Assessing Strengths and Limitations of a Statewide Tour Based Freight Model Using Scenario Analysis in Maryland By Colin Smith, RSG Sabya Mishra, University of Memphis Subrat Mahapatra, Maryland State Highway Administration Carlos Carrion, University of Maryland Lei Zhang, University of Maryland Presentation at 2017 planning applications conference, Raleigh, May 16, 2017

Outline Overview and needs of freight model Structure of the statewide freight model Scenarios Initial Results Ongoing and future work

Overview Existing 4-step travel demand model Maryland Statewide Transportation Model (MSTM) Incorporate behavioral freight demand model National supply chain Tour based models Commercial vehicle models Generate trip diary for further use in microscopic models

Overall model design Overall Model Structure Freight model is designed Integration with two models – the Maryland Statewide Model and the BMC regional model Integrating demand model components for freight and non-freight trucks, and freight networks Supply Chain Model Model annual commodity movements and shipment flows by mode, and includes the firm synthesis model Freight Truck Touring Model Models pick up and delivery of freight shipments within the region Commercial Vehicle Model Models commercial vehicle movements in the region, all purposes other than freight shipment delivery to businesses

Model Design Conversion to modal trip tables Maryland Statewide Model (MSTM) Conversion to modal trip tables Passenger Model National Supply Chain (Firms, Shipments, Modes) National/Statewide Networks BMC Regional Model (InSITE) Passenger Model Regional Freight Truck Touring Model Regional Networks Regional Commercial Vehicle Touring Model Conversion to truck trip tables

Model Spatial Structure

Model Networks

Data Development Summary National data for model inputs Firm locations from CBP I/O data from BEA Commodity flow data from FAF Shipment data from CFS Modal networks Borrowed data for model estimation, calibration and validation Ohio establishment data Texas establishment data (previously used to estimate models) Local data for model inputs, calibration, validation: - Model highway networks ATRI GPS data for MD Traffic counts Distribution and intermodal center location data

Commodity Flow Data

ATRI GPS ata

Scenario Analysis Scenario-1 Scenario-2 Scenario-3 Freight network impacts because of shared and collaborative urban deliveries Scenario-2 Freight diversion of potential commodities to non-truck modes Scenario-3 Capacity enhancement of potential long-distance non-urban corridors to alleviate congestion from urban corridors

Scenario-1 (Example) Independent distribution systems 48 customers 4 suppliers 40*40 km grid 6 day operation 8 customers/day 2018 km by 4 veh

Scenario-1 (Example) Collaborative distribution systems Goods transfer between suppliers first

Scenario-2 (Model Components) Parameter Description original Value REVISED Value BulkHandFee Handling charge for bulk goods ($ per ton) 1.00 WDCHandFee Warehouse/‌DC handling charge ($ per ton) 15.00 IMXHandFee Intermodal lift charge ($ per ton) 10 TloadHandFee Transload charge ($ per ton; at international ports only) 10.00 AirHandFee Air cargo handling charge ($ per ton) 20.00 WaterRate Line-haul charge, water ($ per ton-mile) 0.005 CarloadRate Line-haul charge, carload ($ per ton-mile) 0.03 IMXRate Line-haul charge, intermodal ($ per ton-mile) 0.04 0.025 AirRate Line-haul charge, air ($ per ton-mile) 3.75 LTL53rate Line-haul charge, 53 feet LTL ($ per ton-mile) 0.08 FTL53rate Line-haul charge, 53 feet FTL ($ per ton-mile) LTL40rate Line-haul charge, 40 feet LTL ($ per ton-mile) 0.10 FTL40rate Line-haul charge, 40 feet FTL ($ per ton-mile) WaterMPH Water speed (mph) 5.00 RailMPH Rail speed (mph) 22.50 LHTruckMPH Line-haul truck speed (mph) 60.00 DrayTruckMPH Drayage truck speed (mph) 45.00 AirMPH Air speed (mph) 500.00 ExpressSurchar ge Surcharge for direct/‌express transport (factor) 1.50 BulkTime Handling time at bulk handling facilities (hours) 72.00 WDCTime Handling time at warehouse/‌DCs (hours) 24.00 IMXTime Handling time at intermodal yards (hours) 20 TloadTime Handling time at transload facilities (hours) 12.00 AirTime Handling time at air terminals (hours) Cost parameter by mode Sources Value ($/ton-mile) Truck Leachman (2005), EIA 0.080-0.100 Rail Leachman (2005), EIA, CSX, UP 0.030 Air Leachman (2005), UPS 3.750 Water 0.005

Scenario-3 For US 301 Segment-1 Increased capacity Increased speed

Questions Contact Sabya Mishra Assistant Professor Department of Civil Engineering University of Memphis Email: smishra3@memphis.edu