The proposed extension of Highway 167 in Pierce County isn’t the headline-grabber that King County’s behemoth highway projects are, but it could have economic rewards they can’t match.

A state Department of Transportation report released last week concluded that extending Highway 167 from Puyallup to the Port of Tacoma could fuel job growth to the tune of $10.1 billion.

That’s the size of the new payroll expected to be generated by an expansion of the port’s international cargo and other operations — an expansion that is contingent on good transportation connections to move the freight to and from the docks.

By 2025, additional port business could create 79,000 new jobs — more than the number of Washington workers employed by Boeing. Those workers’ wages alone would represent a sevenfold return on the nearly $1.4 billion investment in Highway 167 that voters will likely consider this fall.

Numbers like that — which don’t even take into account the $940 million in congestion relief the project is also expected to produce — put the Highway 167 extension in rare company. The Alaskan Way Viaduct and Highway 520 bridge projects can boast bigger safety and congestion-relief benefits, but can’t generate freight growth on the scale that the Highway 167 extension could.

Highway 167 is part of a roads package that the Regional Transportation Investment District plans to put on the November ballot in Pierce, King and Snohomish counties. Included in the plan — to be financed largely with higher sales and motor vehicle taxes — is the backbone of the Highway 167 project, a two-lane extension from Puyallup to the port that will open up the corridor to traffic and secure the route for future expansion.

Eventually, transportation officials hope to expand the highway to four lanes and build an interchange where it intersects Interstate 5. But that might never happen if Pierce County officials can’t convince state and federal officials that Highway 167 should rank just as high on their priority lists as King County’s megaprojects.

The first step is to convince the Legislature to elevate Highway 167 to the same status afforded the viaduct and Highway 520 bridge projects. Transportation budget writers made both King County projects eligible to tap a $1 billion reserve account to cover funding shortfalls. Highway 167 should be on that list too — as much for the access to money as for what its inclusion would say about the state’s priorities.

A sound transportation plan not only provides congestion relief and safety improvements but also economic development. In that regard, the region’s leaders would be hard-pressed to find a highway project that can deliver like Highway 167 would.