
rs' i
nfla
tion
rate
s as
wel
l as
curr
ency
exc
hang
e flu
ctua
tions
whe
n ad
just
ing
the
valu
e of
inte
rnat
iona
lly tr
aded
goo
ds
and
serv
ices
for
infla
tion.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. I
nter
natio
nal
Trad
e C
omm
issi
on, I
nter
activ
e Ta
riff a
nd T
rade
Dat
aWeb
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://da
taw
eb.u
sitc
.gov
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
263
TAB
LE
98
U.S
. In
tern
atio
nal
Tra
de
in T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Ser
vice
s: 1
990–
2002
Mill
ions
of c
urre
nt d
olla
rs
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Impo
rts35
,497
34,9
8734
,370
35,9
3439
,081
41,6
9743
,212
47,0
9750
,334
55,4
5465
,904
61,2
41 5
9,62
4
Expo
rts37
,339
38,4
8538
,149
38,4
8640
,751
44,9
8946
,496
47,8
7845
,702
46,7
0150
,897
46,3
13 4
5,74
6
Tota
l72
,836
73,4
7272
,519
74,4
2079
,832
86,6
8689
,708
94,9
7596
,036
102,
155
116,
801
107,
554
105
,370
NO
TE
S: D
etai
l ser
vice
type
dat
a ar
e no
t ava
ilabl
e in
infla
tion-
adju
sted
term
s. T
rans
port
atio
n se
rvic
es in
clud
e pa
ssen
ger
fare
s an
d fr
eigh
t and
por
t ser
vice
s. It
exc
lude
s re
ceip
ts a
nd p
aym
ents
for
trav
el s
ervi
ces,
whi
ch in
clud
es p
urch
ases
of g
oods
and
ser
vice
s (e
.g.,
food
, lod
ging
, rec
reat
ion,
gift
s, e
nter
tain
men
t, an
d an
y in
cide
ntal
ex
pens
e on
a fo
reig
n vi
sit)
. The
se d
ata
have
not
bee
n ad
just
ed fo
r in
flatio
n be
caus
e th
ere
is n
o sp
ecifi
c de
flato
r av
aila
ble
for
tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d se
rvic
es. I
n ad
ditio
n,
it is
diff
icul
t to
cont
rol f
or tr
adin
g pa
rtne
rs' i
nfla
tion
rate
s as
wel
l as
curr
ency
exc
hang
e flu
ctua
tions
whe
n ad
just
ing
the
valu
e of
inte
rnat
iona
lly tr
aded
goo
ds a
nd s
ervi
ces
for
infla
tion.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tion
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
A
naly
sis,
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tra
nsac
tions
Acc
ount
s da
ta, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.d
oc.g
ov/b
ea/d
i1.h
tm, a
s of
Apr
il 20
03.
TAB
LE
99
U.S
. Tra
de
Bal
ance
in T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Ser
vice
s: 1
990–
2002
Tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d se
rvic
es e
xpor
ts m
inus
impo
rtsM
illio
ns o
f cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Trad
e ba
lanc
e1,
842
3,49
83,
779
2,55
21,
670
3,29
23,
284
781
–4,6
32–8
,753
–15,
007
–14,
928
–13,
878
NO
TE
S: D
etai
l ser
vice
type
dat
a ar
e no
t ava
ilabl
e in
infla
tion-
adju
sted
term
s. T
rans
port
atio
n se
rvic
es in
clud
e pa
ssen
ger
fare
s an
d fr
eigh
t and
por
t ser
vice
s. It
exc
lude
s re
ceip
ts a
nd p
aym
ents
for
trav
el s
ervi
ces,
whi
ch in
clud
es p
urch
ases
of g
oods
and
ser
vice
s (e
.g.,
food
, lod
ging
, rec
reat
ion,
gift
s, e
nter
tain
men
t, an
d an
y in
cide
ntal
ex
pens
e on
a fo
reig
n vi
sit)
. The
se d
ata
have
not
bee
n ad
just
ed fo
r in
flatio
n be
caus
e th
ere
is n
o sp
ecifi
c de
flato
r av
aila
ble
for
tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d se
rvic
es. I
n ad
ditio
n,
it is
diff
icul
t to
cont
rol f
or tr
adin
g pa
rtne
rs' i
nfla
tion
rate
s as
wel
l as
curr
ency
exc
hang
e flu
ctua
tions
whe
n ad
just
ing
the
valu
e of
inte
rnat
iona
lly tr
aded
goo
ds a
nd s
ervi
ces
for
infla
tion.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tion
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
A
naly
sis,
Inte
rnat
iona
l Tra
nsac
tions
Acc
ount
s da
ta, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.d
oc.g
ov/b
ea/d
i1.h
tm, a
s of
Apr
il 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
264
TAB
LE
100
a V
alu
e o
f Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed F
inal
Dem
and
an
d It
s S
har
e in
GD
P:
1990
–200
1Bi
llion
s of
cha
ined
199
6 do
llars 1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d fin
al d
eman
d71
9.8
695.
872
3.9
747.
678
1.7
802.
883
7.7
881.
293
4.8
981.
197
7.8
984.
1
Tran
spor
tatio
n sh
are
in G
DP (p
erce
nt)
10.7
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.6
10.6
10.7
10.8
11.0
11.1
10.6
10.7
NO
TE
S:
Tota
l tra
nspo
rtat
ion-
rela
ted
final
dem
and
is th
e su
m o
f all
cons
umer
, priv
ate
busi
ness
, and
gov
ernm
ent p
urch
ases
of t
rans
port
atio
n-re
late
d go
ods
and
serv
ices
, and
net
exp
orts
(i.e
., tr
ansp
orta
tion
impo
rts
subt
ract
ed fr
om tr
ansp
orta
tion
expo
rts)
. Gro
ss p
rivat
e do
mes
tic in
vest
men
t con
stitu
tes
railr
oad
and
petr
oleu
m
pipe
lines
onl
y.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
(BT
S),
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n da
ta fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nts"
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn/
nipa
w, a
s of
Feb
. 24,
200
3.
TAB
LE
100
b
Val
ue
of
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Fin
al D
eman
d a
nd
Its
Sh
are
in G
DP
: 19
90–2
001
Billi
ons
of c
urre
nt d
olla
rs
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d fin
al d
eman
d61
7.5
616.
965
6.2
697.
274
7.6
782.
083
7.7
893.
393
2.4
993.
71,
031.
81,
046.
9
Tran
spor
tatio
n sh
are
in G
DP (p
erce
nt)
10.6
10.3
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.6
10.7
10.7
10.6
10.7
10.5
10.4
NO
TE
S: T
otal
tran
spor
tatio
n-re
late
d fin
al d
eman
d is
the
sum
of a
ll co
nsum
er, p
rivat
e bu
sine
ss, a
nd g
over
nmen
t pur
chas
es o
f tra
nspo
rtat
ion-
rela
ted
good
s an
d se
rvic
es, a
nd
net e
xpor
ts (
i.e.,
tran
spor
tatio
n im
port
s su
btra
cted
from
tran
spor
tatio
n ex
port
s). G
ross
priv
ate
dom
estic
inve
stm
ent c
onst
itute
s ra
ilroa
d an
d pe
trol
eum
pip
elin
es o
nly.
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s (B
TS
), c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Nat
iona
l Inc
ome
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s" a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.d
oc.g
ov/b
ea/d
n/ni
paw
, as
of F
eb. 2
4, 2
003.
Appendix B
265
TAB
LE
101
S
har
e o
f Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed F
inal
Dem
and
by
Typ
e: 1
990–
2001
Perc
ent
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Pers
onal
con
sum
ptio
n74
.069
.870
.471
.571
.871
.671
.070
.370
.471
.874
.476
.4
Gros
s pr
ivat
e do
mes
tic in
vest
men
t12
.713
.213
.414
.416
.016
.517
.217
.718
.720
.319
.617
.1
Net e
xpor
ts (e
xpor
ts m
inus
impo
rts)
–4.3
–2.7
–2.5
–3.9
–5.2
–5.4
–5.1
–4.6
–5.2
–8.2
–10.
6–1
0.5
Gove
rnm
ent p
urch
ases
17.7
19.7
18.7
18.0
17.4
17.2
16.9
16.6
16.1
16.0
16.6
17.0
NO
TE
S:
Tota
l tra
nspo
rtat
ion-
rela
ted
final
dem
and
is th
e su
m o
f all
cons
umer
, priv
ate
busi
ness
, and
gov
ernm
ent p
urch
ases
of t
rans
port
atio
n-re
late
d go
ods
and
serv
ices
, and
net
exp
orts
(i.e
., tr
ansp
orta
tion
impo
rts
subt
ract
ed fr
om tr
ansp
orta
tion
expo
rts)
. Gro
ss p
rivat
e do
mes
tic in
vest
men
t con
stitu
tes
railr
oad
and
petr
oleu
m
pipe
lines
onl
y.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
(BT
S),
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n da
ta fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nts"
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn/
nipa
w, a
s of
Feb
. 24,
200
3.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
266
TAB
LE
102
a V
alu
e A
dd
ed b
y F
or-
Hir
e Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n S
ervi
ces
to U
.S. G
DP
an
d It
s S
har
e in
U.S
. To
tal G
DP
: 19
90–2
001
Billi
ons
of c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs 1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
GDP
of fo
r-hi
re tr
ansp
orta
tion
serv
ices
180.
618
5.9
193.
620
1.2
218.
622
5.1
243.
424
8.9
257.
926
8.6
282.
527
0.3
As a
sha
re o
f GDP
(per
cent
)2.
72.
82.
82.
83.
03.
03.
13.
13.
03.
03.
12.
9
KE
Y:
GD
P =
Gro
ss D
omes
tic P
rodu
ct.
NO
TE
S:
For
-hire
tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
es in
clud
e ra
ilroa
d tr
ansp
orta
tion,
loca
l and
inte
rurb
an p
asse
nger
tran
sit,
truc
king
and
war
ehou
sing
, wat
er tr
ansp
orta
tion,
tran
spor
-ta
tion
by a
ir, p
ipel
ines
(exc
ept n
atur
al g
as),
and
tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
es. T
rans
port
atio
n se
rvic
es c
over
est
ablis
hmen
ts fu
rnis
hing
ser
vice
s in
cide
ntal
to tr
ansp
orta
tion
(e.g
., fo
rwar
ding
and
pac
king
ser
vice
s, a
nd th
e ar
rang
emen
t of p
asse
nger
and
frei
ght t
rans
port
atio
n).
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, c
alcu
latio
ns b
ased
on
data
from
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Gro
ss D
omes
tic P
rodu
ct b
y In
dust
ry"
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.gov
/bea
/dn2
/gpo
.htm
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
102
b
Val
ue
Ad
ded
by
Fo
r-H
ire
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
Ser
vice
s to
U.S
. GD
P a
nd
Its
Sh
are
in U
.S. T
ota
l GD
P:
1990
–200
1Bi
llion
s of
cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
GDP
of fo
r-hi
re tr
ansp
orta
tion
serv
ices
177.
418
6.1
193.
420
622
3.2
233.
424
3.4
261.
828
8.7
301.
931
3.7
306.
1
As a
sha
re o
f GDP
(per
cent
)3.
13.
13.
13.
13.
23.
23.
13.
13.
33.
33.
23.
0
KE
Y:
GD
P =
Gro
ss D
omes
tic P
rodu
ct.
NO
TE
S:
For
-hire
tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
es in
clud
e ra
ilroa
d tr
ansp
orta
tion,
loca
l and
inte
rurb
an p
asse
nger
tran
sit,
truc
king
and
war
ehou
sing
, wat
er tr
ansp
orta
tion,
tran
s-po
rtat
ion
by a
ir, p
ipel
ines
(ex
cept
nat
ural
gas
), a
nd tr
ansp
orta
tion
serv
ices
. Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
serv
ices
cov
er e
stab
lishm
ents
furn
ishi
ng s
ervi
ces
inci
dent
al to
tran
spor
tatio
n (e
.g.,
forw
ardi
ng a
nd p
acki
ng s
ervi
ces,
and
the
arra
ngem
ent o
f pas
seng
er a
nd fr
eigh
t tra
nspo
rtat
ion)
.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n da
ta fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
A
naly
sis,
"G
ross
Dom
estic
Pro
duct
by
Indu
stry
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov/b
ea/d
n2/g
po.h
tm, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03.
Appendix B
267
TAB
LE
103
S
har
e o
f F
or-
Hir
e Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n V
alu
e A
dd
ed b
y M
od
e: 1
990–
2001
Perc
ent
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Railr
oad
trans
porta
tion
10.0
11.2
10.7
10.4
10.1
10.1
9.6
9.2
8.8
8.3
8.9
9.2
Loca
l and
inte
rurb
an p
asse
nger
tran
sit
7.1
6.7
6.4
6.3
5.9
5.9
5.5
5.9
6.0
6.3
6.1
6.4
Truc
king
and
war
ehou
sing
37.7
38.5
39.1
39.3
39.0
38.5
37.8
36.4
37.0
37.3
36.6
36.7
Wat
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
5.6
5.6
5.3
5.2
5.2
5.0
5.0
5.3
5.1
4.5
4.7
4.9
Tran
spor
tatio
n by
air
26.0
24.2
25.4
25.8
27.3
27.9
29.1
30.2
29.8
30.0
30.0
29.0
Pipe
lines
, exc
ept n
atur
al g
as3.
23.
33.
03.
02.
52.
22.
32.
52.
52.
52.
32.
2
Tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
es10
.810
.710
.110
.110
.110
.410
.610
.610
.811
.111
.511
.5
KE
Y:
GD
P =
Gro
ss D
omes
tic P
rodu
ct.
NO
TE
S:
For
-hire
tran
spor
tatio
n se
rvic
es in
clud
e ra
ilroa
d tr
ansp
orta
tion,
loca
l and
inte
rurb
an p
asse
nger
tran
sit,
truc
king
and
war
ehou
sing
, wat
er tr
ansp
orta
tion,
tran
s-po
rtat
ion
by a
ir, p
ipel
ines
(ex
cept
nat
ural
gas
), a
nd tr
ansp
orta
tion
serv
ices
. Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
serv
ices
cov
er e
stab
lishm
ents
furn
ishi
ng s
ervi
ces
inci
dent
al to
tran
spor
tatio
n (e
.g.,
forw
ardi
ng a
nd p
acki
ng s
ervi
ces,
and
the
arra
ngem
ent o
f pas
seng
er a
nd fr
eigh
t tra
nspo
rtat
ion)
.
SO
UR
CE
: U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
cal
cula
tions
bas
ed o
n da
ta fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
A
naly
sis,
"G
ross
Dom
estic
Pro
duct
by
Indu
stry
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov/b
ea/d
n2/g
po.h
tm, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
268
TAB
LE
104
a F
eder
al, S
tate
, an
d L
oca
l Gov
ern
men
t Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed R
even
ues
: 19
90–2
000
Billi
ons
of c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Tota
l82
.2
88.2
89
.8
92.3
92
.4
95.8
96
.4
98.1
10
7.0
118.
9 11
3.6
Fede
ral
26.1
30
.2
29.5
29
.9
28.8
30
.8
30.7
30
.8
37.7
48.9
42.6
Stat
e40
.2
41.3
43
.3
44.7
45
.1
45.9
46
.0
46.5
48
.048
.248
.6
Loca
l15
.9
16.7
17
.0
17.7
18
.5
19.1
19
.7
20.8
21
.421
.822
.4
SO
UR
CE
S:
Exc
ept
as n
ote
d—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"G
over
nmen
t Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Fin
an-
cial
Sta
tistic
s S
earc
habl
e D
atab
ase,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. S
tate
an
d lo
cal p
ort
ion
for
2000
—U
.S. D
epar
t-m
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Sta
te a
nd L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent F
inan
ces,
" av
aila
ble
at ft
p://f
tp2.
cens
us.g
ov/p
ub/o
utgo
ing/
govs
/F
inan
ce/,
as o
f Feb
ruar
y 20
03. C
hai
n-t
ype
pri
ce in
dex
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Nat
iona
l Inc
ome
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s Ta
bles
," ta
ble
7.1,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn/
nipa
web
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
104
b
Fed
eral
, Sta
te, a
nd
Lo
cal G
over
nm
ent
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Rev
enu
es:
1990
–200
0Bi
llion
s of
cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Tota
l69
.8
77.4
80
.3
85.2
87
.6
93.7
96
.4
100.
5 11
1.2
126.
9 12
5.8
Fede
ral
21.4
26
.0
25.9
27
.4
27.2
30
.2
30.7
31
.438
.952
.046
.8
Stat
e34
.6
36.6
39
.1
41.4
42
.9
44.8
46
.0
47.7
50.0
51.6
54.1
Loca
l13
.7
14.8
15
.4
16.4
17
.6
18.6
19
.7
21.3
22.3
23.3
24.9
SO
UR
CE
S:
Exc
ept
as n
ote
d—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"G
over
nmen
t Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Fin
an-
cial
Sta
tistic
s S
earc
habl
e D
atab
ase,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. S
tate
an
d lo
cal p
ort
ion
for
2000
—U
.S. D
epar
t-m
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Sta
te a
nd L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent F
inan
ces,
" av
aila
ble
at ft
p://f
tp2.
cens
us.g
ov/p
ub/o
utgo
ing/
govs
/F
inan
ce/,
as o
f Feb
ruar
y 20
03. C
hai
n-t
ype
pri
ce in
dex
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Nat
iona
l Inc
ome
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s Ta
bles
," ta
ble
7.1,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn/
nipa
web
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
269
TAB
LE
105
a F
eder
al, S
tate
, an
d L
oca
l Gov
ern
men
t Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed R
even
ues
by M
od
e: 2
000
Billi
ons
of c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs
2000
Tota
l11
3,56
9
High
way
79,2
02
Tran
sit
11,4
36
Air
19,5
52
Wat
er3,
320
Pipe
line
36
Gene
ral s
uppo
rt23
TAB
LE
105
b
Fed
eral
, Sta
te, a
nd
Lo
cal G
over
nm
ent
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Rev
enu
es
by M
od
e: 2
000
Billi
ons
of c
urre
nt d
olla
rs
2000
Tota
l12
5,84
7
High
way
87,8
00
Tran
sit
12,6
74
Air
21,6
27
Wat
er3,
682
Pipe
line
40
Gene
ral s
uppo
rt25
TAB
LE
106
a F
eder
al, S
tate
, an
d L
oca
l Gov
ern
men
t Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed E
xpen
dit
ure
s F
rom
Ow
n F
un
ds:
FY
199
0–20
00Bi
llion
s of
cha
ined
199
6 do
llars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Stat
e an
d lo
cal
8185
8886
9192
9394
100
104
105
Fede
ral
3838
4041
4242
4141
4041
44
Tota
l11
912
312
812
613
313
313
313
514
014
514
9
NO
TE
S:
Fed
eral
exp
endi
ture
s fr
om o
wn
fund
s co
nsis
ts o
f out
lays
of t
he fe
dera
l gov
ernm
ent i
nclu
ding
not
onl
y di
rect
spe
ndin
g bu
t als
o gr
ants
to s
tate
and
loca
l go
vern
men
ts. S
tate
and
loca
l exp
endi
ture
s fr
om o
wn
fund
s in
clud
e ou
tlays
of s
tate
and
loca
l gov
ernm
ents
from
all
sour
ces
of fu
nds
excl
udin
g fe
dera
l gra
nts.
Sta
te
and
loca
l dat
a ar
e re
port
ed to
geth
er b
ecau
se d
isag
greg
ated
fede
ral g
rant
s da
ta a
re n
ot a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
S: E
xcep
t as
no
ted
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, "
Gov
ernm
ent T
rans
port
atio
n F
inan
cial
Sta
tistic
s S
earc
habl
e D
atab
ase,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. S
tate
an
d lo
cal p
ort
ion
for
2000
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, U.S
. Cen
sus
Bur
eau,
"S
tate
an
d Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t Fin
ance
s,"
avai
labl
e at
ftp:
//ftp
2.ce
nsus
.gov
/pub
/out
goin
g/go
vs/F
inan
ce/,
as o
f Feb
ruar
y 20
03. C
hai
n-t
ype
pri
ce in
dex
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of
Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nts
Tabl
es,"
tabl
e 7.
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.d
oc.g
ov/b
ea/d
n/ni
paw
eb/,
as o
f F
ebru
ary
2003
.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Exc
ept
as n
ote
d—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"G
over
nmen
t Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Fin
anci
al S
tatis
tics
Sea
rcha
ble
Dat
abas
e,"
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
. Sta
te a
nd
loca
l po
rtio
n fo
r 20
00—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S.
Cen
sus
Bur
eau,
"S
tate
and
Loc
al G
over
nmen
t Fin
ance
s,"
avai
labl
e at
ftp:
//ftp
2.ce
nsus
.gov
/pub
/out
goin
g/go
vs/F
inan
ce/,
as o
f Feb
ruar
y 20
03. C
hai
n-t
ype
pri
ce in
dex
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Nat
iona
l Inc
ome
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s Ta
bles
," ta
ble
7.1,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn/
nipa
web
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
270
TAB
LE
106
b
Fed
eral
, Sta
te, a
nd
Lo
cal G
over
nm
ent
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Exp
end
itu
res
Fro
m O
wn
Fu
nd
s: F
Y 1
990–
2000
Billi
ons
of c
urre
nt d
olla
rs
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Stat
e an
d lo
cal
3133
3537
4041
4142
4144
48
Fede
ral
7075
7979
8690
9397
104
111
117
Tota
l10
110
811
511
612
613
113
313
814
615
516
5
NO
TE
S:
Fed
eral
exp
endi
ture
s fr
om o
wn
fund
s co
nsis
ts o
f out
lays
of t
he fe
dera
l gov
ernm
ent i
nclu
ding
not
onl
y di
rect
spe
ndin
g bu
t als
o gr
ants
to s
tate
and
loca
l go
vern
men
ts. S
tate
and
loca
l exp
endi
ture
s fr
om o
wn
fund
s in
clud
e ou
tlays
of s
tate
and
loca
l gov
ernm
ents
from
all
sour
ces
of fu
nds
excl
udin
g fe
dera
l gra
nts.
Sta
te
and
loca
l dat
a ar
e re
port
ed to
geth
er b
ecau
se d
isag
greg
ated
fede
ral g
rant
s da
ta a
re n
ot a
vaila
ble.
SO
UR
CE
S: E
xcep
t as
no
ted
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n, B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s, "
Gov
ernm
ent T
rans
port
atio
n F
inan
cial
Sta
tistic
s S
earc
habl
e D
atab
ase,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. S
tate
an
d lo
cal p
ort
ion
for
2000
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, U.S
. Cen
sus
Bur
eau,
"S
tate
an
d Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t Fin
ance
s,"
avai
labl
e at
ftp:
//ftp
2.ce
nsus
.gov
/pub
/out
goin
g/go
vs/F
inan
ce/,
as o
f Feb
ruar
y 20
03. C
hai
n-t
ype
pri
ce in
dex
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of
Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nts
Tabl
es,"
tabl
e 7.
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.d
oc.g
ov/b
ea/d
n/ni
paw
eb/,
as o
f F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
271
TAB
LE
107
a S
har
es o
f F
eder
al, S
tate
, an
d L
oca
l Gov
ern
men
t Tr
ansp
ort
atio
n-R
elat
ed E
xpen
dit
ure
s by
Mo
de
Fro
m O
wn
Fu
nd
s: F
Y 2
000
Mill
ions
of c
urre
nt d
olla
rs
2000
High
way
103,
838
Tran
sit
31,3
95
Rail
781
Air
20,8
20
Wat
er7,
942
Pipe
line
27
Gene
ral s
uppo
rt25
9
Tota
l16
5,06
2
TAB
LE
107
b
Sh
ares
of
Fed
eral
, Sta
te, a
nd
Lo
cal G
over
nm
ent
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
-Rel
ated
Exp
end
itu
res
by M
od
e F
rom
Ow
n F
un
ds:
FY
200
0M
illio
ns o
f cha
ined
199
6 do
llars 2000
High
way
93,5
53
Tran
sit
28,2
43
Rail
712
Air
18,8
14
Wat
er7,
193
Pipe
line
25
Gene
ral s
uppo
rt23
6
Tota
l14
8,77
5
NO
TE
S fo
r Ta
ble
s 10
7a a
nd
107
b:
Fed
eral
exp
endi
ture
s fr
om o
wn
fund
s co
nsis
ts o
f out
lays
of t
he fe
dera
l gov
ernm
ent i
nclu
ding
not
onl
y di
rect
spe
nd-
ing
but a
lso
gran
ts to
sta
te a
nd lo
cal g
over
nmen
ts. S
tate
and
loca
l exp
endi
ture
s fr
om o
wn
fund
s in
clud
e ou
tlays
of s
tate
and
loca
l gov
ernm
ents
from
all
sour
ces
of fu
nds
excl
udin
g fe
dera
l gra
nts.
Sta
te a
nd lo
cal d
ata
are
repo
rted
toge
ther
bec
ause
dis
aggr
egat
ed fe
dera
l gra
nts
data
are
not
ava
ilabl
e.
SO
UR
CE
S fo
r Ta
ble
s 10
7a a
nd
107
b:
Exc
ept
as n
ote
d—
US
Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"G
over
nmen
t Tra
ns-
port
atio
n F
inan
cial
Sta
tistic
s S
earc
habl
e D
atab
ase,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. S
tate
an
d lo
cal p
ort
ion
for
2000
—U
.S.
Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Sta
te a
nd L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent F
inan
ces,
" av
aila
ble
at ft
p://f
tp2.
cens
us.g
ov/p
ub/o
utgo
ing/
govs
/Fin
ance
/, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03. C
hai
n-t
ype
pri
ce in
dex
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Nat
iona
l Inc
ome
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
s Ta
bles
," ta
ble
7.1,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn/
nipa
web
/, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
272
TAB
LE
108
a G
ross
Gov
ern
men
t In
vest
men
ts in
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n In
fras
tru
ctu
re a
nd
Ro
llin
g S
tock
: 19
90–2
000
Billi
ons
of c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Infra
stru
ctur
e52
.052
.552
.856
.359
.256
.357
.060
.262
.767
.265
.5
Rolli
ng s
tock
7.0
6.8
6.7
7.4
7.6
7.6
7.9
9.3
9.6
9.9
10.5
Tota
l59
.059
.259
.563
.766
.863
.964
.969
.572
.377
.176
.0
NO
TE
S:
Inve
stm
ent i
n tr
ansp
orta
tion
infr
astr
uctu
re c
onst
itute
s th
e pu
rcha
se o
r co
nstr
uctio
n va
lue
of tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s an
d st
ruct
ures
for
all m
odes
exc
ept
pipe
line.
Dat
a on
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
rans
port
atio
n in
vest
men
t are
not
ava
ilabl
e se
para
tely
. Rai
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
data
are
onl
y av
aila
ble
for
stat
e an
d lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e in
vest
men
t fro
m 1
993
to 2
000.
Inve
stm
ent i
n ro
lling
sto
ck c
onsi
sts
of g
over
nmen
t out
lays
for
mot
or v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Inve
stm
ent-
Con
cept
s, D
ata
and
Ana
lysi
s,"
draf
t, co
mpi
led
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s (B
EA
), "
Fix
ed A
sset
s an
d C
onsu
mer
Dur
able
s,"
and
Per
sona
l com
mun
icat
ions
w
ith B
EA
; and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Val
ue o
f Con
stru
ctio
n P
ut in
Pla
ce S
tatis
tics,
" D
etai
led
Con
stru
ctio
n E
xpen
ditu
res
Tabl
es,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov,
as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
108
b
Gro
ss G
over
nm
ent
Inve
stm
ents
in T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Infr
astr
uct
ure
an
d R
olli
ng
Sto
ck:
1990
–200
0Bi
llion
s of
cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Infra
stru
ctur
e44
.846
.146
.550
.654
.654
.657
.462
.967
.074
.576
.4
Rolli
ng s
tock
6.2
5.2
6.6
7.0
7.5
7.9
7.9
8.3
9.0
9.4
9.6
Tota
l51
.051
.353
.157
.662
.162
.565
.371
.276
.084
.086
.1
NO
TE
S:
Inve
stm
ent i
n tr
ansp
orta
tion
infr
astr
uctu
re c
onst
itute
s th
e pu
rcha
se o
r co
nstr
uctio
n va
lue
of tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s an
d st
ruct
ures
for
all m
odes
exc
ept
pipe
line.
Dat
a on
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
rans
port
atio
n in
vest
men
t are
not
ava
ilabl
e se
para
tely
. Rai
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
data
are
onl
y av
aila
ble
for
stat
e an
d lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e in
vest
men
t fro
m 1
993
to 2
000.
Inve
stm
ent i
n ro
lling
sto
ck c
onsi
sts
of g
over
nmen
t out
lays
for
mot
or v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Inve
stm
ent-
Con
cept
s, D
ata
and
Ana
lysi
s,"
draf
t, co
mpi
led
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s (B
EA
), "
Fix
ed A
sset
s an
d C
onsu
mer
Dur
able
s,"
and
Per
sona
l com
mun
icat
ions
w
ith B
EA
; and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Val
ue o
f Con
stru
ctio
n P
ut in
Pla
ce S
tatis
tics,
" D
etai
led
Con
stru
ctio
n E
xpen
ditu
res
Tabl
es,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov,
as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
273
TAB
LE
109
a G
ross
Gov
ern
men
t In
vest
men
t in
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n In
fras
tru
ctu
re b
y L
evel
of
Gov
ern
men
t: 1
990–
2000
Billi
ons
of c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Fede
ral
2.4
2.9
2.7
3.5
4.0
3.8
3.9
3.4
3.7
4.0
3.9
Stat
e an
d lo
cal
49.6
49.5
50.1
53.2
55.7
53.0
53.4
57.2
59.5
64.3
63.0
Tota
l52
.0
52.5
52
.8
56.7
59
.7
56.8
57
.4
60.6
63
.2
68.3
66
.9
NO
TE
S:
Inve
stm
ent i
n tr
ansp
orta
tion
infr
astr
uctu
re c
onst
itute
s th
e pu
rcha
se o
r co
nstr
uctio
n va
lue
of tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s an
d st
ruct
ures
for
all m
odes
exc
ept
pipe
line.
Dat
a on
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
rans
port
atio
n in
vest
men
t are
not
ava
ilabl
e se
para
tely
. Rai
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
data
are
onl
y av
aila
ble
for
stat
e an
d lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e in
vest
men
t fro
m 1
993
to 2
000.
Inve
stm
ent i
n ro
lling
sto
ck c
onsi
sts
of g
over
nmen
t out
lays
for
mot
or v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Inve
stm
ent-
Con
cept
s, D
ata
and
Ana
lysi
s,"
draf
t, co
mpi
led
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s (B
EA
), "
Fix
ed A
sset
s an
d C
onsu
mer
Dur
able
s,"
and
Per
sona
l com
mun
icat
ions
w
ith B
EA
; and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Val
ue o
f Con
stru
ctio
n P
ut in
Pla
ce S
tatis
tics,
" D
etai
led
Con
stru
ctio
n E
xpen
ditu
res
Tabl
es,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov,
as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
109
b
Gro
ss G
over
nm
ent
Inve
stm
ent
in T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Infr
astr
uct
ure
by
Lev
el o
f G
over
nm
ent:
199
0–20
00Bi
llion
s of
cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Fede
ral
2.0
2.6
2.4
3.1
3.7
3.7
3.9
3.5
3.9
4.3
4.4
Stat
e an
d lo
cal
42.8
43.6
44.1
47.4
50.9
50.9
53.4
59.4
63.1
70.3
72.1
Tota
l44
.846
.146
.550
.654
.654
.657
.462
.967
.074
.576
.4
NO
TE
S:
Inve
stm
ent i
n tr
ansp
orta
tion
infr
astr
uctu
re c
onst
itute
s th
e pu
rcha
se o
r co
nstr
uctio
n va
lue
of tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s an
d st
ruct
ures
for
all m
odes
exc
ept
pipe
line.
Dat
a on
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
rans
port
atio
n in
vest
men
t are
not
ava
ilabl
e se
para
tely
. Rai
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
data
are
onl
y av
aila
ble
for
stat
e an
d lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e in
vest
men
t fro
m 1
993
to 2
000.
Inve
stm
ent i
n ro
lling
sto
ck c
onsi
sts
of g
over
nmen
t out
lays
for
mot
or v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Inve
stm
ent-
Con
cept
s, D
ata
and
Ana
lysi
s,"
draf
t, co
mpi
led
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s (B
EA
), "
Fix
ed A
sset
s an
d C
onsu
mer
Dur
able
s,"
and
Per
sona
l com
mun
icat
ions
w
ith B
EA
; and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Val
ue o
f Con
stru
ctio
n P
ut in
Pla
ce S
tatis
tics,
" D
etai
led
Con
stru
ctio
n E
xpen
ditu
res
Tabl
es,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov,
as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
274
TAB
LE
110
a G
ross
Gov
ern
men
t In
vest
men
t in
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n In
fras
tru
ctu
re b
y M
od
e: 1
990–
2000
Billi
ons
of c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
High
way
38.6
38.2
38.3
40.0
42.3
40.4
41.0
43.9
46.0
49.9
48.2
Air
5.5
6.4
6.8
8.0
7.4
6.4
6.4
6.9
7.6
8.1
7.7
Wat
er1.
61.
51.
51.
51.
51.
51.
71.
71.
82.
02.
1
Tran
sit
6.3
6.4
6.2
6.9
7.9
8.0
7.9
7.7
7.2
7.2
7.5
Railr
oad
UU
U0.
40.
50.
50.
40.
40.
51.
01.
4
Tota
l52
.052
.552
.856
.759
.756
.857
.460
.663
.268
.366
.9
KE
Y:
U =
dat
a ar
e un
avai
labl
e.
NO
TE
S:
Inve
stm
ent i
n tr
ansp
orta
tion
infr
astr
uctu
re c
onst
itute
s th
e pu
rcha
se o
r co
nstr
uctio
n va
lue
of tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s an
d st
ruct
ures
for
all m
odes
exc
ept
pipe
line.
Dat
a on
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
rans
port
atio
n in
vest
men
t are
not
ava
ilabl
e se
para
tely
. Rai
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
data
are
onl
y av
aila
ble
for
stat
e an
d lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e in
vest
men
t fro
m 1
993
to 2
000.
Inve
stm
ent i
n ro
lling
sto
ck c
onsi
sts
of g
over
nmen
t out
lays
for
mot
or v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Inve
stm
ent-
Con
cept
s, D
ata
and
Ana
lysi
s,"
draf
t, co
mpi
led
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s (B
EA
), "
Fix
ed A
sset
s an
d C
onsu
mer
Dur
able
s,"
and
Per
sona
l com
mun
icat
ions
w
ith B
EA
; and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Val
ue o
f Con
stru
ctio
n P
ut in
Pla
ce S
tatis
tics,
" D
etai
led
Con
stru
ctio
n E
xpen
ditu
res
Tabl
es,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov,
as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
275
TAB
LE
110
b
Gro
ss G
over
nm
ent
Inve
stm
ent
in T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Infr
astr
uct
ure
by
Mo
de:
199
0–20
00Bi
llion
s of
cur
rent
dol
lars
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
High
way
33.2
33.5
33.6
35.4
38.5
38.7
41.0
45.6
48.8
54.7
55.5
Air
4.7
5.6
6.1
7.2
6.9
6.2
6.4
7.2
8.1
8.8
8.7
Wat
er1.
41.
31.
31.
41.
41.
51.
71.
71.
92.
12.
3
Tran
sit
5.5
5.7
5.6
6.2
7.3
7.7
7.9
8.0
7.7
7.9
8.5
Railr
oad
UU
U0.
30.
50.
50.
40.
40.
61.
01.
4
Tota
l45
4647
50.6
54.6
54.6
57.4
62.9
67.0
74.5
76.4
KE
Y:
U =
dat
a ar
e un
avai
labl
e.
NO
TE
S:
Inve
stm
ent i
n tr
ansp
orta
tion
infr
astr
uctu
re c
onst
itute
s th
e pu
rcha
se o
r co
nstr
uctio
n va
lue
of tr
ansp
orta
tion
faci
litie
s an
d st
ruct
ures
for
all m
odes
exc
ept
pipe
line.
Dat
a on
sta
te a
nd lo
cal t
rans
port
atio
n in
vest
men
t are
not
ava
ilabl
e se
para
tely
. Rai
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
data
are
onl
y av
aila
ble
for
stat
e an
d lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e in
vest
men
t fro
m 1
993
to 2
000.
Inve
stm
ent i
n ro
lling
sto
ck c
onsi
sts
of g
over
nmen
t out
lays
for
mot
or v
ehic
les.
SO
UR
CE
S:
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
"Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Inve
stm
ent-
Con
cept
s, D
ata
and
Ana
lysi
s,"
draf
t, co
mpi
led
base
d on
dat
a fr
om U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s (B
EA
), "
Fix
ed A
sset
s an
d C
onsu
mer
Dur
able
s,"
and
Per
sona
l com
mun
icat
ions
w
ith B
EA
; and
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, U
.S. C
ensu
s B
urea
u, "
Val
ue o
f Con
stru
ctio
n P
ut in
Pla
ce S
tatis
tics,
" D
etai
led
Con
stru
ctio
n E
xpen
ditu
res
Tabl
es,
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov,
as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
111
U
.S. E
ner
gy
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n b
y S
ecto
r: 1
990–
2001
Quad
rillio
n Br
itish
ther
mal
uni
ts (B
TU)
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Resi
dent
ial
16.9
17.4
17.3
18.1
18.1
18.5
19.5
18.9
18.7
19.2
19.8
19.3
Com
mer
cial
13.2
13.4
13.3
13.6
13.9
14.4
14.9
15.4
15.6
15.9
16.4
16.4
Indu
stria
l31
.731
.432
.532
.733
.734
.135
.135
.235
.035
.535
.733
.8
Tran
spor
tatio
n22
.522
.122
.522
.923
.524
.024
.524
.825
.426
.226
.926
.9
SO
UR
CE
: U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
istr
atio
n, M
onth
ly E
nerg
y R
evie
w (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: Aug
ust 2
002)
, tab
le 2
.1.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
276
TAB
LE
112
a T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Sec
tor
En
erg
y U
se a
nd
Gro
ss D
om
esti
c P
rod
uct
: 19
91–2
001
Inde
x: 1
991
= 1.
0
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tran
spor
tatio
n se
ctor
ene
rgy
use
1.0
0 1
.02
1.0
3 1
.06
1.0
8 1
.11
1.1
2 1
.15
1.1
8 1
.21
1.2
1
Gros
s Do
mes
tic P
rodu
ct (G
DP)
1.0
0 1
.03
1.0
6 1
.10
1.1
3 1
.17
1.2
2 1
.27
1.3
3 1
.38
1.3
8
Tran
spor
tatio
n en
ergy
use
per
GDP
1.0
0 0
.99
0.9
8 0
.97
0.9
6 0
.95
0.9
2 0
.90
0.8
9 0
.88
0.8
8
SO
UR
CE
S:
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
sec
tor
ener
gy
use
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
stra
tion,
Ann
ual E
nerg
y R
evie
w 2
001,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.eia
.doe
.gov
/em
eu/a
er/c
onte
nts.
htm
l, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
. GD
P—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nt T
able
s,"
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn1
.htm
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
TAB
LE
112
b
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
Sec
tor
En
erg
y U
se a
nd
Gro
ss D
om
esti
c P
rod
uct
: 19
91–2
001
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tran
spor
tatio
n se
ctor
ene
rgy
use
(Qua
drill
ion
BTU)
22.1
222
.46
22.8
823
.50
23.9
624
.51
24.8
125
.35
26.0
926
.70
26.7
5
Gros
s Do
mes
tic P
rodu
ct (G
DP)
(Bill
ions
of c
hain
ed 1
996
dolla
rs)
6,6
76
6,8
80
7,0
63
7,3
48
7,5
44
7,8
13
8,1
60
8,5
09
8,8
59
9,1
91
9,2
15
Tran
spor
tatio
n en
ergy
use
per
GDP
3,3
14
3,2
64
3,2
40
3,1
99
3,1
76
3,1
37
3,0
40
2,9
79
2,9
45
2,9
05
2,9
03
KE
Y:
BT
U =
Brit
ish
ther
mal
uni
ts. T
he a
vera
ge h
eat c
onte
nt o
f mot
or g
asol
ine
is 1
29,0
24 B
TU
per
gal
lon.
One
qua
drill
ion
BT
U is
equ
ival
ent t
o 7.
75 b
illio
n ga
llons
of
mot
or g
asol
ine.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
sec
tor
ener
gy
use
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
stra
tion,
Ann
ual E
nerg
y R
evie
w 2
001,
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.eia
.doe
.gov
/em
eu/a
er/c
onte
nts.
htm
l, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
. GD
P—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nt T
able
s,"
avai
labl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bea
.doc
.gov
/bea
/dn1
.htm
, as
of F
ebru
ary
2003
.
Appendix B
277
TAB
LE
113
U
.S. P
etro
leu
m U
se b
y S
ecto
r: 1
990–
2001
Mill
ion
barr
els
per d
ay
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Tran
spor
tatio
n 1
0.97
1
0.80
1
0.94
1
1.18
1
1.48
1
1.72
1
1.96
1
2.13
1
2.46
1
2.83
1
3.08
1
3.16
Indu
stry
4.3
2 4
.25
4.5
4 4
.43
4.6
6 4
.57
4.7
9 4
.92
4.8
0 4
.98
4.8
9 4
.67
Build
ings
1.1
5 1
.14
1.1
3 1
.14
1.1
1 1
.10
1.2
1 1
.17
1.0
8 1
.18
1.2
2 1
.20
Utili
ties
0.5
6 0
.53
0.4
3 0
.49
0.4
7 0
.33
0.3
6 0
.41
0.5
8 0
.54
0.5
1 0
.57
SO
UR
CE
S:
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
Sec
tor
En
erg
y U
se—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Ene
rgy,
Ene
rgy
Info
rmat
ion
Adm
inst
ratio
n, A
nnua
l Ene
rgy
Rev
iew
200
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.e
ia.d
oe.g
ov/e
meu
/aer
/con
tent
s.ht
ml,
as o
f Feb
ruar
y 20
03. G
DP
—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, Bur
eau
of E
cono
mic
Ana
lysi
s, "
Nat
iona
l Inc
ome
and
Pro
duct
Acc
ount
Tab
les,
" av
aila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.d
oc.g
ov/b
ea/d
n1.h
tm, a
s of
Feb
ruar
y 20
03.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
278
TAB
LE
114
a T
ran
spo
rtat
ion
Fu
el P
rice
s: 1
991–
2002
Chai
ned
1996
dol
lars
per
gal
lon
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Avia
tion
gaso
line
1.17
1.12
1.05
1.00
1.02
1.12
1.11
0.94
1.01
1.22
1.21
1.19
Jet f
uel,
kero
sene
0.73
0.66
0.62
0.56
0.55
0.65
0.60
0.44
0.52
0.84
0.71
0.65
Mot
or g
asol
ine,
al
l typ
es1.
331.
301.
251.
221.
231.
291.
271.
081.
171.
461.
401.
30
Dies
el n
o. 2
0.72
0.67
0.64
0.58
0.57
0.68
0.63
0.48
0.56
0.87
0.77
0.69
Railr
oad
dies
el0.
750.
690.
670.
620.
610.
680.
670.
550.
530.
820.
780.
66
Crud
e oi
l0.
210.
200.
170.
160.
180.
210.
190.
120.
170.
260.
210.
22
TAB
LE
114
b
Tran
spo
rtat
ion
Fu
el P
rice
s: 1
991–
2002
Curr
ent d
olla
rs p
er g
allo
n
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Avia
tion
gaso
line
1.05
1.03
0.99
0.96
1.01
1.12
1.13
0.98
1.06
1.31
1.32
1.32
Jet f
uel,
kero
sene
0.65
0.61
0.58
0.53
0.54
0.65
0.61
0.45
0.54
0.90
0.78
0.72
Mot
or g
asol
ine,
all t
ypes
1.20
1.19
1.17
1.17
1.21
1.29
1.29
1.12
1.22
1.56
1.53
1.44
Dies
el n
o. 2
0.65
0.62
0.60
0.55
0.56
0.68
0.64
0.49
0.58
0.94
0.84
0.76
Railr
oad
dies
el0.
670.
630.
630.
600.
600.
680.
680.
570.
550.
870.
850.
73
Crud
e oi
l0.
190.
180.
160.
160.
170.
210.
190.
130.
180.
280.
230.
24
NO
TE
FO
R T
AB
LE
S 1
14a
AN
D 1
14b
: A
ll ca
tego
ries
excl
ude
taxe
s, e
xcep
t mot
or g
asol
ine,
whi
ch in
clud
es ta
xes.
SO
UR
CE
S F
OR
TA
BL
ES
114
a A
ND
114
b:
1991
–200
1 fu
el p
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n (U
SD
OT
), B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s (B
TS
),
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
3-8
. 200
2 fu
el p
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
istr
atio
n,
Mon
thly
Ene
rgy
Rev
iew
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
les
9.4
and
9.7;
and
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
200
3 (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, p. 6
.
Appendix B
279
TAB
LE
115
a M
oto
r F
uel
Pri
ces
Co
mp
ared
wit
h p
er C
apit
a M
oto
r V
ehic
le-M
iles
Trav
eled
: 19
91–2
001
Chai
ned
1996
dol
lars
per
gal
lon
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Gaso
line
pric
e1.
331.
301.
251.
221.
231.
291.
271.
081.
171.
461.
401.
30
VMT
per c
apita
9,16
49,
350
9,44
49,
602
9,08
99,
218
9,38
79,
531
9,63
59,
729
9,75
9U
KE
Y:
U =
dat
a ar
e un
avai
labl
e.
SO
UR
CE
S:
1991
–200
1 fu
el p
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n (U
SD
OT
), B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s (B
TS
), N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-8. 2
002
Fu
el P
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
istr
atio
n, M
onth
ly E
nerg
y R
evie
w (
Was
hing
ton,
D
C: 2
002)
, tab
les
9.4
and
9.7;
and
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
200
3 (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, p. 6
. Per
cap
ita
veh
icle
- an
d a
ircr
aft-
mile
s co
mp
ute
d u
sin
g d
ata
fro
m—
US
DO
T, B
TS
, Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-2
9; a
nd U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, C
ensu
s B
urea
u, In
tern
atio
nal D
atab
ase
(ID
B),
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov/
ipc/
ww
w/id
bnew
.htm
l, as
of A
pril
2003
. Def
lato
r—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of
Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nt T
able
s,"
tabl
e 7.
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov, a
s of
Apr
il 20
03.
TAB
LE
115
b
Mo
tor
Fu
el P
rice
s C
om
par
ed w
ith
per
Cap
ita
Mo
tor
Veh
icle
-Mile
s Tr
avel
ed:
1991
–200
1Cu
rren
t dol
lars
per
gal
lon
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Gaso
line
pric
e1.
201.
191.
171.
171.
211.
291.
291.
121.
221.
561.
531.
44
VMT
per c
apita
9,16
49,
350
9,44
49,
602
9,08
99,
218
9,38
79,
531
9,63
59,
729
9,75
9U
KE
Y:
U =
dat
a ar
e un
avai
labl
e.
SO
UR
CE
S:
1991
–200
1 fu
el p
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n (U
SD
OT
), B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s (B
TS
), N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-8. 2
002
Fu
el P
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
istr
atio
n, M
onth
ly E
nerg
y R
evie
w (
Was
hing
ton,
D
C: 2
002)
, tab
les
9.4
and
9.7;
and
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
200
3 (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, p. 6
. Per
cap
ita
veh
icle
- an
d a
ircr
aft-
mile
s co
mp
ute
d u
sin
g d
ata
fro
m—
US
DO
T, B
TS
, Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-2
9; a
nd U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, C
ensu
s B
urea
u, In
tern
atio
nal D
atab
ase
(ID
B),
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov/
ipc/
ww
w/id
bnew
.htm
l, as
of A
pril
2003
.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
280
TAB
LE
116
a J
et F
uel
Pri
ces
Co
mp
ared
wit
h p
er C
apit
a A
ircr
aft-
Mile
s Tr
avel
ed:
1991
–200
1Ch
aine
d 19
96 d
olla
rs p
er g
allo
n
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Jet f
uel p
rice
0.65
0.61
0.58
0.53
0.54
0.65
0.61
0.45
0.54
0.90
0.78
0.72
Vehi
cle-
mile
s15
.215
.616
.016
.617
.417
.818
.018
.219
.120
.119
.5U
KE
Y:
U =
dat
a ar
e un
avai
labl
e.
SO
UR
CE
S:
1991
–200
1 fu
el p
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n (U
SD
OT
), B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s (B
TS
), N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-8. 2
002
Fu
el P
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
istr
atio
n, M
onth
ly E
nerg
y R
evie
w (
Was
hing
ton,
D
C: 2
002)
, tab
les
9.4
and
9.7;
and
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
200
3 (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, p. 6
. Per
cap
ita
veh
icle
- an
d a
ircr
aft-
mile
s co
mp
ute
d u
sin
g d
ata
fro
m—
US
DO
T, B
TS
, Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-2
9; a
nd U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, C
ensu
s B
urea
u, In
tern
atio
nal D
atab
ase
(ID
B),
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov/
ipc/
ww
w/id
bnew
.htm
l, as
of A
pril
2003
. Def
lato
r—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of
Com
mer
ce, B
urea
u of
Eco
nom
ic A
naly
sis,
"N
atio
nal I
ncom
e an
d P
rodu
ct A
ccou
nt T
able
s,"
tabl
e 7.
1, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ea.g
ov, a
s of
Apr
il 20
03.
TAB
LE
116
b
Jet
Fu
el P
rice
s C
om
par
ed w
ith
per
Cap
ita
Air
craf
t-M
iles
Trav
eled
: 19
91–2
001
Curr
ent d
olla
rs p
er g
allo
n
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Jet f
uel p
rice
0.73
0.66
0.62
0.56
0.55
0.65
0.60
0.44
0.52
0.84
0.71
0.65
Vehi
cle-
mile
s15
.215
.616
.016
.617
.417
.818
.018
.219
.120
.119
.5U
KE
Y:
U =
dat
a ar
e un
avai
labl
e.
SO
UR
CE
S:
1991
–200
1 fu
el p
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n (U
SD
OT
), B
urea
u of
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s (B
TS
), N
atio
nal T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics
2002
(W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, tab
le 3
-8. 2
002
Fu
el P
rice
s—U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of E
nerg
y, E
nerg
y In
form
atio
n A
dmin
istr
atio
n, M
onth
ly E
nerg
y R
evie
w (
Was
hing
ton,
D
C: 2
002)
, tab
les
9.4
and
9.7;
and
Ass
ocia
tion
of A
mer
ican
Rai
lroad
s, R
ailro
ad F
acts
200
3 (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, p. 6
. Per
cap
ita
veh
icle
- an
d a
ircr
aft-
mile
s co
mp
ute
d u
sin
g d
ata
fro
m—
US
DO
T, B
TS
, Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
1-2
9; a
nd U
.S. D
epar
tmen
t of C
omm
erce
, C
ensu
s B
urea
u, In
tern
atio
nal D
atab
ase
(ID
B),
ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.cen
sus.
gov/
ipc/
ww
w/id
bnew
.htm
l, as
of A
pril
2003
.
Appendix B
281
TAB
LE
117
a P
asse
ng
er-M
iles,
En
erg
y C
on
sum
pti
on
, an
d E
ner
gy
Eff
icie
ncy
: 19
90–2
000
Inde
x: 1
990
= 1.
00
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Pass
enge
r-m
iles
1.00
1.01
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.09
1.12
1.16
1.19
1.22
1.25
Ener
gy c
onsu
mpt
ion
1.00
0.97
1.01
1.04
1.06
1.07
1.10
1.12
1.15
1.19
1.19
Ener
gy e
ffici
ency
(PM
/BTU
)1.
001.
041.
031.
021.
021.
021.
021.
031.
031.
021.
05
KE
Y:
BT
U =
Brit
ish
ther
mal
uni
t; P
M =
pas
seng
er-m
iles.
NO
TE
S: G
ener
al a
viat
ion
data
are
exc
lude
d be
caus
e pa
ssen
ger a
nd fr
eigh
t ope
ratio
ns d
ata
cann
ot b
e di
sagg
rega
ted.
Tra
nsit
bus
data
are
exc
lude
d be
caus
e th
ose
oper
atio
ns a
re in
clud
ed in
hig
hway
bus
dat
a. C
omm
erci
al d
omes
tic a
viat
ion
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n da
ta fo
r pa
ssen
ger
and
frei
ght o
pera
tions
wer
e es
timat
ed fr
om th
e to
tal c
omm
erci
al d
omes
tic a
viat
ion
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Pas
sen
ger
-mile
s an
d e
ner
gy
use
(u
nle
ss o
ther
wis
e n
ote
d)—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
s 1-
34, 4
-6, a
nd 4
-8, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f May
200
3. T
ran
sit
ener
gy
use
cal
cula
ted
fr
om
—A
mer
ican
Pub
lic T
rans
port
atio
n A
ssoc
iatio
n, T
rans
it S
tatis
tics,
tabl
es 3
0 an
d 33
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.apt
a.co
m, a
s of
May
200
3.
TAB
LE
117
b P
asse
ng
er-M
iles,
En
erg
y C
on
sum
pti
on
, an
d E
ner
gy
Eff
icie
ncy
: 19
90–2
000
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Pass
enge
r-m
iles
(bill
ions
) 3
,787
3,8
15 3
,925
3,9
96 4
,082
4,1
20 4
,247
4,3
76 4
,497
4,6
20 4
,737
Ener
gy c
onsu
mpt
ion
(trill
ion
BTU)
14,5
8214
,167
14,
668
15,
123
15,
404
15,
631
16,
033
16,
399
16,
787
17,
416
17,
355
Ener
gy e
ffici
ency
(PM
/BTU
)0.
0003
0.00
030.
0003
0.00
030.
0003
0.00
030.
0003
0.00
030.
0003
0.00
030.
0003
KE
Y:
BT
U =
Brit
ish
ther
mal
uni
t; P
M =
pas
seng
er-m
iles.
NO
TE
S: G
ener
al a
viat
ion
data
are
exc
lude
d be
caus
e pa
ssen
ger a
nd fr
eigh
t ope
ratio
ns d
ata
cann
ot b
e di
sagg
rega
ted.
Tra
nsit
bus
data
are
exc
lude
d be
caus
e th
ose
oper
atio
ns a
re in
clud
ed in
hig
hway
bus
dat
a. C
omm
erci
al d
omes
tic a
viat
ion
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n da
ta fo
r pa
ssen
ger
and
frei
ght o
pera
tions
wer
e es
timat
ed fr
om th
e to
tal c
omm
erci
al d
omes
tic a
viat
ion
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Pas
sen
ger
-mile
s an
d e
ner
gy
use
(u
nle
ss o
ther
wis
e n
ote
d)—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
s 1-
34, 4
-6, a
nd 4
-8, a
vaila
ble
at h
ttp://
ww
w.b
ts.g
ov/,
as o
f May
200
3. T
ran
sit
ener
gy
use
cal
cula
ted
fr
om
—A
mer
ican
Pub
lic T
rans
port
atio
n A
ssoc
iatio
n, T
rans
it S
tatis
tics,
tabl
es 3
0 an
d 33
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.apt
a.co
m, a
s of
May
200
3.
Transportation Statistics Annual Report
282
TAB
LE
118
a F
reig
ht
Ton
-Mile
s, E
ner
gy
Co
nsu
mp
tio
n, a
nd
En
erg
y E
ffic
ien
cy:
1990
-200
0In
dex:
199
0 =
1.00
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Ton-
mile
s1.
001.
021.
051.
061.
121.
171.
191.
171.
181.
211.
23
Ener
gy c
onsu
mpt
ion
1.00
1.01
1.03
1.02
1.07
1.13
1.15
1.15
1.22
1.27
1.32
Ener
gy e
ffici
ency
(TM
/BTU
)1.
001.
001.
021.
041.
051.
031.
031.
020.
970.
960.
93
KE
Y:
BT
U =
Brit
ish
ther
mal
uni
t; T
M =
ton-
mile
s.
NO
TE
S: G
ener
al a
viat
ion
data
are
exc
lude
d be
caus
e pa
ssen
ger
and
frei
ght o
pera
tions
dat
a ca
nnot
be
disa
ggre
gate
d. M
arin
e ga
solin
e us
e da
ta a
re e
xclu
ded
from
fr
eigh
t ene
rgy
use
tota
l bec
ause
mar
ine
gaso
line
is u
sed
prim
arily
in r
ecre
atio
nal v
ehic
les.
Pip
elin
e da
ta a
re e
xclu
ded
beca
use
ton-
mile
s da
ta in
clud
e al
l typ
es o
f pe
trol
eum
pro
duct
s, a
nd e
nerg
y co
nsum
ptio
n da
ta a
re a
vaila
ble
for
natu
ral g
as o
nly.
Com
mer
cial
dom
estic
avi
atio
n fu
el c
onsu
mpt
ion
data
for
pass
enge
r an
d fr
eigh
t op
erat
ions
wer
e es
timat
ed fr
om th
e to
tal c
omm
erci
al d
omes
tic a
viat
ion
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Ton
-mile
s an
d e
ner
gy
use
(u
nle
ss o
ther
wis
e n
ote
d)—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rta-
tion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
s 1-
34, 1
-44,
4-6
, and
4-8
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of M
ay 2
003.
Tru
ck t
on
-mile
s fo
r 20
00—
The
Eno
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Fou
ndat
ion,
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
in A
mer
ica,
19t
h E
ditio
n (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, pag
e 45
.
TAB
LE
118
b
Fre
igh
t To
n-M
iles,
En
erg
y C
on
sum
pti
on
, an
d E
ner
gy
Eff
icie
ncy
: 19
90-2
000
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Ton-
mile
s (b
illio
ns)
3,1
96 3
,233
3,3
37 3
,364
3,5
27 3
,648
3,7
25 3
,682
3,7
10 3
,780
3,8
18
Ener
gy c
onsu
mpt
ion
(trill
ion
BTU)
6,1
75 6
,191
6,2
60 6
,249
6,6
05 6
,942
7,0
60 7
,090
7,3
62 7
,624
7,9
31
Ener
gy e
ffici
ency
(TM
/BTU
)0.
0005
0.00
050.
0005
0.00
050.
0005
0.00
050.
0005
0.00
050.
0005
0.00
050.
0005
KE
Y:
BT
U =
Brit
ish
ther
mal
uni
t; T
M =
ton-
mile
s.
NO
TE
S: G
ener
al a
viat
ion
data
are
exc
lude
d be
caus
e pa
ssen
ger
and
frei
ght o
pera
tions
dat
a ca
nnot
be
disa
ggre
gate
d. M
arin
e ga
solin
e us
e da
ta a
re e
xclu
ded
from
fr
eigh
t ene
rgy
use
tota
l bec
ause
mar
ine
gaso
line
is u
sed
prim
arily
in r
ecre
atio
nal v
ehic
les.
Pip
elin
e da
ta a
re e
xclu
ded
beca
use
ton-
mile
s da
ta in
clud
e al
l typ
es o
f pe
trol
eum
pro
duct
s, a
nd e
nerg
y co
nsum
ptio
n da
ta a
re a
vaila
ble
for
natu
ral g
as o
nly.
Com
mer
cial
dom
estic
avi
atio
n fu
el c
onsu
mpt
ion
data
for
pass
enge
r an
d fr
eigh
t op
erat
ions
wer
e es
timat
ed fr
om th
e to
tal c
omm
erci
al d
omes
tic a
viat
ion
fuel
con
sum
ptio
n.
SO
UR
CE
S:
Ton
-mile
s an
d e
ner
gy
use
(u
nle
ss o
ther
wis
e n
ote
d)—
U.S
. Dep
artm
ent o
f Tra
nspo
rtat
ion,
Bur
eau
of T
rans
port
atio
n S
tatis
tics,
Nat
iona
l Tra
nspo
rta-
tion
Sta
tistic
s 20
02 (
Was
hing
ton,
DC
: 200
2), t
able
s 1-
34, 1
-44,
4-6
, and
4-8
, ava
ilabl
e at
http
://w
ww
.bts
.gov
/, as
of M
ay 2
003.
Tru
ck t
on
-mile
s fo
r 20
00—
The
Eno
Tr
ansp
orta
tion
Fou
ndat
ion,
Tra
nspo
rtat
ion
in A
mer
ica,
19t
h E
ditio
n (W
ashi
ngto
n, D
C: 2
002)
, pag
e 45
.