National Academies Press: OpenBook

Truck Drayage Productivity Guide (2011)

Chapter: Chapter 4 - Drayage Problems and Solutions

« Previous: Chapter 3 - Drayage Data and Information Sources
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Drayage Problems and Solutions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 33
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Drayage Problems and Solutions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 34
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Drayage Problems and Solutions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 35
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Drayage Problems and Solutions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 36
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Drayage Problems and Solutions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Drayage Problems and Solutions." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 38

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Problem and Solution Matrix The NCFRP Project 14 study team developed a master matrix to systematically display salient study findings. The matrix displays the following information for the major bottlenecks and sources of delay identified in the project: • Nature of the problem; • Causes—proximate and root; • Impacts, absolute and relative, on drayage time, cost, service, and emissions; • Potential solutions; • Implementation strategies; • Potential implementation barriers; • Roles and responsibilities of stakeholders; and • Examples of successful implementation. Table 4–1 displays the matrix. The matrix provides a condensed overview of the major port drayage bottlenecks and sources of delay, and a starting point for analysis of drayage issues at specific ports and terminals. The sig- nificance of the problems in a nationwide context is displayed to help practitioners gauge the likely consequences of local issues and prioritize problem-solving efforts. The major problem categories shown correspond to chapter headings in this guidebook. Drayage Problems The problems are displayed as rows, dividing the matrix into horizontal sections. The matrix is organized to identify four main problems and six aspects of the first problem as follows: 1. Long and unpredictable overall truck turn times at marine terminals, • Long and unpredictable marine terminal gate queuing • Marine terminal gate processing delays • Marine terminal procedural exceptions and trouble tickets • Container chassis supply time and delays • Marine terminal container yard congestion delays • Marine terminal disruptions 2. Extra drayage trips (“dry runs”), 3. Extra empty equipment moves, and 4. Congestion on streets and highways. 33 C H A P T E R 4 Drayage Problems and Solutions

Table 4–1. Problem and solution matrix. Proximate Root Time Cost Emissions Service Practices & Example Facilities Technology & Systems Institutions Strategies Barriers Roles Long queue times Peaking Gate processing delays Gate capacity and hours CY delays Chassis logistics,M&R Continuous systems quality improvement Logistics channel complexity Marine terminals: problem resolution Chassis logistics Capacity shortfalls Modernize & expand facilities Marine labor agreements Problem resolution Process Exceptions Enhance worker proficiency Inexperienced drivers and carriers Congestion Exceptions Standardization Some capital required Shippers: drive the process Peaking Longer gate hours Faster gateprocess Pier Pass Remain open at meal times OCR Marine Terminal Capacity Management Dedicated gates for simple transactions Two-stage gates or equivalent Video gate inspection Modernize & expand facilities Marine terminals--primary problem resolution Lack of RPMs (outgate) 4-5 million annual inbound gate moves Email, web, and/or gate camera information High-tech gates RFID Enhance worker proficiency Motor carriers--problemidentification, cooperation Gate closures for breaks Pre-cleared trucks Nearby truck stops Pre-Clearance with PINS Street turns Shippers--drive the process Morning queues Lack of close overnight parking APM Portsmouth example RPM installation Standardization Appointment systems Ports--port community communication Slow gate processing Slow legacy systems Avg. 3-5 minutes per move $1.00 extra per inbound gate move Execute existing procedures Gate closures for breaks Labor agreements & practices Exceptions High tech gates Ports: information dissemination Problem: Marine Terminal Procedural Exceptions, Trouble Tickets Dispatch errors Booking errors Marine terminal system errors System flaws, customer practices, transaction complexity 5% of 24 million annual transactions Proactive management of non-standard moves Limited chassis interchangeability $10 per chassis search Poor maintenance Frequent chassis changes $2-4 million annually Problem: Long and Unpredictable Marine Terminal Gate Queuing Problem: Marine Terminal Gate Processing Delays Problem: Marine Terminal Chassis Logistics Delays Marine carriers provide fewer chassis Motor carriers own more chassis Undercapitalized motor carriers Traditional chassis supply approach Update legacy chassis management systems to keep up with legal and market trends Pre-clearance & appointment systems Driver/truck arrivals exceed short-term gate capacity Times range from near-zero to multiple hours. $67-$83 million nationwide $16.66 per inbound gate move Avg. 20 min queue at inbound gate Pool operators continue to expand operations Lack of easily accessible information on correct procedures Estimated standard deviation more than 30 min 20 min of idling and creeping per move Inexperienced drivers and carriers 5% of transactions take much longer Average about 1 hour per transaction Unpredictability makes it difficult for motor carriers to meet service standards Significant avoidable emissions$1.2 billion of trucker time spent in marine terminals 24 million gate transactions annually Variability in gate processing time Problem worse at legacy gate facilities One-stage gates w/o bypass Gate processing time variability Additional idling and creeping Suboptimization, motor carrier experiences most of cost Average 12 min when driver must obtain chassis 12 min of idling and creeping All--improve communication, collaboration, proficiency, and standardization Customer: choice of experienced truckers Marine terminals and motor carriers: training Do it right the first time Increase worker proficiency Automate, speed gate process Uneven procedural compliance by shippers, marine carriers, motor carriers, and marine terminals Legacy facilities require capital to modernize Marine labor agreements Continuous quality improvement Applicable to grounded terminals Estimated standard deviation more than 5 min Trucker-owned chassis 4-5 million inbound gate moves per year Shipper-driven actions (e.g., this study) Righttechnology Adequate capacity Dedicated empty & chassis yards APM Portsmouth Two-stage gates or equivalent Fast diversion to trouble window for exceptions Well-trained drivers and gate clerks Clean and timely customer booking Effective electronic communication Solutions Summary Problem Statement: Long and Unpredictable Overall Turn Times at Marine Terminals ImpactsCauses Recognize and address issue Improve communication, collaboration, proficiency, standardization Port community communication and collaboration Shipper-driven communication, education, and cooperation Suboptimization, motor carrier experiences most of cost Motor carriers: problem identification, cooperation Implementation Waits for lift or flip Chassis supply exceptions Time to locate, inspect, and hook up chassis Modernize Avg. move delayed by 1 At legacy gates a driver with a clean transaction can be delayed by other long transactions 20-30% of all containers Extra idling One-hour delayper exception Changing conditions, inaccurate info Inexperience, error 5% of moves = 20+% of total time One hour driver delay for a trouble ticket $ 4-5 million annual extra Port community communication Continuous systems quality improvement PierPass Port-wide education and training Chassis pools with greater participation and geographic scope Continue to implement FMCSA roadability regulations Continuous exception reduction Safety regulation All parties--more accurate, timely instructions and communications Congestion at Chassis Yards Chassis pools Dry, well organized, maintained, and lighted Let market forces continue to drive a transition to improve chassis management Right sized Continuous improvement to meet changing needs Information and training for new and occasional drivers Marine terminals communicate requirements and procedures clearly Driver error Additional time for clerks, dispatchers, customers, and marine carriers $60 million for motor carriers $50 per trouble ticket Experienced, trained drivers, motor carriers, and clerks

Proximate Root Time Cost Emissions Service Practices & Examples Facilities Technology & Systems Institutions Strategies Barriers Roles Solutions Impacts Causes Implementation Gate flow/container yard imbalance Delays inside and outside terminal Avg. $8.33 per inbound gate Densify the marine terminal Legacy facilities require capital to modernize and densify Insufficient container yard capacity or lift Inside gate turn times vary by 20- 30 min with congestion 4-5 million inbound gate moves per year Additional terminal equipment Equipment location problem (UTL) P roblem: Marine Terminal Disruptions Inefficiency Process or facility changes $50 per trip Systems failure Management changes Estimate one terminal disruption annually Ocean carrier tenant shifts Sudden increase in volume Strikes Short-term interruptions Dispatch or driver error Poor communication $ 100 per occurrence Proactive dispatchers Inexperienced workers Motor carrier--problem resolution Booking error Poor communication, customer error 0.1% of containers Make use of available systems Inaccurate systems Terminal error Poor Communication, system error $1.2 million annually Well-trained clerks and drivers Procedural discrepancies Vessel Sharing Agreements $75 per move Chassis pools Estimate 1% of containers Ocean carrier tenant shifts Human error Highway capacity shortfall $50/hour Road condition problems 10% penalty on day 4 hour driving $25 per day $150 million annually Port community--strong political support Port Authority--leadership role Problem: Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion Delays Problem: Extra Drayage Trips, "Dry Runs" Problem: Extra Empty Equipment Moves Problem: Congestion on Streets and Highways Port community active in highway planning Proactive port community advocacy to gain share of highway improvement funds Long-term effort Difficult, time consuming Nonrecurring incidents Congestion, inability to recover Significant, unable to quantify the time penalty Extra idling and creeping Missed customer appointments Marine carriers--primary problem resolution Support by others to provide accurate information. Empty equipment in wrong location Extra drayage moves within port complex Assume 1.5 hours per move $9 million annually Extra moves Redundant system Communicate nature and details of crisis and remedies Add resources; typically land and labor Disorganized, congested facilities Improve equipment distribution practices to take advantage of new flexibilities Traditional practices Terminal congestion Delay in empty positioning Marine terminals and carriers direct return of empty equipment to different locations Daily communications with motor carriers using a variety of latest technology; web, email, etc. Appointment systems have some promise but have not yet been used successfully to significantly smooth work flow Marine terminal must invest or work longer to increase capacity Increase container handling automation Smooth work flow Facilities, equipment investment Missed customer appointments Estimate 10 min per inbound gate $33-$42 million nationwide 10 min of idling and creeping Unpredictable, unreliable service One extra hour or more for motor carriers forced to use the disrupted terminal. $12.5 million annually 250,000 trips per terminal Varies depending upon distance; assume 2 hours Extra miles and idling Longer terminal hours Crisis management teams Major delays for both disrupted terminal and other terminals served by the same truckers One extra hour of idling and creeping Longer terminal hours Shift of resources Maintain gate flows in balance with the rest of the marine terminal's capabilities Recurring congestion Uneven flow and peaking in CY Congestion in the container yard Short-term terminal performance lapse New UIIA provisions add flexibility Motor carrier dispatch to avoid congestion Minimize operations during peak hour Build/expand key intermodal connectors Traffic monitoring systems Webcams Increase worker proficiency Communicate when exceptions arise Natural disaster or accident Continuous improvement to add shipment visibility Add temporary facilities Marine terminal--problem resolution Off terminal chassis and annually container yards

The problem descriptions are relatively generic, and are discussed in detail in relevant sections of this guidebook. Although the potential for delay and unreliability exists at rail intermodal terminals, off-terminal container depots, and shipper/receiver locations, those sources of delay were considered relatively minor. They could, however, have local or short- term significance. Marine container terminal turn time is the principle focus. The matrix shows it as an overall problem, and then provides separate entries for the six turn time components listed in Table 4–1. The problems covered have both time and reliability dimensions, which can be equally important. The problems are interrelated in complex ways. Taking chassis pools out of marine terminals, for example, will reduce associated delays, but may entail extra trips to position chassis outside the terminal. It is, therefore, more useful and accurate to view the matrix as a system rather than as a checklist of independent issues. Causes The causes section of the table is broken into two sections: “proximate” and “root.” The proxi- mate cause may be thought of as the manifestation of the root cause. For example, long queue times is the symptom of a root problem such as peaking, legacy facilities, or poorly trained clerks. The distinction follows conventions commonly used in process improvement efforts, and has been adopted for that reason. Many of the proximate causes of delay, such as long gate queues or con- gestion at chassis yards, are immediately obvious, but the root causes are not. Moreover, some proximate causes, such as slow average gate processing times, may have multiple contributing root causes such as legacy systems, meal breaks, or inability to divert exceptions to a trouble window. A substantial part of the project effort was devoted to linking proximate and root causes, and under- standing the root causes. There are also root causes—such as peaking, communications shortfalls, and human error— that contribute to multiple problems. That is not surprising considering the interrelated nature of the system. For those structural factors that are an inherent part of containerized shipping, such as peaking, the matrix suggests that some problems will persist and can be reduced but not eliminated. Human error can likewise be reduced through training or better information, but cannot be elim- inated. The matrix also suggests, however, that efforts directed at better communications, systems improvement, training, and other common issues will have multiple payoffs. Impacts The impacts section of the table categorizes the problems based on their adverse impact on drayage time, direct economic cost, emissions, and service quality. All the impacts are rough esti- mates for the purpose of showing order-of-magnitude results. The time impacts shown range from a few minutes per move due to gate processing delays, to an average of about an hour per move for trouble tickets or comparable exceptions. Since drayage costs are primarily a function of time, the time impacts drive the cost estimates. The most dramatic impacts are those associated with the “tails” of the turn time or gate time distributions—the 5% of transactions that take much longer than average. There have always been anecdotal reports of multi-hour turn times or queue times, but they have not been previously quantified. Service impacts are estimated based on the magnitude or the variability in process times introduced by the particular problem or issue. 36 Truck Drayage Productivity Guide

These estimates provide guidance on the absolute and relative importance of the various problems. • The overall cost of driver and tractor time spent in marine container terminals is estimated at over $1 billion annually. (The total cost of drayage is much higher, because it includes time in transit and at customer locations, as well as time at the ports.) • Queuing at the marine terminal gates is estimated to cost $67–$83 million annually, while gate processing delays add an estimated $4–$5 million to the total. • Exceptions and trouble tickets are a major cost factor, with an estimated impact of $60 million annually. • The additional cost of obtaining chassis at a stacked terminal, as opposed to arriving with a chas- sis, is estimated at $2–$4 million annually. • Congestion in the container yard is estimated to cost drayage firms about $33–$42 million annually. • Congestion cost on highways and streets is impossible to quantify with any precision. The matrix provides a plausible estimate of around $150 million annually, based on 10% of 4 hours of driv- ing per day (as opposed to time waiting) or 24 minutes per day of lost time due to congestion. Service impacts are qualitative, with most problems resulting in delays or missed appointments. Most delays result in extra time spent idling or creeping in queues in terminals or on congested roads. The emissions impacts of those delays have been estimated using the EPA SmartWay DrayFLEET Model, as explained in detail in Chapter 12. Solutions Potential solutions to drayage problems also are identified in the matrices. In general, they encompass steps to mitigate peaking and congestion, and reduce exceptions and trouble tickets as follows: • Better use of port and terminal information systems to ensure that import containers are ready to be picked up; • Two-stage terminal entry gates (or equivalent capabilities) to segregate and handle exceptions without delaying routine transactions; • Appointment systems that can make terminal transactions more predictable and reduce gate and container yard congestion; • In the near term, neutral chassis pools to streamline in-terminal chassis logistics; • In the long term, trucker-supplied chassis to eliminate in-terminal chassis logistics; • Extended gate hours, where required, to reduce and accommodate peaking; • Better driver and drayage firm information and training; • Importer and exporter preference for experienced drayage firms that understand and use the available productivity tools; • Rationalization of empty container and chassis return requirements; • Wider use of OCR, RFID, and other technologies to automate, streamline, and routinize terminal gate processing; • Proactive chassis maintenance and flagging of defective chassis in terminal pools; • Elimination of gate closures for lunch or other breaks; • Improved accuracy of exporter booking instructions and documentation; • Correction of terminal systems “glitches” that lead to trouble tickets or dysfunctional work-arounds; Drayage Problems and Solutions 37

• Regular meetings and other communication within the port community, including port staff, terminal operators, drayage firms, ocean carriers, customers, and other stakeholders as required; • Sufficient terminal resources and capabilities to simultaneously serve vessels and trucks; • Customer preferences for ocean carriers with good drayage transaction records; • Reduction in port-area and urban street and highway congestion; and • Improvements to legacy marine terminals. Implications for Stakeholders A review of the matrices, the list of problems, and the list of solutions suggests roles for all of the stakeholders in containerized shipping and port operations as follows: • Port authorities can improve communications, support legacy terminal improvements, coor- dinate appointment systems, and participate in port-area congestion mitigation. • Marine container terminals can improve gate processing, reduce operating system “glitches,” stagger break times to prevent gate closures, extend gate hours as required, and increase capa- bilities to simultaneously serve vessels and trucks. • Drayage firms can increase their driver training effort, maximize use of port and terminal cargo clearance systems, and work with customers to reduce booking errors. • Ocean carriers can rationalize empty returns, reduce booking errors and exceptions, and sup- port terminal improvements and extended gates. • Customers can reduce booking and paperwork errors, and use experienced, knowledgeable drayage firms. • Local and regional planners can mitigate congestion on port-area streets and highways. Although each stakeholder group can achieve marginal improvements working indepen- dently, large-scale solutions will require coordinated efforts by multiple parties. 38 Truck Drayage Productivity Guide

Next: Chapter 5 - Truck Turn Times »
Truck Drayage Productivity Guide Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) Report 11: Truck Drayage Productivity Guide is designed to help improve drayage productivity and capacity while reducing emissions, costs, and port-area congestion at deepwater ports.

The guide includes suggestions designed to help shippers, receivers, draymen, marine terminal operators, ocean carriers, and port authorities address inefficiencies, control costs, and reduce associated environmental impacts of truck drayage.

The guide identifies and quantifies the impacts of bottlenecks, associated gate processes, exceptions (trouble tickets), chassis logistics, congestion, and disruption at marine container terminals. The impacts are described in terms of hours, costs, and emissions that were estimated using the Environmental Protection Agency’s DrayFLEET model.

A CD-ROM, which contains the final report on the development of NCFRP Report 11 and its appendices, is included with the print version of NCFRP Report 11.

The CD-ROM is also available for download from TRB’s website as an ISO image. Links to the ISO image and instructions for burning a CD-ROM from an ISO image are provided below.

Help on Burning a .ISO CD-ROM Image

Download the .ISO CD-ROM Image

(Warning: This is a large file and may take some time to download using a high-speed connection.)

CD-ROM Disclaimer - This software is offered as is, without warranty or promise of support of any kind either expressed or implied. Under no circumstance will the National Academy of Sciences or the Transportation Research Board (collectively “TRB’) be liable for any loss or damage caused by the installation or operations of this product. TRB makes no representation or warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, in fact or in law, including without limitation, the warranty of merchantability or the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and shall not in any case be liable for any consequential or special damages.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!