Analysis of

Benefits and Costs

of
Lane Departure Warning Systems
for the Trucking Industry

February 2009
 FOREWORD
The goal of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is to reduce the number
and severity of commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crashes. Over the last several years, FMCSA
has collaborated with the trucking industry to test, evaluate, and encourage the deployment of
effective onboard safety systems CMVs to enhance the safety of all roadway users.

The purpose of this document is to provide the economic benefits, expected costs, and industry
return on investment for lane departure warning systems. The verification of the costs and
benefits of safety systems is critical for facilitating voluntary acceptance of these systems by the
motor carrier industry. To ensure deployment, systems must be cost-effective investments that
meet user needs. Confidence in onboard safety systems’ ability to reduce commercial-motor-
vehicle-involved fatalities and injuries is a necessary precondition for acceptance and adoption of
these systems.

The benefit-cost analysis presented in this document covers financial metrics such as return on
investment and payback periods for the end-users of the onboard safety systems—commercial
motor carriers. This document intends to augment, rather than supersede, previous analyses that
have focused on onboard safety systems.

The development of this analysis required the solicitation and collection of data sets from
multiple industry resources. This information collection is covered by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) and Paperwork Reduction Act exemption for ITS-related surveys,
questionnaires, and interviews defined in Section 5305, Title V, Subtitle C, paragraph (i) (2) of
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users of
2005, which states that “Any survey, questionnaire, or interview that the Secretary considers
necessary to carry out the evaluation of any test or program assessment activity under this
subchapter shall not be subject to chapter 35 of title 44.”

NOTICE
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the United States Department of
Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes
no liability for its contents or use thereof.

This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or
manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the objective
of this document.
 Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.
FMCSA-RRT-09-022
4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date
Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Lane Departure Warning Systems for February 2009
the Trucking Industry
6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

Amy Houser (FMCSA), Dan Murray (ATRI), Sandra Shackelford
(ATRI), Robert Kreeb (Booz Allen Hamilton), Travis Dunn (Booz Allen
Hamilton)

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
American Transportation Research Institute
950 North Glebe Road 11. Contract or Grant No.
Arlington, VA 22203 DMTC75-04-F-00104

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Department of Transportation Final Report
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration September 2004–December 2007
Office of Research and Technology 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE FMCSA
Washington, DC 20590

15. Supplementary Notes

This program was administered through the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). The FMCSA
Program Manager is Ms. Amy Houser.

16. Abstract

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA’s) safety goal is to reduce the number and severity of
commercial motor vehicle fatalities and crashes. During the last several years, FMCSA has collaborated with the
trucking industry to test, evaluate, and facilitate the deployment of several onboard safety systems for commercial
motor vehicles to increase the safety of all roadway users.

The purpose of this report is to evaluate costs and benefits for industry associated with lane departure warning
systems that can reduce large-truck lane departure crashes.

The analysis described herein indicates that combination and single-unit vehicles with lane departure warning
systems will help to prevent lane-departure crashes. Motor carriers purchasing this technology will likely see net
positive returns on investments within a five-year product lifecycle for the crash types and operating scenarios
described in this report.

17. Key Word 18. Distribution Statement

Lane departure Warning Systems, Benefit-Cost Analysis,
Return on Investment, Payback Periods, Motor Carriers,
Crashes, CMV, Commercial Motor Vehicle

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price
Unclassified Unclassified 75 N/A
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized.
 SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS
APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS
Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol
LENGTH LENGTH
in inches 25.4 millimeters mm mm millimeters 0.039 inches in
ft feet 0.305 meters m m meters 3.28 feet ft
yd yards 0.914 meters m m meters 1.09 yards yd
mi miles 1.61 kilometers km km kilometers 0.621 miles mi
AREA AREA
in2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2 mm2 square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2
ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2 m2 square meters 10.764 square feet ft2
yd2 square yards 0.836 square meters m2 m2 square meters 1.195 square yards yd2
ac acres 0.405 hectares ha ha hectares 2.47 acres ac
mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2 km2 square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2
VOLUME VOLUME
fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters ml ml milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz
gal gallons 3.785 liters l l liters 0.264 gallons gal
ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 m3 cubic meters 35.71 cubic feet ft3
yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 m3 cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd3
MASS MASS
oz ounces 28.35 grams g g grams 0.035 ounces oz
lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb
T short tons (2000 lbs) 0.907 megagrams Mg Mg megagrams 1.103 short tons (2000 lbs) T
TEMPERATURE (exact) TEMPERATURE (exact)
°F Fahrenheit 5(F-32)/9 Celsius °C °C Celsius 1.8 C + 32 Fahrenheit °F
temperature or (F-32)/1.8 temperature temperature temperature
ILLUMINATION ILLUMINATION
fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc
fl foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m2 cd/m2 cd/m2 candela/m2 0.2919 foot-Lamberts fl
FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS
lbf pound-force 4.45 newtons N N newtons 0.225 pound-force lbf
pound-force pound-force
psi 6.89 kilopascals kPa kPa kilopascals 0.145 psi
per square inch per square inch

*SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with section 4 of ASTM E380.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................................V
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................VII
1. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................1
1.1 TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTIONS ...............................................................................1
1.2 MACK FIELD OPERATIONAL TEST ........................................................................3
1.3 BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS ..........................................................4
2. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS STEPS .....................................................................................5
2.1 BENEFITS IN TERMS OF CRASH AVOIDANCE ....................................................5
2.2 TECHNOLOGY AND DEPLOYMENT COSTS .........................................................6
2.3 BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS .......................................................6
3. BENEFITS CALCULATIONS ................................................................................................7
3.1 STEP 1: ESTIMATE CRASHES PREVENTABLE BY THE LDWS .........................7
3.2 STEP 2: ESTIMATE THE CRASH COSTS FOR THE CRASHES
PREVENTABLE BY LDWS ......................................................................................10
3.3 STEP 3: ESTIMATE CRASH COSTS BASED ON VEHICLE MILES
TRAVELED AND EXPECTED CRASH REDUCTION ...........................................21
4. COST CALCULATIONS .......................................................................................................24
4.1 STEP 4: ESTIMATE THE TECHNOLOGY AND DEPLOYMENT COSTS ...........24
5. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS ...............................................................26
5.1 STEP 5: CALCULATE NET PRESENT VALUES OF BENEFITS AND COSTS...26
5.2 STEP 6: SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ..........................................................................30
6. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................38
7. REFERENCES.........................................................................................................................39

LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF DATA SETS ..................................................................41
APPENDIX B: SUPPORTING DATA .....................................................................................45
APPENDIX C: COST DATA – MOTOR CARRIER QUESTIONNAIRE AND
RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS ................................................................................47
APPENDIX D: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................59

i
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Mean Annual Number of Large-Truck Lane Departure Crashes by Crash Severity,
2001–2005....................................................................................................................... 9
Table 2. Mean Annual Number of Large-Truck Lane Departure Crashes by Crash Outcome
and Severity, 2001–2005................................................................................................. 9
Table 3. Estimated Mean Annual Number of Crashes Preventable by LDWS by
Crash Severity, 2001–2005 ........................................................................................... 10
Table 4. Median Driver-Replacement Cost Categories Per Fatal or Injury Crash ....................... 12
Table 5. Average Annual Numbers of Truck Driver Injuries and Fatalities per Crash,
2001–2005..................................................................................................................... 13
Table 6. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per SVRD Collision Crash............ 13
Table 7. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per SVRD Rollover Crash ............ 13
Table 8. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per ODLD and SDLD
Sideswipe Crash ............................................................................................................ 14
Table 9. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per ODLD Head-on Crash ............ 14
Table 10. Median Operational Costs per Crash ............................................................................ 15
Table 11. Median Environmental Costs per Crash ....................................................................... 15
Table 12. Median Property Damage Costs per Crash................................................................... 16
Table 13. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per SVRD Collision Crash................................ 16
Table 14. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per SVRD Rollover Crash................................. 16
Table 15. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per ODLD and SDLD Sideswipe Crash ........... 17
Table 16. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per Head-on Crash ............................................ 17
Table 17. Average Annual Numbers of Injuries and Fatalities per Crash, 2001–2005 ................ 17
Table 18. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal SVRD Collision Crash....................... 18
Table 19. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal SVRD Rollover Crash ....................... 18
Table 20. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal SDLD Sideswipe Crash ..................... 18
Table 21. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal ODLD Sideswipe Crash .................... 18
Table 22. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal Head-on Crash ................................... 18
Table 23. Cost Estimates per Crash by Crash Type and Crash Severity for Lane Departure
Crashes .......................................................................................................................... 20
Table 24. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for an Average Annual
VMT at Low Efficacy Rates ......................................................................................... 22
Table 25. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for an Average Annual
VMT at High Efficacy Rates......................................................................................... 23
Table 26. Cost of LDWS, if Financed .......................................................................................... 24
Table 27. Federal Tax Savings due to Depreciation of LDWS .................................................... 25
Table 28. Total Costs of Technology Deployment with and without Financing.......................... 25
Table 29. Present Value of the Benefits of LDWS at Low Efficacy Rates Using 3% and
7% Discount Rates ........................................................................................................ 26
Table 30. Present Value of the Benefits of LDWS at High Efficacy Rates Using 3% and
7% Discount Rates ........................................................................................................ 26

ii
Table 31. Present Value of the Costs of LDWS Using 3% and 7% Discount Rates .................... 27
Table 32. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS, without Financing ...... 27
Table 33. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS, with Financing ........... 27
Table 34. Payback Period in Months ............................................................................................ 28
Table 35. Motor Carrier Perceptions of Crash Cost Importance .................................................. 29
Table 36. Cost Estimates per Crash by Crash Type and Crash Severity for Lane Departure
Crashes with Insurance Deductible of $50,000............................................................. 31
Table 37. Cost Estimates per Crash by Crash Type and Crash Severity for Lane Departure
Crashes with Insurance Deductible of $5,000............................................................... 32
Table 38. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for an Average Annual
VMT of 100,000 VMT at Low Efficacy Rates ............................................................. 33
Table 39. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for an Average Annual
VMT of 100,000 VMT at High Efficacy Rates ............................................................ 33
Table 40. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 3% Discount Rate with Financing.......... 33
Table 41. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 7% Discount Rate with Financing.......... 33
Table 42. Cost Estimates per Lane Departure Crash by Crash Severity with High-Value
Cargo Damages of $50,000 ........................................................................................... 35
Table 43. Cost Estimates per Lane Departure Crash by Crash Severity with High-Value
Cargo Damages of $1,000,000 ...................................................................................... 36
Table 44. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 3% Discount Rate with Financing.......... 37
Table 45. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 7% Discount Rate with Financing.......... 37
Table 46. GES Fields and Variables Defining Crashes Addressed by LDWS............................. 42
Table 47. Average Annual VMT (millions of miles) for Combination Vehicles, 2001–2005..... 44
Table 48. Annual Number of SVRD Collision PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005...... 45
Table 49. Annual Number of SVRD Rollover PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005 ...... 45
Table 50. Annual Number of SDLD Sideswipe PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005 .... 45
Table 51. Annual Number of ODLD Sideswipe PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005 ... 45
Table 52. Annual Number of ODLD Head-on PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005 ...... 45
Table 53. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in SVRD Collisions, 2001–2005................ 46
Table 54. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in SVRD Rollovers, 2001–2005 ................ 46
Table 55. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in SDLD Sideswipes, 2001–2005 .............. 46
Table 56. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in ODLD Sideswipes, 2001–2005 ............. 46
Table 57. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in ODLD Head-ons, 2001–2005 ................ 46

iii
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. AutoVue LDWS .............................................................................................................. 2
Figure 2. SafeTRAC LDWS Driver Display .................................................................................. 3
Figure 3. Single-Vehicle Roadway Departures Addressed by LDWS ........................................... 7
Figure 4. Same-Direction Lane Departures Addressed by LDWS ................................................. 8
Figure 5. Opposite-Direction Lane Departures Addressed by LDWS ........................................... 8

iv
 ACRONYMS
ATRI American Transportation Research Institute
BCA Benefit–Cost Analysis
BLS U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Labor Statistics
CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle
FARS Fatality Analysis Reporting System/Fatal Accident Reporting System
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FOT Field Operational Test
GES General Estimates System
HAZMAT Hazardous Materials
IVI Intelligent Vehicle Initiative
LDWS Lane Departure Warning System, Systems
MACRS Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System
NASS National Sampling Automotive System
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
ODLD Opposite-Direction Lane Departure
OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer
OSS Onboard Safety System
PAR Police Traffic Accident Report
PDO Property Damage Only
SDLD Same-Direction Lane Departure
SVRD Single-Vehicle Roadway Departure
USDOT United States Department of Transportation
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

v
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The primary safety goal of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is to
reduce the number and severity of commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crashes. Over the last
several years, FMCSA has collaborated with the trucking industry to test, evaluate, and facilitate
the deployment of several onboard safety systems (OSS) for CMVs in an effort to enhance the
safety of all roadway users.

As part of an ongoing FMCSA effort to encourage voluntary adoption of onboard safety systems,
this analysis builds on the previous field operational testing by changing the focus of the benefit-
cost assessments from societal impacts to more targeted motor carrier industry outcomes, since
motor carriers are the end-users that are responsible for investment and deployment of onboard
safety systems. The purpose of this benefit-cost analysis (BCA) is to provide return on
investment information to the motor carrier industry in support of future decisions on the
purchase of lane departure warning systems (LDWS). According to the motor carrier industry,
verifying associated costs and benefits of safety systems is critical for deployment, since these
systems must prove to be beneficial, cost-effective investments that meet the users’ needs.

This document presents the BCA for LDWS from a motor carrier perspective. However, other
industry stakeholders, such as insurance companies, vendors, and risk managers, can equally
apply the calculations to their own internal assessments and programs.

TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION

LDWS are forward-looking, vision-based systems, consisting of a main unit and small video
camera mounted on the vehicle’s windshield, recording data about the upcoming roadway.
Algorithms within LDWS interpret video images of the lane to estimate the vehicle state (lateral
position, speed, heading, etc.) and the road alignment (lane width, road curvature, etc.). LDWS
warn drivers of a lane departure when the vehicle is traveling above a certain speed threshold and
the vehicle’s turn signal is not being used to make an intended lane change or departure. In
addition, LDWS notify drivers when lane markings are inadequate for detection, or when the
system itself malfunctions. LDWS do not take any automatic action to avoid a lane departure or
to control the vehicle; therefore, drivers remain responsible for the safe operation of their
vehicles.

Types of crashes that can be prevented through the use of LDWS include:
• Single-vehicle roadway departure (SVRD): Crash in which a truck departs the roadway
from its lane of travel, either to the left or to the right
• Same-direction lane departure (SDLD): Crash in which a truck departs its lane of
travel and enters into a lane of traffic traveling in the same direction as the truck
• Opposite-direction lane departure (ODLD): Crash in which a truck departs its lane of
travel and enters into an oncoming-traffic lane

vii
These lane departure crash types can include different crash outcomes, such as rollovers, head-on
collisions, and sideswipes.

BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS

For this BCA, the potential benefit, in terms of crash cost avoidance, was measured against the
purchase, installation, and operational costs of these collision warning systems in motor carrier
operations. The primary data source for benefits was information provided by insurance
companies and motor carriers on actual expenses incurred due to CMV crashes. As a result, this
assessment incorporates actual motor-carrier-based benefit-cost data.

The methodology for this analysis was based on estimates of crash cost avoidance for the
principal types of crashes that can be addressed by LDWS on straight trucks and combination
vehicles. LDWS benefits were based on reducing the occurrence of large-truck lane departure
crashes. To obtain a measure of crash cost avoidance, the number of crashes that the technology
may prevent each year per vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was determined. Next, using
information provided by motor carriers, legal experts, insurance companies, and others, the
actual crash costs which are paid by the motor carrier industry were determined for each of the
associated crash types. As a result, trucking companies can use this cost information as a basis
for evaluating the potential crash avoidance benefits of LDWS compared to the purchase and
usage costs of the technology.

The motor carrier crash costs that may be prevented by the use of LDWS, or whose severity may
be decreased, include:
• Labor Costs
– Training
– Testing
– Hiring and orientation
– Recruitment
• Workers’ Compensation Costs
• Operational Costs
– Cargo damage due to crash
– Cargo delivery delays
– Loading and unloading cargo
– Towing, inventory, and storage
• Environmental Costs
– Fines
– Clean-up costs
• Property Damage and Auto Liability Costs
• Legal Costs
– Court costs
– Legal fees and costs
– Out-of-pocket settlements

viii
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

In order to apply the costs specifically to motor carriers, this analysis was based on the
assumption that these crash costs would be incurred by motor carriers with deductibles equal to
or above total crash costs, or by self-insured motor carriers. However, other industry
stakeholders, such as insurance companies, vendors, and risk managers, can equally apply the
calculations to their own internal assessments and programs. The following findings and
conclusions were derived from the benefit-cost analysis.

Using low and high estimates of efficacy rates ranging from 23 percent to 53 percent derived
from a field test and industry input (see Section 3.1.2), it was estimated that LDWS has the
potential to reduce approximately 1,069–2,463 SVRD collisions, 627–1,307 SVRD rollovers,
1,111–2,223 SDLD sideswipes, 997–1,992 ODLD sideswipes, and 59–118 ODLD head-ons.
Based on the average estimates of the crash cost categories listed in the previous section, these
property-damage-only (PDO) crashes range in cost from $100,150–$196,958, injury crashes are
in the range of $135,096–$455,936, and fatal crashes are in the range of $885,150–$1,252,872.
These avoided costs or benefits of the LDWS were based on a typical or average incident;
therefore, they should be interpreted as approximations of typical expected values.

Crash avoidance costs based on VMT and expected crash reduction resulting from deployment
of LDWS were calculated for annual VMT values of 80,000, 100,000, 120,000, 140,000, and
160,000 miles. However, the research relied heavily on documented annual average VMTs of
100,000 to 110,000 for class 6–8 trucks used in a variety of operational environments.

The technology and deployment cost estimates for the LDWS included the technology purchase,
maintenance costs, and cost of training drivers in the use of the technology. Purchasing the
technology with or without financing was also considered in these costs, as well as Federal tax
savings due to depreciation of the LDWS equipment. These total costs ranged from
approximately $765 to $866.40.

The net present values of the LDWS were computed by discounting future benefits and costs for
the values using discount rates of 3 and 7 percent. Discounting benefits and costs transforms
gains and losses occurring in different time periods to a common unit of measurement. These
values were calculated over the first five years of deployment, since estimates of product
lifecycles are speculative beyond five years. When the anticipated present value costs and
benefits of the LDWS were compared, the benefits of using the system over a period of five
years outweighed the costs associated with purchasing the systems at each efficacy rate and for
each VMT category. For every dollar spent, carriers get more than a dollar back in benefits that
could be quantified for this analysis—ranging from $1.37 to $6.55, based on different VMTs,
system efficacies, and technology purchase prices.

Payback periods were also calculated to estimate the length of time required to recover the initial
investments made for the LDWS. These payback periods ranged from nine to 37 months,
depending on the different VMTs, system efficacies, and technology purchase costs.

ix
Since certain industry segments will experience different costs and benefits because of
differences in operating practices, a sensitivity analysis was performed to show some of these
differences for small carriers and high-value cargo carriers.

It was important to consider small carriers separately from large carriers because of discrete
differences in their financial and operating environments. For instance, small carriers are
unlikely to be self-insured; therefore, out-of-pocket costs per crash will initially be much lower
for small carriers. Since the median deductible for a motor carrier will fall in the range of
$5,000–$50,000, these low and high deductibles were considered as part of the benefit-cost
analysis.

Based on the overall probability of involvement in a lane departure crash, small carriers that have
lower deductibles (say, $5,000 per truck) may not achieve a breakeven point—a dollar or more
of benefits for each dollar spent on financing the technology—in the first five years. However, as
the number of crashes and/or their severity increases, insurance premium costs will increase until
the carrier’s insurance costs equal or exceed the investment costs of the LDWS, or the carrier is
dropped altogether by the insurance provider. For this reason, an investment in the technology
may still be considered judicious for added protection against rising insurance costs. In addition,
indirect costs of crashes, such as impacts on safety ratings, public image, and employee morale,
can add to the benefits of purchasing onboard safety systems.

x
 1. INTRODUCTION
The safety goal of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is to reduce the
number and severity of commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crashes. Over the last several years,
FMCSA has collaborated with the trucking industry to test, evaluate, and encourage the
deployment of onboard safety systems (OSS) for CMVs in an effort to enhance the safety of all
roadway users.

FMCSA is now promoting voluntary adoption of these systems within trucking fleets by
initiating steps to work closely with the trucking industry. Lane Departure Warning Systems
(LDWSs) are one type of commercially available onboard safety technology designed to prevent
crashes by warning drivers of unintended lane or roadway departures.

Through the Intelligent Vehicle Initiative (IVI), the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)
completed an independent evaluation of the Mack IVI Field Operational Test (FOT) (FMCSA,
2006). The report included a societal benefit-cost analysis over a 20-year period of deployment
for an LDWS designed to prevent run-off-the-road crashes. While succeeding in identifying the
societal costs that could be linked to CMV crashes, the study did not focus on the direct costs
incurred by commercial motor carriers. The avoidance of societal costs does not immediately
translate into bottom-line cost savings for the motor carriers purchasing the OSS.

As part of an ongoing FMCSA effort to encourage voluntary adoption of LDWS, this benefit-
cost analysis builds on the previous FOT by changing the focus of the benefit-cost analysis from
societal costs to the costs incurred by the motor carrier industry—the end-users that are
responsible for investment and deployment of the technology. The purpose of this benefit-cost
analysis is to provide cost and return on investment information to the motor carrier industry in
support of future decisions to purchase LDWS. The motor carrier industry has confirmed that
verifying associated costs and benefits of safety systems is critical to spurring deployment, since
these systems must prove to be beneficial, cost-effective investments that meet the users’ needs.

1.1 TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTIONS

Fundamentally, LDWS perform three main functions:

• Detect lane markings ahead of the vehicle
• Monitor the vehicle’s position in the lane
• Warn the driver when the vehicle is diverging (or beginning to diverge) from the lane
without turn signal activation

Currently available LDWS are forward-looking, vision-based systems, consisting of a main unit
and small video camera mounted on the vehicle’s windshield, recording data about the upcoming
roadway. Algorithms within LDWS interpret video images of the lane to estimate the vehicle
state (lateral position, speed, heading, etc.) and the road alignment (lane width, road curvature,
etc.). LDWS warn drivers of a lane departure when the vehicle is traveling above a certain speed
threshold and the vehicle’s turn signal is not being used to make an intended lane change or
departure. In addition, LDWS notify drivers when lane markings are inadequate for detection, or
when the system malfunctions. LDWS do not take any automatic action to avoid a lane departure

1
or to control the vehicle; therefore, drivers remain responsible for the safe operation of their
vehicles (FMCSA 2005).

Since LDWS are vision-based systems, their performance may be limited. LDWS do not operate
at delivery points and roads where the truck travels at speeds below the minimum LDWS
tracking speed, typically 35 mph. As a result, LDWS notify drivers when the system is
operational, but do not provide warnings under these conditions. LDWS may be beneficial in
low-visibility conditions (e.g., rain, fog, and falling snow) when lane markings are present.
However, because of reflections on wet road surfaces, LDWS may occasionally be unable to
detect lane markings; under these conditions, the lane-tracking indicator will show that the
system is not providing warnings. When lane markings are not visible on roads covered by mud,
ice, or snow, the lane tracking indicator will show that the system is inactive.

Current LDWS suppliers for the large-truck industry in the United States include Iteris,
AssistWare, and Delphi. The Iteris AutoVue LDWS is shown in Figure 1. During an unsignaled
lane change or roadway departure, the Iteris AutoVue system emits a left- or right-side audio
warning, similar to the sound of a vehicle driving over a rumble strip. The Iteris AutoVue LDWS
is offered as a factory-installed option by several original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).
Other camera-based systems are the Delphi and Mobileye LDWS, which feature alert
configurations including simulated rumble strips, audible tones, and haptic alerts.

Figure 1. AutoVue LDWS

The AssistWare SafeTRAC LDWS is primarily marketed directly to fleets as an aftermarket

product. As shown in Figure 2, AssistWare’s SafeTRAC system provides a graphical display
depicting the vehicle’s current position in the lane, along with the lane boundary locations and
types and a drift alert, which is an audible tone indicating that the truck is about to travel out of
its lane or has already done so, when the driver deviates from the lane without using the turn
signal. SafeTRAC also offers fleet management and driver monitoring features, such as a
manufacturer-developed “alertness” score.

2
 V o l/A d j
On S a fe T R A C
O n /O ff C o n tro l K n o b
S w itc h (T u rn fo r V o lu m e ,
86 P u s h fo r M e n u )
D r o w s y D r i v e r W a r n in g S y s t e m Push • Sel

A le rtn e s s L a n e T ra c k e r
S c o re S ta tu s

Figure 2. SafeTRAC LDWS Driver Display

1.2 MACK FIELD OPERATIONAL TEST

The Mack FOT evaluation focused on the use of LDWS to prevent single-vehicle roadway
departures, also known as run-off-road crashes, and rollovers not caused by an impact with a
roadside feature or other obstacle. The test results revealed that under conditions similar to those
of the field test, the deployment of LDWS would result in a reduction of approximately 21–23
percent in single-vehicle roadway departure crashes and 17–24 percent reduction in rollover
crashes. These findings were based upon improved driver lane-keeping behavior and a reduction
in the frequency of driving conflicts in the FOT. As a result, LDWS were shown to be effective
in reducing the number of situations in which a single-vehicle roadway departure or rollover
crash could result, since LDWS provide advance information that the driver can use to avoid a
potential hazard.

Use of LDWS also has the potential to reduce some lane departure crashes where the truck
travels over the lane line. Yet, the safety benefits of the LDWS for these crash types were not
evaluated in the Mack FOT, because the available FOT data were not sufficient to identify
driving conflicts associated with crash types such as sideswipes. Specifically, identifying a lane
departure over the lane line-related conflict requires knowledge of the presence of traffic in an
adjacent lane and the speed and location of vehicles in the adjacent lane. This information could
not be obtained from the data available in the FOT with adequate confidence and accuracy.
However, the approximate number of these types of crashes potentially prevented by LDWS can
be estimated by analyzing crash data.

The Mack FOT report included a societal benefit-cost analysis over a 20-year period of
deployment for an LDWS to prevent single-vehicle roadway departure and rollover crashes.
Societal costs include many factors, such as the lost productivity of workers caught in traffic
congestion resulting from truck crashes, or costs of emergency response to crashes. However,
avoiding these societal costs does not immediately translate into bottom-line cost savings for the
motor carriers purchasing the OSS.

As a result, LDWS efficacy results from the Mack FOT were used in this report, but to determine
the specific costs and benefits of the LDWS in order to aid motor carriers in making purchasing
decisions, further data collection and analysis were necessary, beyond the studies previously
conducted.

3
1.3 BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS

Large-truck crashes often involve a complex series of critical events and factors, many of which
can be addressed using OSS. However, crash reduction also depends on motor carrier factors
which may not be directly addressed by these systems, such as operational characteristics, back-
room safety initiatives and motor carrier safety “culture,” and driver selection, training, and
management practices (Short et al. 2007). As a result of varying degrees of success in addressing
these motor carrier factors, the levels of crash reduction and cost savings realized from the
implementation of LDWS may deviate from the projected values in this analysis.

The trucking industry is a broad collection of many industries, each of which has operating
characteristics as diverse as the industries they service. Segmentation of the trucking industry is
often based on the size of fleets, vehicle configurations, geographic range of operations, and
commodities hauled. Usually one characteristic is insufficient to describe a particular segment,
and a combination of characteristics is necessary to account for the variety of operations. In an
effort to address the tremendous diversity found in the trucking industry, real-world information
and data for this study were provided by carriers and suppliers operating in a wide range of
industry segments, yet these data may not be representative of the unique characteristics of every
motor carrier. Some specific areas of diversity among carriers—such as VMT, fleet size, and
high-value cargo-hauling—were given special attention in order to take account of factors that
may have a disproportionately large impact on the costs associated with crashes.

Lastly, the commercial vehicle population is comprised of a wide variety of vehicle types and
uses. At a general level, two types of vehicles are predominant: combination vehicles (tractor-
trailers) and straight trucks. These two types of vehicles have very different operating
characteristics. In general, straight trucks tend to be used in a localized setting, providing pick-up
and delivery services to customers within a 50- to 100-mile radius of their base of operations.
Combination vehicles are more often used in regional and long-distance applications, accounting
for about 30 percent of total commercial vehicles and 65 percent of commercial vehicle miles
traveled. Because of higher mileage traveled and consequent greater exposure to the risk of
crashes, and because of the greater severity of crashes when they do occur, combination trucks
have the highest crash cost per vehicle over the average operational life of the vehicle (Wang et
al. 1999).

Since unintentional lane departures can occur along any route, many fleet types may benefit from
using LDWS. These systems can be installed on any truck configuration or combination of
single-unit vehicles. Yet they may be most promising for trucks that have accumulated high
mileage over their operational lives and travel primarily at constant speeds greater than 35 mph.

4
 2. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS STEPS
This section outlines the steps involved in estimating typical costs and benefits of LDWS for
motor carriers that are considering investing in OSS technologies. Appendix A provides the
details on all data sets used in the benefit-cost analysis. The total benefits of deploying LDWS
include direct savings due to avoided crashes and indirect benefits from overall improvement in
fleet safety. The costs of deploying LDWS include the initial capital investment required for the
technology purchase, as well as training and maintenance costs.

2.1 BENEFITS IN TERMS OF CRASH AVOIDANCE

Step 1: Estimate Crashes Preventable by LDWS

Crash data in the General Estimates System (GES) were used to estimate the lane departure
crashes that can be prevented by using LDWS on large trucks over a five-year period, 2001–
2005 (NHTSA 2005):
• Single-vehicle roadway departures (SVRD): Crashes in which a truck departed the
roadway from its lane of travel, either to the left or to the right
• Same-direction lane departures (SDLD): Crashes in which a truck departed its lane of
travel and entered into a lane of traffic traveling in the same direction as the truck
• Opposite-direction lane departures (ODLD): Crashes in which a truck departed its
lane of travel and entered into an oncoming-traffic lane

Lane departure crash types can include different crash outcomes, such as rollovers, head-ons, and
sideswipes. As a result, information from the GES data was used to estimate outcomes from
different lane departure crashes. Then, using information from the Mack FOT and motor carriers,
efficacy rates were determined and used to estimate the portion of these types of crashes that
could be prevented by LDWS. Finally, these data were used to estimate the costs for rollover,
sideswipe, head-on, and run-off roadway crashes involving property damage only (PDO),
injuries, and fatalities.

Step 2: Estimate Crash Costs for Crashes Preventable by LDWS

Crash costs were derived from a combination of resources, including motor carriers, insurance
companies, legal firms, a review of large-truck statistics, and expert opinion. In general, these
costs related to the following major areas:
• Labor costs, including recruitment, training, testing, hiring, and orientation
• Workers’ Compensation costs
• Operational costs, including post-crash costs, cargo damage, towing, inventory, and
storage costs
• Property damage costs
• Environmental costs
• Legal costs, including attorney fees and injury and fatality settlement costs

5
Next, the total crash costs were determined for the types of crashes preventable by LDWS. These
costs were summed to determine per-crash cost estimates for crashes of varying degrees of
severity—PDO, injury, or fatality—preventable by LDWS.

Step 3: Estimate Crash Costs Based on Vehicle Miles Traveled and Expected Crash
Reduction
While the analysis in Step 1 provides information on the number of truck crashes preventable by
LDWS, and Step 2 provides estimates of the costs of those crashes, motor carriers need to know
what cost-reduction value of the avoided crashes they can expect from using LDWS. As a result,
this step involves estimating crash avoidance costs based on VMT, and estimating the expected
crash reductions from deploying LDWS. To address the variances in the average VMTs traveled
by carriers in different operating conditions, the crash costs were calculated for annual VMT
values of 80,000, 100,000, 120,000, 140,000, and 160,000 miles. However, the research relied
heavily on documented annual average VMTs of 100,000 to 110,000 for class 6–8 trucks used in
a variety of operational environments.

2.2 TECHNOLOGY AND DEPLOYMENT COSTS

Step 4: Estimate Technology and Deployment Costs

The technology and deployment cost estimates for LDWS included the technology purchasing
price, maintenance costs, and cost of training drivers in the use of the technology. Purchasing the
technology with or without financing was also considered in estimating these costs, as were
Federal tax savings due to depreciation of the LDWS equipment.

2.3 BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS

Step 5: Calculate Net Present Values of Benefits and Costs and Estimate Payback Periods
The net present values of LDWS were computed by discounting future benefits and costs for the
values in Steps 3 and 4 using discount rates of 3 and 7 percent. Discounting benefits and costs
transforms gains and losses occurring in different time periods to a common unit of
measurement. These values were determined over the first five years of deployment, since
estimates of product lifecycles are speculative beyond five years. Payback periods were also
calculated to estimate the length of time required to recover the initial investments made in
purchasing the LDWS.

Step 6: Sensitivity Analysis

Certain industry segments will experience different costs and benefits due to differences in
operating practices. The costs and benefits for these industry segments will fall outside the
normal scope of carrier operations used for the crash cost estimates in Step 5. Additional
analyses were conducted for small carriers, as well as for carriers hauling high-value cargo.

6
 3. BENEFITS CALCULATIONS
This section presents the first three steps in the benefit-cost analysis to determine the benefits
relating to the crashes that can be prevented by using LDWS.

3.1 STEP 1: ESTIMATE CRASHES PREVENTABLE BY THE LDWS

The first step in this benefit-cost analysis involved estimating how many crashes are likely to be
preventable by LDWS. This estimate was based on crash data, Mack FOT results, and motor
carrier information.

3.1.1 Crash Data

Crash data in the GES were used to estimate the sets of lane departure crashes preventable by
LDWS over a five-year period, 2001–2005:

• Single-vehicle roadway departures (SVRD): Crashes in which a truck departed the

roadway from its lane of travel, either to the left or to the right. LDWS can help to
prevent SVRD crashes of the types that typically result in rollovers or collisions with
fixed objects, as shown in Figure 3 (NHTSA 2005, 88).

Figure 3. Single-Vehicle Roadway Departures Addressed by LDWS

7
 • Same-direction lane departures (SDLD): Crashes in which a truck departed its lane of
travel over the lane line and entered into a lane of traffic traveling in the same direction
as the truck without the intention of changing lanes. LDWS can help to prevent SDLD
crashes of the types shown in Figure 4, which typically result in sideswipes (NHTSA
2005, 89).

Figure 4. Same-Direction Lane Departures Addressed by LDWS

• Opposite-direction lane departures (ODLD): Crashes in which a truck departed its

lane of travel and entered into an oncoming-traffic lane. LDWS can help to prevent
ODLD crashes of the types shown in Figure 5, which typically result in sideswipes and
head-on crashes (NHTSA 2005, 89).

Figure 5. Opposite-Direction Lane Departures Addressed by LDWS

GES data were used as the basis for estimating costs for lane departure collisions involving PDO,
injuries, injuries, and/or fatalities.

Table 1 provides the crash data for the different lane departure crash degrees of severity
addressed by the LDWS. The GES Accident, Vehicle, Event, and Person files were used to
determine the total number of crashes included in the analysis for a five-year period. The annual
crash data are presented in Appendix B. Since GES is a probability-based nationally
representative sample of all police-reported fatal, injury, and PDO crashes, the data from GES
yield national estimates, calculated using a weighting procedure. Within GES, the estimated
number of crashes for the type described in a record is given by the “Weight” variable. The GES

8
Vehicle and Person files were used to count the number of lane departure crashes for large trucks
that resulting in fatalities, injuries, or PDO. Next, the weighted-numbers crashes in each category
were summed and divided by 5 (five years) to provide a mean annual number of crashes by crash
severity.

Table 1. Mean Annual Number of Large-Truck Lane Departure Crashes

by Crash Severity, 2001–2005

Crash Type PDO Crashes Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes TOTAL

SVRD 4,748 2,412 102 7,262
SDLD 4,268 563 2 4,833
ODLD 3,835 651 100 4,586
Total 12,851 3,626 204 16,681

Table 2. Mean Annual Number of Large-Truck Lane Departure Crashes

by Crash Outcome and Severity, 2001–2005

Crash Outcome PDO Crashes Injury Crashes Fatal Crashes TOTAL

SVRD Collisions 3,602 982 64 4,648
SVRD Rollovers 1,146 1,430 38 2,614
SDLD Sideswipes 4,268 562 2 4,832
ODLD Sideswipes 3,737 557 37 4,331
ODLD Head-ons 98 95 63 256
Total 12,851 3,626 204 16,681

3.1.2 Efficacy of LDWS

While the crashes presented in Table 1 and Table 2 represent the average numbers of the types of
crashes potentially preventable by LDWS, this technology will probably not prevent all of these
crashes. For example, LDWS will not prevent crashes due to loss of steering control (brake lock-
up) as a vehicle departs a lane or runs off the road, a circumstance which may have been
included in this data set. Furthermore, crashes initiated by major vehicle mechanical failures,
such as faulty brakes, steering loss, or tire blowouts, would not be considered preventable by
LDWS systems. In addition, these systems would have limited effectiveness in a crash that
occurred as a truck drifted off the roadway or struck another vehicle in an adjacent lane when the
driver was incapacitated, seriously ill, or unconscious. Since these types of incidents may have
occurred in the GES data sets of crashes shown in Table 2, efficacy rates were estimated for the
LDWS.

Efficacy rates or crash prevention rates are the percentages of crashes that, with a high degree of
probability, LDWS would prevent. Using information from the Mack FOT and motor carrier
feedback, a range of efficacy rates was determined and used to estimate the percentage of these
types of crashes that could be prevented by LDWS. Motor carriers provided the average number
of events that occurred annually in the five-year period under study and estimated the number of
crashes that could have been prevented by the use of LDWS in their operations. These efficacy

9
rates were calculated by dividing the number of crashes preventable with the technology by the
sum of the number of crashes experienced and the number of crashes avoided. As shown in
Table 3, the higher rates of efficacy were determined to be 53 percent for SVRD collision (47 out
of 89 collisions), 50 percent for SVRD rollovers (50 out of 101 rollovers), and 46 percent for
SDLD and ODLD over-the-lane-line collisions (52 out of 113 collisions). As a result, the
assumed lower rates of efficacy of LDWS in preventing the different crash outcomes came from
the Mack FOT, while the higher rates were obtained from motor carrier information. Multiplying
the numbers of crashes in Table 2 by these efficacy rates resulted in the estimated numbers of
crashes preventable by LDWS shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Estimated Mean Annual Number of Crashes Preventable by LDWS

by Crash Severity, 2001–2005

Crash Type at % Efficacy PDO Injury Fatal Total

SVRD Collisions—23% Efficacy 828 226 15 1,069
SVRD Collisions—53% Efficacy 1,909 520 34 2,463
SVRD Rollovers—24% Efficacy 275 343 9 627
SVRD Rollovers—50% Efficacy 573 715 19 1,307
SDLD Sideswipes—23% Efficacy 982 129 0 1,111
SDLD Sideswipes—46% Efficacy 1,963 259 1 2,223
ODLD Sideswipes—23% Efficacy 860 128 9 997
ODLD Sideswipes—46% Efficacy 1,719 256 17 1,992
ODLD Head-ons—23% Efficacy 23 22 14 59
ODLD Head-ons—46% Efficacy 45 44 29 118

3.2 STEP 2: ESTIMATE THE CRASH COSTS FOR THE CRASHES

PREVENTABLE BY LDWS

The second step in this benefit-cost analysis involved estimating the costs of crashes that are
likely to be preventable by LDWS.

3.2.1 Cost Data Collection Process

To develop a comprehensive estimate of crash costs, the American Transportation Research
Institute (ATRI) collected cost estimates from representative motor carrier constituents within
the trucking industry. As shown in Appendix C, the Carrier Interview Guide, carriers and
insurers were asked to estimate their costs with respect to the following data collection cost
categories:
• Labor costs related to replacement of drivers due to temporary and permanent driver
injury, and additional labor costs incurred post-crash
• Workers’ Compensation costs
• Operational costs related to cargo damage towing, inventory, and storage
• Environmental costs

10
 • Property damage costs
• Legal costs, including attorney fees and injury and fatality settlement costs

The survey respondents described how the costs associated with these categories vary depending
on the type of crash, of the major types of crashes preventable by LDWS. Baseline data were
also received on the quantity and severity of crashes, categorized by type, which had occurred
during the last year, as well as the number of drivers who had been injured and/or replaced. In
addition, the Interview Guide included questions on costs by type of vehicle, cargo, and
insurance, such as deductible levels or whether the carrier is self-insured and at what levels.

The Interview Guide design was guided by previous studies and their relevant findings—
specifically, average worker replacement costs from The Costs of Truckload Driver Turnover
(Rodriguez et al. 2000). All of the costs obtained from these interviews were assumed to be in
2007-year dollars.

As shown in Appendix C, a broad range of motor carrier fleet sizes, operational types, and
characteristics were represented. In addition to motor carriers, four insurance companies, two
environmental clean-up firms, four industry attorneys, and five technology vendors were
interviewed in support of the crash cost data collection.

After the initial interview results were synthesized, follow-up interviews were conducted with
additional representatives of motor carriers, insurers, and legal firms, in order to validate
responses and address any gaps in the data. They were asked about the cost factors related to
areas in the data collection cost categories with respect to run-off-the road collisions, rollovers,
and sideswipes, although several cost categories associated with these specific crashes do not
vary by crash type.

After the ranges were identified for the data collection cost categories, median costs were
determined. While there was little deviation between mean and median cost calculations,
occasional outliers were evident in certain categories. For instance, rare jury decisions have
resulted in single-fatality settlements exceeding $10 million, but these are extremely infrequent.
Since these outlying responses were not representative of the sample as a whole, and would have
negatively influenced the calculation of a “typical” crash cost, median values were used instead.
The interview respondents were also asked how the potential crash costs presented might be
affected by the severity of the crash—for example, whether the crash involved PDO, injuries, or
fatalities.

3.2.2 Labor Costs

In this analysis, labor cost estimates were assumed to be specific to the replacement of the truck
drivers injured or killed in crashes. Since medical insurance is a basic operating cost that covers
a broad array of on-the-job and off-the-job illnesses and injuries, and generally covers all
personnel working for a motor carrier, these costs were not allocated as marginal costs of
crashes. However, if a driver must be replaced because of a fatal or injury crash, a motor carrier
would incur added labor costs.

Driver-replacement cost estimates related to the training, testing, hiring, and orientation activities
involved when a new driver is brought into the organization. Training costs included any

11
ancillary tuition, instructor costs, and team-driver costs. Testing costs included driver
background check, drug screening tests, and physicals (medical exams). Hiring costs included
any bonuses and relocation costs provided to new hires. When provided by carriers, orientation
costs included items such as meals and lodging expenses. Table 4 presents a breakout of these
median costs per each new driver hired—costs provided by the interviewed motor carriers and
insurance companies.

Table 4. Median Driver-Replacement

Cost Categories Per Fatal or Injury Crash

Cost Category Cost

Training $3,350
Testing $500
Hiring $500
Orientation $2,650
Total $7,000

3.2.3 Workers’ Compensation

Workers’ Compensation is designed to protect workers and their dependents against hardships
from injury or death arising out of the work environment. These employees or their survivors are
provided with fixed monetary awards covered under Workers’ Compensation, thus eliminating
the need for excessive litigation.

Employers with a certain number of employees are legally required to furnish Workers’
Compensation coverage. Rather than purchase insurance, some employers choose to self-insure
their Workers’ Compensation liabilities for reasons of cost-effectiveness, maintaining greater
control over their claims programs, and increasing safety and loss control management. To
receive self-insured status, the employer must qualify through an application process, meet
specified financial requirements, and be approved.

These specific costs were included in the benefit-cost analysis only when the crash resulted in a
driver injury or fatality. Workers’ Compensation laws provide the following benefits to an
employee:
• Medical Expense—covers the costs of hospitals, doctors, medical treatment, etc.
• Disability Pay—compensates for lost pay either temporarily, while the employee is
recovering, or permanently, if the employee is unable to return to work. The amount paid
varies, but can be as high as one-half to two-thirds of employee’s pre-disability pay.
• Vocational Rehabilitation—covers costs involved in cases in which the injury renders the
employee unable to perform the usual duties of his or her occupation, including re-
training to enter a new trade or business and physical therapy.

The median Workers’ Compensation claims of $62,728 for motor vehicle crashes were
determined from insurance company data. According to insurance companies, approximately 10
percent of the Workers’ Compensation costs are borne by motor carriers if they are not self-
insured, and the remainder is covered by insurance, as required. In order to isolate those costs

12
that are specific to a motor carrier, the research assumption used in this analysis is that the motor
carrier is self-insured or maintains a per-crash deductible that exceeds total crash costs.
However, insurers can use the same figures and outputs to understand OSS benefits and impacts
from an insurer’s perspective.

These labor and Workers’ Compensation costs apply only when the truck driver is the party
injured or killed in a large-truck crash. To account accurately for the actual labor costs associated
with truck crashes, as well as the cost savings that can be expected from the use of LDWS, the
researchers multiplied labor costs by the average number of injuries and fatalities incurred by
truck drivers on a per-crash basis. As shown in Table 5, on average, a larger percentage of truck
drivers are injured or killed per SVRD collision or rollover (90 to 100 percent) than per
sideswipe and head-on (0 to 30 percent).

Table 5. Average Annual Numbers of Truck Driver Injuries and Fatalities per Crash, 2001–2005

Number Number of Number of Number Number of Number of

Crash Type of Injury Injuries in Injuries per of Fatal Fatalities in Fatalities per
Crashes Crashes Crash Crashes Crashes Crash
SVRD Collisions 982 914 0.9 64 60 0.9
SVRD Rollovers 1,430 1,398 1.0 38 38 1.0
SDLD Sideswipes 562 98 0.2 2 0 0.0
ODLD Sideswipes 557 118 0.2 37 1 0.0
ODLD Head-ons 95 14 0.1 63 21 0.3

Using these rates, the labor and Workers’ Compensation costs associated with injuries and
fatalities per crash have been calculated as shown in Table 6 through Table 9.

Table 6. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per SVRD Collision Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Driver Replacement $6,300 $6,300
Workers’ Compensation $56,455 $56,455
Total $62,755 $62,755

Table 7. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per SVRD Rollover Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Driver Replacement $7,000 $7,000
Workers’ Compensation $62,728 $62,728
Total $69,728 $69,728

13
Table 8. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per ODLD and SDLD Sideswipe Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Driver Replacement $1,400 $0
Workers’ Compensation $12,546 $0
Total $13,946 $0

Table 9. Average Labor and Workers’ Compensation Costs per ODLD Head-on Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Driver Replacement $700 $2,100
Workers’ Compensation $6,273 $18,818
Total $6,973 $20,918

3.2.4 Operational Costs

Operational costs considered in this analysis included direct costs associated with cargo damage,
delivery delays, and loading and unloading, as well as towing, inventory, storage, and other
miscellaneous costs. Categories of median operational costs typically paid by motor carriers in
the event of a SVRD collision, head-on, rollover, or sideswipe crash are presented in Table 10.
Cargo damage costs, which can reflect extreme ranges in cargo value, included the direct average
damage to the cargo that occurred as a result of the crash. Cargo delivery delay costs included
any penalties or reimbursements that the carrier pays as a result of late delivery. Cargo loading
and unloading costs were direct expenses to the company for moving the cargo from the crash
scene. Towing costs included costs for the truck (including both the tractor and trailer) being
towed from the crash site. In addition, there were the inventory and cargo storage costs.
Miscellaneous costs included a summation of smaller crash-related costs, such as the additional
expenses associated with calling the customer after the crash, and any crash-associated public
relations costs. Additional motor carrier operational costs that could be associated with crashes,
such as costs for emergency supplies (cones, flares, etc.), were described by the interviewed
carriers as typical “costs of doing business”; therefore, they were not included in this analysis.

As shown in Table 10, overall operational costs were estimated to be approximately $28,900 for
SVRD collisions, $28,625 for SVRD rollover crashes, and $13,650 for sideswipes and head-on
crashes, but these total costs could vary considerably, depending primarily on the value of the
damaged cargo.

14
 Table 10. Median Operational Costs per Crash

SDLD and
SVRD SVRD ODLD ODLD
Cost Category Collisions Rollovers Sideswipes Head-ons
Cargo damage $17,500 $15,000 $5,000 $5,000
Cargo delivery delays $800 $2,875 $750 $750
Loading and unloading cargo $2,000 $1,850 $2,500 $2,500
Towing, inventory, and storage $8,250 $8,500 $5,000 $5,000
Miscellaneous $400 $400 $400 $400
Total $28,950 $28,625 $13,650 $13,650

Additional operational costs considered for inclusion in this analysis were citations and penalties
resulting from crashes. Lane departure crashes may involve fines for such citations as speeding
or driving too fast for conditions. A collection of information from state and local authorities
from 10 states and seven cities indicated that the average penalty for these types of fines is
approximately $140. Since violation citations are not issued in all crashes, and the fines are a
relatively small expense, they were not included as a cost in the analysis.

3.2.5 Environmental Costs

According to environmental remediation companies, environmental clean-up costs tended to
vary depending on whether or not a body of water was impacted and required clean-up. Based on
average invoices, the costs for water-impacted clean-up ranged from $500 to over $100,000 per
crash, depending on the type of waterway involved. If a body of water was not , the clean-up
costs ranged from $300 to over $20,000 per crash. The variability in range of cost in both
cases—water impacted and no water impacted—depended on what type of substance was leaked
or spilled, and the amount involved.

In addition to these costs, a carrier may be required to pay fines for the environmental damage
caused. The costs of these fines also varied based on the severity of the crash and on whether or
not water was impacted. Carriers reported that the average environmental fine for a crash in
which no water was impacted is $4,000; the average environmental fine for a crash in which
water was impacted was $7,500. For this analysis, the conservative figure of $4,000 is used as
the environmental fine per crash. The total median environmental costs used in this analysis are
shown in Table 11.

Table 11. Median Environmental Costs per Crash

SDLD and
SVRD SVRD ODLD ODLD
Cost Category Collisions Rollovers Sideswipes Head-ons
Environmental fine (no water impacted) $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000
Out-of-pocket environmental clean-up costs $31,000 $78,500 $20,000 $20,000
Total $35,000 $82,500 $24,000 $24,000

15
3.2.6 Property Damage Costs
Median costs for property damage in crashes, as provided by the interviewed insurers and
carriers for crashes addressed by LDWS, are presented in Table 12. Infrastructure and
surrounding structural damage refer to the crash-caused damage to structures other than the
truck, such as any damage to the environment in which the crash took place and damages to
other vehicles. However, in this research, the term PDO refers specifically to the damage to the
truck.

Table 12. Median Property Damage Costs per Crash

SDLD and
SVRD SVRD ODLD ODLD
Cost Category Collisions Rollovers Sideswipes Head-ons
Damage to structures other than the truck $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500
PDO to truck $31,667 $53,333 $25,000 $25,000
Total $34,167 $55,833 $27,500 $27,500

3.2.7 Legal Costs

According to initial information collected from attorney, insurer, and carrier interviews, and
separately verified by three transportation attorneys interviewed as part of this analysis, legal
costs relating to court costs, attorney fees, and out-of-pocket settlements typically vary
considerably, depending on negligence, and on the type and severity of the crash.

The legal fees cost category included crash reconstruction costs, expert witness fees, and fees
paid to attorneys. The court costs include legal filing fees, court reporter fees, deposition fees,
and other miscellaneous costs relating to filing or completing litigation. These average costs are
shown in Table 13 through Table 16 for each type of crash addressed by LDWS.

Table 13. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per SVRD Collision Crash

Cost Category PDO Crash Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Legal Fees $20,000 $40,000 $150,000
Court Costs $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
Total $40,000 $60,000 $170,000

Table 14. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per SVRD Rollover Crash

Cost Category PDO Crash Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Legal Fees $20,000 $25,000 $100,000
Court Costs $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
Total $30,000 $35,000 $110,000

16
 Table 15. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per ODLD and SDLD Sideswipe Crash

Cost Category PDO Crash Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Legal Fees $15,000 $25,000 $100,000
Court Costs $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
Total $35,000 $45,000 $120,000

Table 16. Average Legal Fees and Court Costs per Head-on Crash

Cost Category PDO Crash Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Legal Fees $20,000 $25,000 $100,000
Court Costs $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
Total $40,000 $45,000 $120,000

The out-of-pocket settlement costs are expenses paid to claimants, including punitive and
compensatory damages. The median settlement cost per fatality is $700,000. The average
settlement cost per injury is $10,000 for sideswipe crashes, $167,500 for rollovers, $120,000 for
roadway departure crashes, and $93,000 for head-on crashes.

For this analysis, the costs per injury or fatality depended on the average number of injuries and
fatalities in crashes preventable by the LDWS. GES data provided the numbers of injuries and
fatalities in the crashes preventable by the LDWS, which were used to calculate the average
number of injuries in injury crashes and the average number of injuries and fatalities in a fatal
crash. Table 17 presents these results. A detailed summary of the numbers of injuries and
fatalities per year in these crashes is provided in Appendix A.

Table 17. Average Annual Numbers of Injuries and Fatalities per Crash, 2001–2005

Number of Number of Number of Number of Number of

Crash Type Crashes Injuries in Injuries Fatalities Fatalities
Crashes per Crash in Crashes per Crash
Injury SVRD Collisions 982 1,087 1.1 N/A N/A
Injury SVRD Rollovers 1,430 1,630 1.1 N/A N/A
Injury SDLD Sideswipes 562 640 1.1 N/A N/A
Injury ODLD Sideswipes 557 761 1.4 N/A N/A
Injury ODLD Head-ons 95 132 1.4 N/A N/A
Fatal SVRD Collisions 64 8 0.1 81 1.3
Fatal SVRD Rollovers 38 0 0.0 38 1.0
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes 2 0 0.0 2 1.0
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes 37 40 1.1 38 1.0
Fatal ODLD Head-ons 63 103 1.6 63 1.0

17
Table 18 through Table 22 show the average cost per injury crash and per fatality crash involving
a crash preventable by the LDWS. These results were obtained by multiplying the annual
average numbers of fatalities and/or injuries per crash type in Table 17 by the respective
settlement costs for one fatality and one injury for sideswipes, rollovers, roadway departures, and
head-ons.

Table 18. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal SVRD Collision Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Out-of-Pocket Costs per Injury $132,000 $12,000
Out-of-Pocket per Fatality N/A $910,000
Total $132,000 $922,000

Table 19. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal SVRD Rollover Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Out-of-Pocket Costs Per Injury $184,250 $0
Out-of-Pocket per Fatality N/A $700,000
Total $184,250 $700,000

Table 20. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal SDLD Sideswipe Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Out-of-Pocket Costs Per Injury $11,000 $0
Out-of-Pocket per Fatality N/A $700,000
Total $11,000 $700,000

Table 21. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal ODLD Sideswipe Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Out-of-Pocket Costs Per Injury $14,000 $11,000
Out-of-Pocket per Fatality N/A $700,000
Total $14,000 $711,000

Table 22. Average Settlement Costs per Injury and Fatal Head-on Crash

Cost Category Injury Crash Fatal Crash

Out-of-Pocket Costs Per Injury $130,200 $148,800
Out-of-Pocket per Fatality N/A $700,000
Total $130,200 $848,800

18
3.2.8 Summary of Total PDO Crash, Injury Crash, and Fatal Crash Costs
Based on the average cost estimates from the previous subsections, Table 23 summarizes the
major crash costs, which could have been avoided through the use of LDWS. These costs are
based on a typical or average incident; therefore, they should be interpreted as approximations of
typical expected values.

19
 Table 23. Cost Estimates per Crash by Crash Type and Crash Severity for Lane Departure Crashes

Labor and Court Costs

Environ- Property Legal
Crash Type and Severity Workers’ Operational and Other Total
mental Damage Settlement
Comp. Legal Fees
PDO SVRD Collisions N/A $28,950 $35,000 $34,167 N/A $40,000 $138,117
Injury SVRD Collisions $62,755 $28,950 $35,000 $34,167 $132,000 $60,000 $352,872
Fatal SVRD Collisions $62,755 $28,950 $35,000 $34,167 $922,000 $170,000 $1,252,872
PDO SVRD Rollovers N/A $28,625 $82,500 $55,833 N/A $30,000 $196,958
Injury SVRD Rollovers $69,728 $28,625 $82,500 $55,833 $184,250 $35,000 $455,936
Fatal SVRD Rollovers $69,728 $28,625 $82,500 $55,833 $700,000 $110,000 $1,046,686
PDO SVRD Head-ons N/A $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 N/A $40,000 $105,150
Injury SVRD Head-ons $6,973 $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 $130,200 $45,000 $247,323
Fatal SVRD Head-ons $20,918 $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 $848,800 $120,000 $1,054,868
PDO SDLD Sideswipes N/A $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 N/A $35,000 $100,150
Injury SDLD Sideswipes $13,946 $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 $11,000 $45,000 $135,096
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes $0 $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 $700,000 $120,000 $885,150
PDO ODLD Sideswipes N/A $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 N/A $35,000 $100,150
Injury ODLD Sideswipes $13,946 $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 $14,000 $45,000 $138,096
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes $0 $13,650 $24,000 $27,500 $711,000 $120,000 $896,150

20
This analysis is based on the assumption that these crash costs would be incurred by motor
carriers which have deductibles at the total crash cost level or are self-insured. By Code of
Federal Regulations requirements (49 CFR 387), all motor carriers must, at minimum, either
insure their equipment for crash liability and cargo damage or demonstrate the financial capacity
to cover liability and cargo damage costs for all of their trucks (USDOT 2001). FMCSA will
consider and approve, subject to appropriate and reasonable conditions, the application of a
motor carrier to qualify as a self–insurer, if the carrier furnishes a true and accurate statement of
its financial condition and other evidence that establishes to the satisfaction of the FMCSA the
motor carrier’s ability to satisfy its obligation for coverage of bodily injury liability, property
damage liability, and/or cargo liability. In the case of a crash, it is likely that a self-insured
carrier would assume all of the costs summarized in Table 23.

For a carrier that is insured through an insurance company, the carrier would pay its deductible,
and the insurance company would then cover most of these costs up to the policy limit. The
median deductible provided by the insurance industry representatives for a liability and cargo
damage insurance policy for medium-sized to large fleets was $50,000. Within the trucking
industry, larger carriers typically have larger insurance deductibles. As a result, many large
carriers choose to become self-insured at high values ranging from $150,000 to $5 million.

Generally, smaller carriers have lower deductibles—typically lower than the estimated median
value of $50,000. In addition, new carriers often have deductibles of less than $10,000 and pay
higher insurance premiums, because the insurance companies do not have the standard three to
five years’ worth of historic safety and operating information to determine experience ratings
and premium rates.

Due to the high cost of truck crashes, major truck insurance providers and various truck fleets
indicated that paying premiums is a significant business expense that most fleets would like to
reduce. However, it should be noted that it is difficult to attribute a standardized premium
increase directly to a single crash, since insurance calculations are based on sophisticated
insurance metrics, such as “experience rating” and “loss-pick” formulas, which consider multiple
factors including safety history, crash severity, convictions, carrier size, and safety culture. Some
interviewed carriers stated that they have experienced increases in premiums of approximately 8
to 15 percent annually—independent of crash history.

3.3 STEP 3: ESTIMATE CRASH COSTS BASED ON VEHICLE MILES

TRAVELED AND EXPECTED CRASH REDUCTION

While Step 1 provides information on the numbers of truck crashes preventable by LDWS, and
Step 2 provides estimates of the costs of those crashes, motor carriers ultimately need to know
the crash cost savings that they can expect from the use of the LDWS. As a result, Step 3
involves estimating crash avoidance costs based on vehicle miles traveled and expected crash
reduction from deploying LDWS.

The average annual truck VMT can vary dramatically depending on the motor carrier’s
operations. As the average VMT per truck increases, the likelihood of a truck being involved in a
crash will increase as well, due to increased exposure. To take into account the variances in the

21
average VMTs traveled by carriers in different operating conditions, the crash costs were
calculated for annual VMT values of 80,000, 100,000, 120,000, 140,000, and 160,000 miles.

To determine the costs of crashes preventable by LDWS for the various annual VMT values
shown in Table 24 and Table 25, the first step was to divide the estimated mean annual number
of crashes preventable by LDWS from Tables 2 and 3 by the mean annual total number of
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) of large trucks in the United States of 217,488 million miles, as
reported in Table VM-1 of the Federal Highway Statistics Publications from 2001 to 2005
(Federal Highway Administration 2001–2005). The resulting values were multiplied by annual
VMT values of 80,000, 100,000, 120,000, 140,000, and 160,000 miles. The total values in
Tables 24 and 25 provide an estimate of the crash costs that can be avoided through the use of
LDWS at the low and high efficacy rates and VMTs. The resulting expected total costs are the
sum of the probability of each possible outcome of the crashes preventable by LDWS multiplied
by its estimated cost. Each total cost value represents the average annual amount one “expects”
as the cost of the crash per vehicle at a different average VMT, with identical odds repeated
many times for each VMT category.

Table 24. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT at Low Efficacy Rates

Crash Type and 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000

Severity VMT VMT VMT VMT VMT
PDO SVRD Collisions $42 $53 $63 $74 $84
Injury SVRD Collisions $29 $37 $44 $51 $59
Fatal SVRD Collisions $7 $9 $10 $12 $14
PDO SVRD Rollovers $20 $25 $30 $35 $40
Injury SVRD Rollovers $58 $72 $86 $101 $115
Fatal SVRD Rollovers $3 $4 $5 $6 $7
PDO SDLD Sideswipes $36 $45 $54 $63 $72
Injury SDLD Sideswipes $6 $8 $10 $11 $13
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
PDO ODLD Sideswipes $32 $40 $48 $55 $63
Injury ODLD Sideswipes $7 $8 $10 $11 $13
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes $3 $4 $4 $5 $6
PDO SVRD Head-ons $1 $1 $1 $2 $2
Injury SVRD Head-ons $2 $3 $3 $4 $4
Fatal SVRD Head-ons $5 $7 $8 $10 $11
Total Cost $251 $314 $377 $440 $503
*Total Cost may not be equal to the summation of numbers shown for PDO, Injury, and Fatal due to
independent rounding.

22
 Table 25. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT at High Efficacy Rates

Crash Type and 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000

Severity VMT VMT VMT VMT VMT
PDO SVRD Collisions $97 $121 $145 $170 $194
Injury SVRD Collisions $67 $84 $101 $118 $135
Fatal SVRD Collisions $16 $20 $24 $27 $31
PDO SVRD Rollovers $42 $52 $62 $73 $83
Injury SVRD Rollovers $120 $150 $180 $210 $240
Fatal SVRD Rollovers $7 $9 $11 $13 $15
PDO SDLD Sideswipes $72 $90 $108 $127 $145
Injury SDLD Sideswipes $13 $16 $19 $23 $26
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes $0 $0 $0 $1 $1
PDO ODLD Sideswipes $63 $79 $95 $111 $127
Injury ODLD Sideswipes $13 $16 $20 $23 $26
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes $6 $7 $8 $10 $11
PDO SVRD Head-ons $2 $2 $3 $3 $3
Injury SVRD Head-ons $4 $5 $6 $7 $8
Fatal SVRD Head-ons $11 $14 $17 $20 $23
Total Cost $533 $667 $800 $933 $1,067
*Total Cost may not be equal to the summation of numbers shown for PDO, Injury, and Fatal due to
independent rounding.

23
 4. COST CALCULATIONS
This section presents the fourth step in the benefit-cost analysis to determine the costs of
purchasing and deploying LDWS. The technology and deployment cost estimates for LDWS
include the technology purchasing price, as well as the costs for installation, maintenance, and
training drivers in the use of the technology. These costs considered purchases of the technology
both with and without financing.

4.1 STEP 4: ESTIMATE THE TECHNOLOGY AND DEPLOYMENT COSTS

Deployment costs include the cost of purchasing and installing LDWS. Based on input from
LDWS suppliers and truck fleets that have acquired LDWS, current deployment costs vary based
on the number of units purchased. According to one LDWS supplier, per-unit prices for
“moderate volume” purchases are about $1,000. The Mack FOT evaluation report included
estimates of less than $1,000 for large-volume purchases and from $1,000 to $1,500 for purchase
and installation of a single aftermarket LDWS—estimates which coincided with information
from carriers that have purchased these systems. For retrofitted LDWS, the approximate
installation time is less than 90 minutes. Suppliers contacted for this study indicated little
difference in cost between an aftermarket purchase of LDWS and an OEM-specified LDWS. The
estimated cost of the LDWS for this analysis was estimated to be approximately $1,000.

These costs are based on the assumption that the motor carrier has the cash available to pay the
upfront cost of the technology. If a motor carrier finances the purchase of the technology, the
costs will increase, as shown in Table 26. These calculations are based on an average interest rate
of 6.38 percent, as determined from motor carrier and banking industry interviews, and generally
reflect a loan period of three years.

Table 26. Cost of LDWS, if Financed

Book Price Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total

$1,000 $367.13 $367.13 $367.13 $1,101.39

It is noteworthy that motor carriers derive Federal tax savings from the depreciation of the
equipment. To determine the tax savings, a tax rate of 35 percent was used (the approximate tax
rate for the highest brackets for both C Corporations ∗ and S Corporations † ). LDWSs installed by
the OEM are considered to be part of the truck cab. Consequently, the technology is also subject
to the Federal Excise Tax, and a depreciable life of three years was used to determine the tax
savings as shown in Table 27 (Internal Revenue Service 2007). The Modified Accelerated Cost
Recovery System (MACRS) is the current method of accelerated asset depreciation required by
the United States income tax code. Each MACRS class has a predetermined schedule, which
determines the percentage of the asset’s cost which is depreciated each year. The General
Depreciation Class for a three-year recovery period was used to determine the depreciation of the

∗
A C Corporation is any major corporation that is taxed under Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code. The income of a C Corporation is
subject to Federal income tax.
†
An S Corporation is any corporation that is taxed under Subchapter S of the Internal Revenue Code. An S Corporation pays no Federal income
taxes on profits, but instead each shareholder pays an income tax on his or her particular profits.

24
LDWS. The cost of the system was multiplied by the MACRS rate for each year to determine the
depreciation. Then this value was multiplied by the tax rate of 35 percent to determine the
Federal tax savings.

Table 27. Federal Tax Savings due to Depreciation of LDWS

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

-$116.66 -$155.58 -$51.84 -$25.94 $0.00

Direct driver training was assumed to be the cost for a one-time training session (per driver) of
one hour at a carrier cost of $23—an estimate of the average wage for a driver plus fringe
benefits. It was estimated that the training will be provided annually, because of the high driver
turnover rate in the trucking industry. Interviews with motor carriers have confirmed that one
hour is the amount of time typically spent training a driver. The costs of trainers, manuals, and
other training materials were excluded, since they may be part of a carrier’s typical training
budget, or may be provided by the system vendors.

Motor carriers reported in interviews that maintenance was minimal and did not incur significant
costs unless a windshield was damaged and the LDWS camera needed to be reinstalled on the
new windshield. As a result of these findings, maintenance costs were determined to be
negligible. As shown in Table 28, the total costs of the technology, plus the added training costs
and minus the Federal tax savings, are provided for both the financed and non-financed purchase
options.

Table 28. Total Costs of Technology Deployment with and without Financing

Technology Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total*

LDWS $906.35 -$132.58 -$28.84 -$2.94 $23.00 $765.00
LDWS (financed) $273.48 $234.56 $338.30 -$2.94 $23.00 $866.40
*Total Cost may not be equal to the summation of numbers shown for each year, due to independent rounding.

25
 5. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS
This section presents an overview of the benefit-cost analysis calculations. Specifically, the
benefits in terms of crash cost avoidance were compared to the costs in terms of total technology
costs.

5.1 STEP 5: CALCULATE NET PRESENT VALUES OF BENEFITS AND COSTS

The present values of the LDWS were computed by discounting future benefits and costs for the
values in Steps 3 and 4, using discount rates of 3 and 7 percent over a five-year period (Office of
Management and Budget 1992). Discounting benefits and costs transforms gains and losses
occurring in different time periods to a common unit of measurement. Economic conditions and
externalities dictate which rate is most appropriate for calculating benefits. The higher the
discount rate, the lower the present value of future cash flows. For typical investments, with
costs concentrated in early periods and benefits following in later periods, raising the discount
rate tends to reduce the net present value. The discounted benefits of the LDWS are shown in
Table 29 and
Table 30 at the low and high efficacy rates. The discounted cost of the LDWS is shown in Table
31.

Table 29. Present Value of the Benefits of LDWS at

Low Efficacy Rates Using 3% and 7% Discount Rates

Average VMT 3% 7%
80,000 $1,150.82 $1,030.32
100,000 $1,438.52 $1,287.90
120,000 $1,726.22 $1,545.48
140,000 $2,013.93 $1,803.06
160,000 $2,301.63 $2,060.64

Table 30. Present Value of the Benefits of LDWS at

High Efficacy Rates Using 3% and 7% Discount Rates

Average VMT 3% 7%
80,000 $2,442.50 $2,186.76
100,000 $3,053.13 $2,733.45
120,000 $3,663.75 $3,280.14
140,000 $4,274.38 $3,826.84
160,000 $4,885.00 $4,373.53

26
 Table 31. Present Value of the Costs of
LDWS Using 3% and 7% Discount Rates

No No
Financing Financing Financing Financing
and 3% and 7% and 3% and 7%
$745.83 $721.88 $813.43 $750.77

When the anticipated costs and benefits of the LDWS are compared, the benefits of using the
system over a period of five years outweigh the costs associated with purchasing the systems at
each efficacy rate and for each VMT category. For every dollar spent, carriers received more
than a dollar back in benefits that could be quantified for this analysis. To demonstrate this
effect, Table 32 and Table 33 present the average benefits a motor carrier could expect to receive
for each dollar invested in LDWS.

Table 32. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS, without Financing

3% Discount 3% Discount 7% Discount 7% Discount

Rate— Rate— Rate— Rate—
Average VMT Low Efficacy High Efficacy Low Efficacy High Efficacy
80,000 $1.54 $3.27 $1.43 $3.03
100,000 $1.93 $4.09 $1.78 $3.79
120,000 $2.31 $4.91 $2.14 $4.54
140,000 $2.70 $5.73 $2.50 $5.30
160,000 $3.09 $6.55 $2.85 $6.06

Table 33. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS, with Financing

3% Discount 3% Discount 7% Discount 7% Discount

Rate— Rate— Rate— Rate—
Average VMT Low Efficacy High Efficacy Low Efficacy High Efficacy
80,000 $1.41 $3.00 $1.37 $2.91
100,000 $1.77 $3.75 $1.72 $3.64
120,000 $2.12 $4.50 $2.06 $4.37
140,000 $2.48 $5.25 $2.40 $5.10
160,000 $2.83 $6.01 $2.74 $5.83

5.1.1 Payback Periods

Payback periods were calculated to determine the length of time required to recover the initial
investments made for the LDWS. Although the motor carrier can expect to reap a return on
investment by purchasing the technology, the amount of time it will take for the motor carrier to
realize the positive benefits after purchasing the system varies according to the average VMT per
truck and the type of the technology. Shorter payback periods reflect less funding risk. The

27
payback period does not address the time value of money, nor does it go beyond the initial
recovery of the investment. The formula is:

SystemCost
= PaybackPeriod
AnnualCashInflow

For example, with the cost of $765 for the LDWS and the expected to return of $533 annually
for a VMT of 80,000 at the high efficacy rate, the payback period would be $765 divided by
$533, which equals 1.43 years or about 17 months.

The payback periods are shown in Table 34. In all cases, motor carriers with costs similar to
those assumed for this analysis can expect a payback period well within the anticipated lifetime
of the technology.

Table 34. Payback Period in Months

VMT Low Efficacy High Efficacy

80,000 37 17
100,000 29 14
120,000 24 11
140,000 21 10
160,000 18 9

5.1.2 Indirect Costs

The previous sections provide information about the direct costs of preventable crashes that
could be reasonably quantified; however, decisions relating to the purchase of the LDWS should
also include the consideration of indirect costs.

To gain a broader understanding of the importance of all crash costs to motor carriers, a survey
questionnaire was delivered to motor carrier members of the Commercial Vehicle Safety
Alliance (CVSA), the American Trucking Associations (ATA), and select affiliated state
trucking associations. In all, 56 motor carriers responded to the questionnaire. The respondents
represented a broad range of motor carrier fleet sizes, operational types, and characteristics.
Although the distribution of respondents by demographic factors did not necessarily replicate the
statistical distributions of the motor carrier industry, the respondents represented a distribution of
carrier types sufficiently broad to make it an adequate sample from which to infer motor carrier
perceptions.

The motor carriers were asked to rate the importance to their companies of each of 21 crash
impacts presented in a list using a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “Not Very Significant” and 5
being “Very Significant.” Table 35 presents the ranking of crash cost importance based on the
value of the responses.

28
These results showed that the first 12 top-ranked crash cost areas included indirect costs, such as
impacts on insurance costs, public image, and employee morale, as true impacts to carriers. The
fact that LDWSs have the potential to address these important indirect costs can add to the
benefits of purchasing these systems.

Table 35. Motor Carrier Perceptions of Crash Cost Importance

Rank Based on Mean Perception of

Crash Impact Mean Importance Crash Cost Importance
Impact on liability insurance rates 1 4.59
Equipment and property damage 2 4.50
Cost of replacing drivers 3 4.45
Impact on Federal safety rating 4 4.37
Crash-related legal expenses 5 4.29
Impact on Workers’ Compensation rates 6 4.25
Impact on medical insurance costs 7 4.21
Loss of customer goodwill and/or business 8 4.15
Impact on public image 9 4.13
Environmental clean-up costs 10 4.06
Cargo damage/loss 11 4.04
Impact on employee morale 12 4.04
Reimbursement of emergency response costs 13 3.85
Cost of management time spent on crash settlement 14 3.74
Liability from automated data collection via 16 3.73
technology
Cost of off-loading cargo and transport by relief 15 3.73
vehicle
Cost of towing/recovering damaged vehicle 17 3.70
Cost of accident investigation 18 3.66
Crash-related fines 19 3.64
Crash-related administrative costs 20 3.42
Shipping penalties 21 3.12

29
5.2 STEP 6: SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Certain industry segments will experience different costs and benefits due to differences in
operating practices. The costs and benefits for these industry segments may fall outside the
normal scope of carrier operations and assumptions used for the crash cost estimates in Step 2.
This sensitivity analysis was included to provide some context for small carriers, since this BCA
overall assessment uses economic assumptions that may be more pertinent to medium-sized and
large carriers. However, FMCSA and ATRI are presently undertaking a separate OSS assessment
focusing on the unique issues and economics of small carriers. Finally, this Step 6 sensitivity
analysis can also be applied to high-value cargo carriers.

5.2.1 Small Carriers

It is important to consider small carriers separately from large carriers because of discrete
differences in their financial and operating environments. For instance, small carriers are
unlikely to be self-insured; therefore, out-of-pocket costs per crash will initially be much lower
for small carriers. The median deductible for a motor carrier will fall near the low end of the
$5,000–$50,000 range. Assuming that the probability that a small carrier will be involved in a
crash is the same as in the original analysis, the estimated costs of a rollover crash with the
insurance deductibles of $50,000 and $5,000 are shown in Table 36 and Table 37, respectively.
Also, this cost estimate uses approximately 10 percent of the Workers’ Compensation costs that
may be borne by typical insured motor carriers. Other costs that were assumed to be directly
covered by small carriers (that is, not covered by insurance policies) included driver replacement
costs and the operational costs for cargo delivery delays; loading and unloading cargo; towing,
inventory, and storage; and miscellaneous costs. Environmental costs were also assumed to be
carrier out-of-pocket costs not covered by insurance.

30
 Table 36. Cost Estimates per Crash by Crash Type and Crash Severity for Lane Departure Crashes with Insurance Deductible of $50,000

Operational: Operational: Operational: Operational:

Driver
Crash Type and Workers’ Cargo and Loading and Towing, Misc. Environ- Insurance
Replace- Total
Severity Comp. Delivery Unloading Inventory, mental Deductible
ment
Delays Cargo and Storage
PDO SVRD Collisions N/A N/A $800 $2,000 $8,250 $400 $35,000 $50,000 $96,450
Injury SVRD Collisions $6,300 $5,645 $800 $2,000 $8,250 $400 $35,000 $50,000 $108,395
Fatal SVRD Collisions $6,300 $5,645 $800 $2,000 $8,250 $400 $35,000 $50,000 $108,395
PDO SVRD Rollovers N/A N/A $2,875 $1,850 $8,500 $400 $82,500 $50,000 $146,125
Injury SVRD Rollovers $7,000 $6,273 $2,875 $1,850 $8,500 $400 $82,500 $50,000 $159,398
Fatal SVRD Rollovers $7,000 $6,273 $2,875 $1,850 $8,500 $400 $82,500 $50,000 $159,398
PDO SVRD Head-ons N/A N/A $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $82,650
Injury SVRD Head-ons $700 $627 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $83,997
Fatal SVRD Head-ons $2,100 $1,820 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $86,570
PDO SDLD Sideswipes N/A N/A $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $82,650
Injury SDLD Sideswipes $1,400 $1,255 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $85,305
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes $0 $0 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $82,650
PDO ODLD Sideswipes N/A N/A $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $82,650
Injury ODLD Sideswipes $1,400 $1,255 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $85,305
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes $0 $0 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $50,000 $82,650

31
 Table 37. Cost Estimates per Crash by Crash Type and Crash Severity for Lane Departure Crashes with Insurance Deductible of $5,000

Operational: Operational: Operational: Operational:

Driver
Crash Type and Workers’ Cargo and Loading and Towing, Misc. Environ- Insurance
Replace- Total
Severity Comp. Delivery Unloading Inventory, mental Deductible
ment
Delays Cargo and Storage
PDO SVRD Collisions N/A N/A $800 $2,000 $8,250 $400 $35,000 $5,000 $51,450
Injury SVRD Collisions $6,300 $5,645 $800 $2,000 $8,250 $400 $35,000 $5,000 $63,395
Fatal SVRD Collisions $6,300 $5,645 $800 $2,000 $8,250 $400 $35,000 $5,000 $63,395
PDO SVRD Rollovers N/A N/A $2,875 $1,850 $8,500 $400 $82,500 $5,000 $101,125
Injury SVRD Rollovers $7,000 $6,273 $2,875 $1,850 $8,500 $400 $82,500 $5,000 $114,398
Fatal SVRD Rollovers $7,000 $6,273 $2,875 $1,850 $8,500 $400 $82,500 $5,000 $114,398
PDO SVRD Head-ons N/A N/A $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $37,650
Injury SVRD Head-ons $700 $627 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $38,997
Fatal SVRD Head-ons $2,100 $1,820 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $41,570
PDO SDLD Sideswipes N/A N/A $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $37,650
Injury SDLD Sideswipes $1,400 $1,255 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $40,305
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes $0 $0 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $37,650
PDO ODLD Sideswipes N/A N/A $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $37,650
Injury ODLD Sideswipes $1,400 $1,255 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $40,305
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes $0 $0 $750 $2,500 $5,000 $400 $24,000 $5,000 $37,650

32
The total values in Table 38 and Table 39 provide an estimate of the expected value of crash
costs that can be avoided through the use of LDWS at different efficacy rates and at a typical
VMT of 100,000. The resulting expected total costs are the sum of the probability of each
possible outcome of the crashes preventable by LDWS multiplied by its estimated cost.

Table 38. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT at Low Efficacy Rates

Deductible PDO Injury Fatal Total Cost*

$5,000 $65 $30 $1 $96
$50,000 $126 $47 $2 $176
*Total Cost may not be equal to the summation of numbers shown for PDO, Injury,
and Fatal, due to independent rounding.

Table 39. LDWS: Average Annual Crash Costs per Crash Avoided for
an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT at High Efficacy Rates

Deductible PDO Injury Fatal Total Cost

$5,000 $136 $63 $3 $202
$50,000 $265 $100 $5 $370

After determining the net present values of the costs and benefits of LDWS, the anticipated
benefits for purchasing the LDWS per dollar spent were calculated for 100,000 VMT; they are
shown below in Table 40 and Table 41. It was assumed that most small carriers would finance
the purchase of the technology; therefore, the present value of the financed costs of LDWS at 3
percent and 7 percent from Table 31 were used to determine the results.

Table 40. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash
Avoided for an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 3% Discount Rate with Financing

Deductible Low Efficacy High Efficacy

$5,000 $0.54 $1.14
$50,000 $0.99 $2.08

Table 41. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash
Avoided for an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 7% Discount Rate with Financing

Deductible Low Efficacy High Efficacy

$5,000 $0.52 $1.10
$50,000 $0.96 $2.02

Since many lane departure crashes involving large trucks may not include environmental costs,
the benefits of the LDWS at 3 percent and at 7 percent could be even lower than the values
shown in Tables 40 and 41 for carriers that are not self-insured. At an annual average 100,000
VMT, the benefits would range from $0.61 per dollar spent on LDWS at a low efficacy rate to

33
$1.32 per dollar spent on LDWS at a high efficacy rate for carriers with a $50,000 deductible, if
no environmental costs are included in the analyses.

Based on the overall probability of involvement in the types of crashes preventable by LDWS, a
small carrier may not reach the level of a dollar or more of benefits for each dollar spent on
financing the technology over five years. However, an excessive number of crashes in a short
time period can seriously affect a small carrier’s insurance premiums and deductible levels. As
the number of crashes increases, so will the insurance costs, until the insurance costs equal or
exceed the original LDWS investment, or until, eventually, the carrier is dropped by the insurer.
The formula for such a consequence varies by number of crashes, crash severity, and timeline.
For this reason, an investment in the technology may still be considered prudent for added
protection against rising insurance costs.

When the risk of involvement in a rollover crash is spread over the entire population of motor
carriers, the benefits may not always exceed the costs for small carriers. However, benefits may
still exist for small carriers. The overall probability of being involved in an unintended-lane-
departure crash is low, but once it occurs, the costs to the small carrier can increase dramatically.
According to insurance industry data, for a deductible level of $5,000 per crash, the annual
premium payment will be approximately $4,000 per power unit. Estimates suggest that as long as
the average loss per power unit does not exceed 50–65 percent of the total premium payment, the
annual premium for the motor carrier may not increase. At the $4,000 premium used in this
discussion, to prevent a rate increase, the average loss per power unit cannot exceed $2,618.

Insurance companies consider many factors when determining motor carrier premium payments.
However, if the insurance provider is not able to generate its required return, or experiences a
loss as a result of covering a particular carrier, it is highly likely that the insurance provider will
increase the motor carrier’s annual premiums. For example, increasing the $4,000 premium by
10 percent because of a lane departure crash results in a new annual premium per truck of
$4,400, an increase of $400 per truck. Over a five-year period, without any further premium
increases above the $400 per truck, this is an additional cost in premium payments of $2,000 per
power unit. In contrast, the expected cost associated with financing the LDWS is $866.40. If the
purchase of this unit prevents a crash that would result in higher insurance premiums, it will save
a motor carrier nearly $1,133 per power unit over five years.

Nevertheless, it is recognized that small carriers do not always have the front-end liquidity or
financial borrowing capacity to invest even in systems that generate a positive ROI.

5.2.2 High-Value Cargo Carriers

For high-value cargo carriers, the costs associated with the damage to high-value cargo will be
greater than the average carrier’s costs. For example, if the cargo damage costs range from
$50,000 to $1,000,000, instead of an average of $15,000, the total estimated crash costs for
SVRD rollovers increase by $35,000 and $985,000, respectively, due to operational cost
changes. The total crash costs accounting for these differences are shown in Table 42 and
Table 43.

34
 Table 42. Cost Estimates per Lane Departure Crash by Crash Severity with High-Value Cargo Damages of $50,000

Labor and Court Costs

Environ- Property Legal
Crash Type and Severity Workers’ Operational and Other Total
mental Damage Settlement
Comp. Legal Fees
PDO SVRD Collisions N/A $61,450 $35,000 $34,167 $0 $40,000 $170,617
Injury SVRD Collisions $62,755 $61,450 $35,000 $34,167 $132,000 $60,000 $385,372
Fatal SVRD Collisions $62,755 $61,450 $35,000 $34,167 $922,000 $170,000 $1,285,372
PDO SVRD Rollovers N/A $63,625 $82,500 $55,833 $0 $30,000 $231,958
Injury SVRD Rollovers $69,728 $63,625 $82,500 $55,833 $184,250 $35,000 $490,936
Fatal SVRD Rollovers $69,728 $63,625 $82,500 $55,833 $700,000 $110,000 $1,081,686
PDO SVRD Head-ons N/A $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $0 $40,000 $150,150
Injury SVRD Head-ons $6,973 $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $130,200 $45,000 $292,323
Fatal SVRD Head-ons $20,918 $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $848,800 $120,000 $1,099,868
PDO SDLD Sideswipes N/A $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $0 $35,000 $145,150
Injury SDLD Sideswipes $13,946 $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $11,000 $45,000 $180,096
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes $0 $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $700,000 $120,000 $930,150
PDO ODLD Sideswipes N/A $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $0 $35,000 $145,150
Injury ODLD Sideswipes $13,946 $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $14,000 $45,000 $183,096
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes $0 $58,650 $24,000 $27,500 $711,000 $120,000 $941,150

35
 Table 43. Cost Estimates per Lane Departure Crash by Crash Severity with High-Value Cargo Damages of $1,000,000

Labor and Court Costs

Environ- Property Legal
Crash Type and Severity Workers’ Operational and Other Total
mental Damage Settlement
Comp. Legal Fees
PDO SVRD Collisions N/A $1,011,450 $35,000 $34,167 $0 $40,000 $1,120,617
Injury SVRD Collisions $62,755 $1,011,450 $35,000 $34,167 $132,000 $60,000 $1,335,372
Fatal SVRD Collisions $62,755 $1,011,450 $35,000 $34,167 $922,000 $170,000 $2,235,372
PDO SVRD Rollovers N/A $1,013,625 $82,500 $55,833 $0 $30,000 $1,181,958
Injury SVRD Rollovers $69,728 $1,013,625 $82,500 $55,833 $184,250 $35,000 $1,440,936
Fatal SVRD Rollovers $69,728 $1,013,625 $82,500 $55,833 $700,000 $110,000 $2,031,686
PDO SVRD Head-ons N/A $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $0 $40,000 $1,100,150
Injury SVRD Head-ons $6,973 $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $130,200 $45,000 $1,242,323
Fatal SVRD Head-ons $20,918 $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $848,8000 $120,000 $2,049,868
PDO SDLD Sideswipes N/A $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $0 $35,000 $1,095,150
Injury SDLD Sideswipes $13,946 $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $11,000 $45,000 $1,130,096
Fatal SDLD Sideswipes $0 $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $700,000 $120,000 $1,880,150
PDO ODLD Sideswipes N/A $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $0 $35,000 $1,095,150
Injury ODLD Sideswipes $13,946 $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $14,000 $45,000 $1,130,096
Fatal ODLD Sideswipes $0 $1,008,650 $24,000 $27,500 $711,000 $120,000 $1,891,150

36
Following the same methodology described in the previous sections, the average crash costs for
high-value cargo carriers are presented below in Table 44 and Table 45.

Table 44. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash
Avoided for an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 3% Discount Rate with Financing

High-Value Cargo
Low Efficacy High Efficacy
Damages
$50,000 $2.18 $4.61
$1,000,000 $11.67 $24.33

Table 45. Anticipated Benefits per Dollar Spent for Purchasing LDWS per Crash
Avoided for an Average Annual VMT of 100,000 VMT, 7% Discount Rate with Financing

High-Value Cargo
Low Efficacy High Efficacy
Damages
$50,000 $2.11 $4.47
$1,000,000 $11.32 $23.60

Since the crash costs are greater for high-value cargo carriers, the benefits that accrue from the
crash-avoidance technology are greater as well.

37
 6. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The following findings and conclusions were derived from this economic analysis of LDWS for
large trucks.

Using low and high estimates of efficacy rates ranging from 23 percent to 53 percent, it was
estimated that the LDWS has the potential to prevent approximately 1,069–2,463 SVRD
collisions, 627–1,307 SVRD rollovers, 1,111–2,223 SDLD sideswipes, 997–1,992 ODLD
sideswipes, and 59–118 ODLD head-ons.

Based on the average estimates of typical individual crash costs, the PDO crashes range in cost
from $100,150–$196,958, injury crashes are in the range of $135,096–$455,936, and fatal
crashes are in the range of $885,150–$1,252,872. These costs reflect the direct out-of-pocket
costs for motor carriers that have deductibles at or above crash costs, or are self-insured.
However, any trucking industry stakeholder that is a party to crash cost calculations or liability—
such as insurers, legal defense firms, or industry suppliers—can use the figures to understand the
safety impacts of onboard safety systems.

The cost estimates are based on currently available motor carrier, insurance, and supplier
information on the actual expenses incurred by the motor carrier industry in crashes that could be
prevented by the use of LDWS.

Regardless of the average VMTs traveled, medium to large motor carriers with an average
likelihood of being involved in a lane departure crash will achieve positive returns on investment
by purchasing and using LDWS. Based on the cost and crash scenarios used herein, many
carriers investing in the LDWS will achieve a higher return on investment than those that do not
invest in the system.

The sensitivity analysis further demonstrates that even small carriers, which generally will not
incur the same per-truck crash costs as larger carriers, can realize added benefits related to
insurance implications if one or more crashes are prevented using LDWS.

38
 7. REFERENCES
Federal Highway Administration. (2001–2005). Federal Highway Statistics Publications. Section
V: Roadway Extent, Characteristics, and Performance, Table VM-1: Vehicle miles of travel
and related data, by highway category and vehicle type. U.S. Department of Transportation
[cited 1 June 2008]. Available online: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohpi/hss/hsspubs.htm
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). (2005). Concept of Operations and
Voluntary Operational Requirements for Lane Departure Warning Systems (LDWS)
Onboard Commercial Motor Vehicles [report online]. Report No. FMCSA-MCRR-05-005.
U.S. Department of Transportation [cited 1 June 2008]. Available online:
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/report/lane-departure-warning-
systems.htm
FMCSA. (2006). Evaluation of the Mack Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test
Final Report [report online]. Report No. FMCSA-06-016. U.S. Department of Transportation
[cited 1 June 2008]. Available online: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-
technology/report/Evaluation-of-the-Mack-Intelligent-Vehicle-Field-Operational-Test-
Sep2006.pdf
Internal Revenue Service. (2007). How to Depreciate Property. Publication 946. Appendix A.
MACRS Percentage Table Guide, General Depreciation System (GDS), Table A-1. U.S.
Department of the Treasury [cited 1 June 2008].
Available online: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p946.pdf
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). (2005). National Automotive
Sampling System: General Estimates System Analytical User’s Manual, 1988–2005 [report
online]. U.S. Department of Transportation [cited 1 June 2008].
Available online: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/AUM05.PDF
Office of Management and Budget. (1992). Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost
Analysis of Federal Programs. OMB Circular A-94. Executive Office of the President [cited
1 June 2008]. Available online: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a094/a094.html
Rodriguez, J., Kosir, M., Lantz, B., Griffin, G., & Glatt, J. (2000). The Costs of Truckload
Driver Turnover. Fargo, North Dakota State University, Upper Great Plains Transportation
Institute [cited 1 June 2008]. Available online: http://www.ugpti.org/pubs/pdf/SP146.pdf
Short, J., Boyle, L., Shackelford, S., Inderbitzen, B., & Bergoffen, G. (2007). The Role of Safety
Culture in Preventing Commercial Motor Vehicle Crashes. CTBSSP Synthesis of Safety
Practice No. 14 [cited 1 June 2008].
Available online: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/ctbssp/ctbssp_syn_14.pdf
U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). (2001). Minimum Levels of Financial
Responsibility for Motor Carriers. Code of Federal Regulations 49 CFR, Part 387 [cited 1
June 2008]. Available online: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-
regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrguidedetails.asp?rule_toc=756&section_toc=756
Wang, J. S., Knipling, R. R., & Blincoe, L. J. (1999). The Dimensions of Motor Vehicle Crash
Risk. Journal of Transportation and Statistics 2(1):19–43.

39
 APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF DATA SETS
National Automotive Sampling System General Estimates System (NASS/GES)

SOURCES:

GES Data Files from:

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem.0efe59a360fbaad24ec86e10dba046a0/

GES Analytical Users Manual, 1988–2005 from:

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/AUM05.pdf

The GES is directed by the National Center for Statistics and Analysis, which is a research and
development arm of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). NHTSA is
an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) responsible for reducing injuries
and fatalities on America’s roadways through education and research on safety standards and
enforcement activity. The GES sample collects data from GES data collectors in 60 different
geographic sites across the United States. These data collectors work with approximately 400
police agencies in these sites; during each visit, the data collectors collect all police traffic
accident reports (PARs) and then select a sample of these reports. An NHTSA contractor codes
these reports into data files, while checking for quality, validity, and consistency. According to
the NASS-GES Analytical User’s Manual, “GES is used to identify highway safety problem
areas, provide a basis for regulatory and consumer information initiatives, and form the basis for
cost and benefit analyses of highway safety initiatives.”

The PARs from which GES data files are coded represent a probability sample of all police-
reported crashes in the United States. Therefore, once the records of interest within GES are
isolated, a weight must be applied to calculate estimates of national crash characteristics,
including items such as the number of crashes of a specific type, or the number of injuries within
that accident type. This weight is indicated by the “Weight” variable in each GES data file; this
weight is “the product of the inverse of the probabilities of selection at each of the three stages in
the sampling process.”

The main limitation of using GES as a data source is that when looking at extremely specific
crash types, there is a possibility that a query will return a small number of records, since the
actual number of crashes that each record represents is given by a weight.

The data fields and variables that were used in this analysis are presented in Table 46.

41
 Table 46. GES Fields and Variables Defining Crashes Addressed by LDWS

Variables for
Variables for Variables for Variables for Variables for
Field Name SVRD Collisions with
SVRD Rollovers SDLD Sideswipes ODLD Sideswipes ODLD Head-ons
Fixed Object
Body Type 64—Straight Truck 64—Straight Truck 64—Straight Truck 64—Straight Truck 64—Straight Truck
BODY_TYP (V05) 66—Truck Tractor 66—Truck Tractor 66—Truck Tractor 66—Truck Tractor 66—Truck Tractor
78—Unknown 78—Unknown 78—Unknown 78—Unknown 78—Unknown
Medium/Heavy Medium/Heavy Medium/Heavy Medium/Heavy Medium/Heavy
Truck Truck Truck Truck Truck
Most Harmful Not 1 (Rollover/ 1—Rollover/Overturn
Event Overturn)
V_EVENT (V20)
Movement Prior 1—Going Straight 1—Going Straight 1—Going Straight 1—Going Straight 1—Going Straight
to Critical Event 2—Decelerating in 2—Decelerating in 2—Decelerating in 2—Decelerating in 2—Decelerating in
P_CRASH1 (V21) Traffic Lane Traffic Lane Traffic Lane Traffic Lane Traffic Lane
14—Negotiating a 14—Negotiating a 14—Negotiating a 14—Negotiating a 14—Negotiating a
Curve Curve Curve Curve Curve
Accident Type 1—Right Roadside 1—Right Roadside 44—Sideswipe/Angle: 64—Sideswipe/Angle: 50—Head-On
ACC_TYPE (V23) Departure: Drive Off Departure: Drive Straight Ahead on Lateral Move Lateral Move
Road Off Road Left Left/Right Left/Right
2—Right Roadside 2—Right Roadside 45—Sideswipe/Angle:
Departure: Departure: Straight Ahead on
Control/Traction Control/Traction Right
Loss Loss 46—Sideswipe/Angle:
6—Left Roadside 6—Left Roadside Changing Lanes to
Departure: Drive Off Departure: Drive the Right
Road Off Road 47—Sideswipe/Angle:
7—Left Roadside 7—Left Roadside Changing Lanes to
Departure: Departure: the Left
Control/Traction Control/Traction
Loss Loss

42
 Variables for
Variables for Variables for Variables for Variables for
Field Name SVRD Collisions with
SVRD Rollovers SDLD Sideswipes ODLD Sideswipes ODLD Head-ons
Fixed Object
Critical Event 12—Critical Event 12—Critical Event 10—Critical Event 10—Critical Event 10—Critical Event
P_CRASH2 (V26) Initiated by This Initiated by This Initiated by This Initiated by This Initiated by This
Vehicle Traveling Vehicle Traveling Vehicle Traveling Vehicle Traveling Vehicle
Over Left Edge of Over Left Edge of Over the Lane Line Over the Lane Line Traveling Over
Roadway Roadway on the Left Side of on the Left Side of the Lane Line on
13—Critical Event 13—Critical Event the Travel Lane the Travel Lane the Left Side of
Initiated by This Initiated by This 11—Critical Event 11—Critical Event the Travel Lane
Vehicle Traveling Vehicle Traveling Initiated by This Initiated by This
Over Right Edge of Over Right Edge of Vehicle Traveling Vehicle Traveling
Roadway Roadway Over the Lane Line Over the Lane Line
on the Right Side of on the Right Side
the Travel Lane of the Travel Lane
Injury Severity 0—No Injury 0—No Injury 0—No Injury 0—No Injury 0—No Injury
INJ_SEV (P09) 1—Possible Injury 1—Possible Injury 1—Possible Injury 1—Possible Injury 1—Possible Injury
2—Non-Incapacitating 2—Non-Incapacitating 2—Non-Incapacitating 2—Non-Incapacitating 2—Non-
Injury Injury Injury Injury Incapacitating
3—Incapacitating 3—Incapacitating 3—Incapacitating 3—Incapacitating Injury
Injury Injury Injury Injury 3—Incapacitating
4—Fatal Injury 4—Fatal Injury 4—Fatal Injury 4—Fatal Injury Injury
5—Injured Severity 5—Injured Severity 5—Injured Severity 5—Injured Severity 4—Fatal Injury
Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown 5—Injured Severity
9—Unknown— 9—Unknown— 9—Unknown— 9—Unknown— Unknown
[assumed as no [assumed as no [assumed as no [assumed as no 9—Unknown—
injury] injury] injury] injury] [assumed as no
injury]
Person Type 1—Driver of a Motor 1—Driver of a Motor 1—Driver of a Motor 1—Driver of a Motor 1—Driver of a Motor
PER_TYPE (P3Z) Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle
2—Passenger of a 2—Passenger of a 2—Passenger of a 2—Passenger of a 2—Passenger of a
Motor Vehicle Motor Vehicle Motor Vehicle Motor Vehicle Motor Vehicle
9—Unknown Occupant 9—Unknown Occupant 9—Unknown Occupant 9—Unknown 9—Unknown
Occupant Occupant

43
Federal Highway Statistics

Federal Highway Statistics publications are managed by the Federal Highway Administration’s
Office of Highway Policy Information. The Highway Statistics Series contains statistical
information on a variety of highway use topics, including vehicle mileage. The highway data
analyzed in the Highway Statistics Series are submitted by individual states and analyzed against
previously submitted data to ensure accuracy. The total number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
for combination and straight trucks in the United States, 217,488 million miles averaged across
years 2001–2005(Federal Highway Administration 2001–2005), is shown in Table 47.

Table 47. Average Annual VMT (millions of miles) for Combination Vehicles, 2001–2005

Truck Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Combination and Straight Trucks 207,686 214,530 215,884 226,504 222,836 217,488

44
 APPENDIX B: SUPPORTING DATA
This appendix contains the annual number of crashes, injuries, and fatalities for lane- departure
crashes from 2001–2005, as presented in Table 48 through Table 57. A note on all figures:
Within GES, the weight is often a seven-digit figure, with three numbers after the decimal;
therefore, the following numbers are rounded.

Table 48. Annual Number of SVRD Collision PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005

Crash Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Number of PDO Crashes 2,878 4,206 4,177 2,870 3,878 3,602
Number of Injury Crashes 850 894 1,213 1,102 851 982
Number of Fatal Crashes 91 60 86 13 69 64

Table 49. Annual Number of SVRD Rollover PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005

Crash Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Number of PDO Crashes 976 1,415 1,347 1,255 736 1,146
Number of Injury Crashes 2,289 1,520 706 1,757 874 1,430
Number of Fatal Crashes 18 103 0 58 10 38

Table 50. Annual Number of SDLD Sideswipe PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005

Crash Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Number of PDO Crashes 6,444 3,235 5,167 3,275 3,220 4,268
Number of Injury Crashes 484 980 605 457 286 562
Number of Fatal Crashes 0 0 0 0 10 2

Table 51. Annual Number of ODLD Sideswipe PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005

Crash Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Number of PDO Crashes 3,967 5,874 3,822 2,670 2,352 3,737
Number of Injury Crashes 528 852 478 307 618 557
Number of Fatal Crashes 2 4 161 12 6 37

Table 52. Annual Number of ODLD Head-on PDO, Injury, and Fatal Crashes, 2001–2005

Crash Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Number of PDO Crashes 211 16 257 0 4 98
Number of Injury Crashes 106 12 233 10 112 95
Number of Fatal Crashes 8 10 95 203 0 63

45
 Table 53. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in SVRD Collisions, 2001–2005

Crash Statistic 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Injuries in Injury Crashes 954 1,173 1,236 1,148 924 1,087
Fatalities in Fatal Crashes 91 60 166 17 69 81
Injuries in Fatal Crashes 16 23 0 0 0 8
Number Truck Driver Injuries 732 910 1,192 938 797 914
Number Truck Driver Fatalities 83 50 86 13 69 60

Table 54. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in SVRD Rollovers, 2001–2005

Crash Statistic 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Injuries in Injury Crashes 2,612 1,732 841 2,090 876 1,630
Fatalities in Fatal Crashes 18 103 0 58 10 38
Injuries in Fatal Crashes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Number Truck Driver Injuries 2,277 1,486 611 1,749 867 1,398
Number Truck Driver Fatalities 18 103 0 58 10 38

Table 55. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in SDLD Sideswipes, 2001–2005

Crash Statistic 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Injuries in Injury Crashes 543 1,041 718 557 340 640
Fatalities in Fatal Crashes 0 0 0 0 10 2
Injuries in Fatal Crashes 0 0 0 0 0 0
Number Truck Driver Injuries 10 365 96 14 7 98
Number Truck Driver Fatalities 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 56. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in ODLD Sideswipes, 2001–2005

Crash Statistic 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Injuries in Injury Crashes 557 1,356 730 365 799 761
Fatalities in Fatal Crashes 2 8 161 12 6 38
Injuries in Fatal Crashes 4 4 161 24 9 40
Number Truck Driver Injuries 54 3 465 22 46 118
Number Truck Driver Fatalities 2 0 0 0 2 1

Table 57. Annual Number of Injuries and Fatalities in ODLD Head-ons, 2001–2005

Crash Statistic 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Average

Injuries in Injury Crashes 117 25 393 10 116 132
Fatalities in Fatal Crashes 8 10 95 203 0 63
Injuries in Fatal Crashes 8 30 190 286 0 103
Number Truck Driver Injuries 0 22 0 44 5 14
Number Truck Driver Fatalities 8 0 95 0 0 21

46
 APPENDIX C: COST DATA –
MOTOR CARRIER QUESTIONNAIRE AND
RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
Part 1: Carrier Interview Guide begins on the next page.

Part 2: Survey Respondent Demographics follows.

47
ATRI is currently working on a trucking industry research initiative to develop a comprehensive
cost-benefit analysis of select safety technologies, including rollover stability control, forward-
looking radar, and lane departure warning systems. The purpose of this interview is to gather
real-world information about the costs associated with collisions that could be prevented or
reduced by these types of technologies. ∗

The overall goal is to determine a company’s approximate costs associated with different types
of accidents—in particular, rollovers, side-swipes, run-off-road, rear-end accidents, and, to a
lesser extent, jackknife crashes.

Thank you in advance for your time and support on this important industry research project!

For each of the following tables, please consider an average accident of each type. Then
provide the number or extent of incidents, injuries, and average cost(s) for each crash type
for each metric. †

∗
This information collection is covered by the OMB and Paperwork Reduction Act exemption for ITS-related surveys, questionnaires, and
interviews defined in Section 5305, Title V, Subtitle C, paragraph (i) (2) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:
A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) of 2005, which states that “Any survey, questionnaire, or interview that the Secretary considers necessary to
carry out the evaluation of any test or program assessment activity under this subchapter shall not be subject to chapter 35 of title 44.”
†
For this Appendix content, the term “accident” is maintained to preserve the integrity of the actual survey content rendered by ATRI.

49
Labor Costs by Collision Type:

Cost Factors Rollovers Side-Swipes Run-Off-Road Rear-End Jackknife

Number of accidents.
Number of drivers injured (per 100 accidents).
Costs Associated with Permanent Injuries to Driver
Number of accidents involving permanent injury.
Number of drivers replaced (per 100 accidents).
Costs of driver recruitment marketing.
Training Costs (i.e., school costs, instructor costs).
Testing Costs (i.e., background checks, physicals).
Hiring Costs (i.e., bonuses, training and relocation).
Orientation costs.
Costs Associated with Temporary Injuries to Driver
Number of accidents involving temporary injury.
Number of drivers temporarily replaced (per 100 accidents).
Costs of recruitment marketing.
Training Costs (i.e., school costs, instructor costs).
Testing Costs (i.e., background checks, physicals).
Recruitment Costs (i.e., bonuses, training and relocation).
Orientation costs.

50
1. A recent study placed the average worker replacement costs for all companies at $8,234. Do
you consider this number reasonable? Yes No

1a. If no, what estimate would you consider reasonable?

2. Are there additional labor costs we have not considered? Yes No

2a. If yes, will you please describe those costs and give estimates?

Costs Estimates

3. Do you budget or estimate the cost of driver replacement for the upcoming fiscal or
calendar year? Yes No

3a. If yes, can you describe your process and give an estimate?

4. Can you estimate the wages for relief drivers? Yes No

4a. If yes, please give an estimate:

4b. If yes, are they hourly, salary, or paid by the mile?

Hourly Salary By the mile

51
Operational Costs by Collision Type (Indicate “N/A” if not available or applicable):
Side- Run-Off-
Cost Factors Rollovers Rear-End Jackknife
Swipes Road
Number of accidents involving
cargo damage (per 100 accidents)
Average cost of cargo damage
due to accident.
Avg. cost of secondary cargo
damage (i.e., rain, exposure to
weather).
Avg. cost associated with cargo
delay (i.e., penalties and/or
reimbursements for late delivery).
Additional inventory costs for
storing cargo.
Any costs associated with
guarding cargo after accident.
Avg. cost associated with
unloading or loading cargo
(do not include labor costs).
Miscellaneous operational costs
(i.e., communications expenses,
press releases, etc.).
Emergency supplies relating to
accident (i.e., flares, fire
extinguishers, etc.).
Towing Costs: Tractor
Trailer

5. What are the primary commodity types your company hauls?

6. How do accident costs vary by the commodity type?

7. Does your company calculate loss of “goodwill” when considering the costs of an
accident (including employee goodwill, customer goodwill, and public goodwill)?
Yes No

7a. If yes, can you give an estimate and describe how you calculate goodwill costs?

Estimate:

Calculation:

52
Environmental Costs by Collision Type:

Side- Run-Off-
Cost Factors Rollovers Rear-End Jackknife
Swipes Road
Number of accidents involving
environmental impact costs (per
100 accidents)
Average cost of fines

Average out-of-pocket costs for

cleanup

8. Does your company incur any environmental costs other than the ones mentioned above?
Yes No

8a. If yes, please estimate and describe the type of costs you occur.

Costs Estimates

53
Insurance Costs by Collision Type:

Side- Run-Off-
Cost Factors Rollovers Rear-End Jackknife
Swipes Road
Estimates of increased per-truck
premiums due to each reportable
accident.
Estimate of per-accident out-of
pocket.
Estimate of per accident out-of
pocket costs relating to property
damage (tractor and trailer).

9. What is your average deductible per vehicle/accident?

10. Does the deductible vary by type of truck? Yes No

10a. If yes, can you please describe and give a range for your deductibles by truck type?

11. Does the deductible vary by driver history? Yes No

11a. If yes, can you please describe and give a range for your deductibles?

54
Legal Costs by Collision Type (per accident):

Side- Run-Off-
Cost Factors Rollovers Rear-End Jackknife
Swipes Road
Average court costs.

Legal fees.

Average out-of-pocket settlement

costs.

12. Are there additional legal expenses we have not considered? Yes No

12a. If yes, please estimate and describe the type of costs you occur.

Costs Estimates

13. Will you please list the average cost of all crashes assuming self-insured?

55
PART 2: SURVEY RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS

Carriers:
Carrier A: This is a large (1,000+ power units) national tank truck carrier that handles
bulk commodity shipping operations, providing services to the entire continental United
States. The fleet primarily consists of tank trailers and a smaller fleet of flat-bed trailers.
Primary commodities are chemicals and petroleum products.

Carrier B: This is a mid-sized (100–500 power units) regional truckload carrier that
operates in the eastern United States and primarily utilizes van trailers. The carrier’s
principal commodities include general freight and limited HAZMAT.

Carrier C: This is a small (<100 power units) specialty carrier that provides expedited
freight services for customers that require high levels of safety and security, with cargo
types that are extremely hazardous or sensitive in nature.

Carrier D: This is a large (1,500+ power units) refrigerated carrier with both truckload
and less-than-truckload operations. Typical commodities hauled include food products,
medical supplies, and consumer goods.

Carrier E: This is a very large (8,000+ power unit) transportation company that provides
truckload services for shippers in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The carrier
hauls general commodities with dry vans, and also utilizes flatbeds, specialty, and un-
sided trailers. The operation is both long- and short-haul. The company relies heavily on
the use of independent drivers.

Carrier F: This is a large (1,200+ power units) refrigerated carrier that operates
throughout the United States, Mexico, and Canada. This carrier primarily hauls food
products and consumer goods.

Insurance Companies:
Insurance Carrier A: This is a large, national insurance company with an emphasis on
commercial transportation accounts, and is one of the top five trucking industry insurers.

Insurance Carrier B: This is a large, national insurance company with a large

diversified portfolio of coverage, which includes many larger trucking industry accounts.

57
Law Firms:
Law Firm A: This is a regional law firm with multiple locations throughout the Midwest
employing more than 80 attorneys. The firm specializes in transportation, litigation
defense, collection services, and intellectual property.

Law Firm B: This is a law firm located in the Southeast employing more than 20
attorneys who specialize in litigation and insurance law.

Law Firm C: This is a national law firm with multiple locations in the Midwest and
throughout the world employing more than 100 attorneys. The firm specializes in
litigation, environmental, intellectual property and real estate law.

Environmental Clean-Up Firms:

Environmental Cleanup Company A: This is an environmental clean-up firm located
in the Southeast that specializes in waste removal, roll-off services, and industrial
cleaning. This firm performs planned and emergency services.

Environmental Cleanup Company B: This is an environmental clean-up firm with

multiple locations along the Eastern Seaboard. The firm’s clean-up services range from
disaster response to spill management.

58
 APPENDIX D: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Lane Departure Warning Systems Benefit-Cost Analysis was managed by Ms. Amy Houser
of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). The project supports FMCSA’s
safety goal to reduce the number and severity of large-truck fatalities and crashes by encouraging
voluntary adoption by motor carriers of promising onboard safety technologies. FMCSA’s
efforts include an evaluation of the costs and benefits to the motor carrier community of adopting
the technologies.

This report provides the analytical framework and findings of the benefit-cost and return on
investment analyses for lane departure warning systems. A number of subject matter experts and
industry representatives have provided input to the research process, as well as comments on
study findings. We would like to thank, and recognize the support provided by the following
individuals.
Ronald R. Knipling, Ph.D. Rick Craig
Virginia Tech Transportation Center Owner-Operator Independent Drivers
Scott Claffey Association
Great West Insurance Company Bill Gouse
Dave Melton American Trucking Associations
Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Tom Moses
Safety The Spill Center
Anne McCartt, Ph.D. Bob Interbitzen
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety National Private Truck Council

In addition, the expanded analysis was supported by the following individuals, who provided
considerable assistance in the form of data, analysis, and review:
Steve Olson Bill Elscholtz
Great West Casualty Corporation Overnite Express
John Culp Charles Pursley
Maverick Transportation Tennessee Express
Mark Ramsdell Ron Szapacs
Larson Allen Air Products
Tracy McDonald Andrew Boyle
Praxair Boyle Transportation
Skip Yeakel Bill Patrolia
Volvo Iteris
Dean Newell Jerry Waddell
Maverick Cargo Transporters
Don Lacy John Dickerson
Prime, Inc. Hill Bros.

59