National Academies Press: OpenBook

Truck Drayage Productivity Guide (2011)

Chapter: Chapter 9 - Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion

« Previous: Chapter 8 - Container Chassis Supply Time and Delays
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 9 - Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 9 - Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 9 - Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 9 - Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 9 - Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Truck Drayage Productivity Guide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14536.
×
Page 75

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.

Container Yard Congestion Impacts The impact of congestion at marine terminals can be seen in the relationship between volume and turn times in Figure 9–1. Although the general relationship is clear, the specifics will vary by terminal. In the examples, the first terminal is relatively unaffected by volumes of up to 1,100 per day while the second shows marked increases in turn times for volumes above that level. Congestion also results from disruptions to marine terminal operations. Such disruptions have resulted from work stoppages, labor shortages, changes in ocean carrier calls, and rail service shortfalls. A short-lived event such as a systems problem will lead to congestion while the terminal gets back to normal. More extended problems such as changes to vessel, carrier, or alliance termi- nal assignments may result in congestion for weeks or months as the terminal, the customers, and the drayage firms adapt. Errors or disruptions within the CY are generally not documented in terminal operating sys- tems, seldom result in trouble tickets, and most incidents by themselves are not serious, yet can be a major source of cumulative delay. The research team learned of a wide variety of potential problems, including the following: • Drivers and tractors getting out of order in lines waiting to receive containers in the stacks, • Lift equipment malfunctions, • Errors in communication between the gantry crane operator and driver, • Drivers pulling the wrong container in wheeled terminals, • Lift equipment transferring the wrong container in stacked terminals, • High wind conditions that can slow or interfere with lift equipment operations, • Inexperienced drivers going to the wrong pickup point or being unaware of procedures, • Retrieving containers that require excessive rehandling due to their position in the stack, • Labor shift changes, • Redirection of assets from yard operations to ship operations, • Traffic jams that can occur because too many trucks are in the terminal at a given time, and • Specific lane blockages from trucks queuing behind a specific crane. All of these delays are considered a normal part of terminal operations and are not typically seen as the first areas that require specific intervention. Nevertheless, terminals do have some ability to reduce the probability of routine CY delays. For example, ports can institute driver education efforts that include a notification system for changes in terminal procedure. Better coordination between gate operators and lift operators can ensure that the CY does not become excessively crowded. Furthermore, solid redundancy procedures to handle excessive demand for a particular gantry crane can help to prevent localized gridlock from occurring within the terminal. 71 C H A P T E R 9 Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion

Marine Terminal Disruptions Brief or extended disruptions to routine marine terminal operations will create drayage bottle- necks and impose delays. The bottlenecks and delays can result from the following: • An interruption in terminal functions, followed by congestion while the backlog of postponed transactions is cleared; • A short-term diversion of terminal resources (equipment or staffing) to other functions, leaving drayage-related functions under-equipped or under-staffed and therefore slower; • A change in terminal operations or processing that creates short-term confusion and ineffi- ciency; and • An increased workload for which the terminal was not sufficiently prepared, such as a trade surge, military deployment, or ocean carrier terminal shift. Longer disruptions result from persistent congestion, major terminal changes, or start-ups at new terminals. Short-Term Interruptions A marine container terminal is a complex enterprise reliant on infrastructure, equipment, sys- tems, and labor working together. Cost-conscious planners and managers keep redundancy and excess capacity to a minimum. Moreover, the primary goal of the terminal’s direct customer, and thus the primary goal of the terminal itself, is to turn the vessel on schedule. If equipment or labor are in short supply, the vessel will be served first and drayage-related functions later. Marine terminals usually have some margin of excess capacity in mobile lift equipment such as RTGs, straddle carriers, and sideloaders. The loss of one or more pieces of equipment due to damage or failure will, however, slow drayage operations, especially in busy periods. Field work and observations indicate that it is common, although not universal practice to assign the oldest, slowest, and least reliable mobile equipment to serve drayage trucks, reserving the best equipment to support vessel operations. Information systems technology is far more reliable than it was a decade or more ago but “the computer is down” is still a familiar and frustrating refrain. The intricate flow of documentation 72 Truck Drayage Productivity Guide Drayage Volume vs. Average Turn Time - Jan - March 2009 - 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Number of Trucks Entering Av er ag e T ur n T im e ( mi nu te) Import Volumes vs. Non-Trouble Turn Time - 2008 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 Daily Import Volume Av g. Tu rn T im e ( mi nu te) (a) Example 1. (b) Example 2. Figure 9–1. Congestion impacts.

required to support terminal and drayage operations comes to a stop when the information system is unavailable for any reason. The near-complete reliance of the industry on computers and other electronic systems means that full manual operation is no longer a reasonable possibility. Some sub- systems, such as gate RFID or OCR systems, can be bypassed if necessary. A shutdown of the termi- nal operating system, however, will bring all operations to a halt. Many of the worst terminal queuing problems are due to some variation of “the system is down” that affects all gates and all drivers. The most common disruptions to routine operations are probably late vessel arrivals or delays in handling a vessel. Because turning the vessel is the highest priority, all available resources will be used to expedite vessel handling. Access to crane-side container stacks is typically restricted while the cranes are serving a vessel, and the terminal may suspend receipts of containers for other voyages. If a vessel is delayed by more than a few hours, the availability of import containers from that vessel will be significantly delayed as well. This delay will, in turn, leave drayage drivers unexpectedly idle while it lasts, but doubly busy thereafter attempting to meet customer demands. The congestion multiplies when delays to one vessel prevent another from being handled on schedule. As Figure 9–2 suggests, late vessel arrivals are common. The structure of labor contracts can lead terminal operators to delay unloading a vessel further. Since longshore labor is called on a shift basis and paid for a full shift regardless of how many hours are worked, terminal operators avoid calling longshore labor for partial shifts. A vessel that arrives partly into a shift might there- fore not be handled until the start of the next full shift. At terminals with on-dock rail facilities, a late train also can cause an unplanned diversion of resources or congest the container yard. Terminal Changes Changes to marine terminal processes, tenants, and facilities will disrupt drayage operations and reduce productivity for the duration of the disruption. The loss of productivity and delay to Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion 73 4Q 2009 Schedule Reliability 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Pacific Int. Line COSCO CSAV Group "K" Line Yang Ming Line Hanjin Shipping Mediterranean SC ZIM CSCL NYK MOL OOCL Hyundai MM Evergreen Line APL UASC CMA-CGM Hapag-Lloyd APM-Maersk Hamburg Sud Source: Drewry analysis for 4Q2009, cited by E. Kolding, Maersk Line, Trans-Pacific Maritime Conference presentation on March 1, 2010, Long Beach, CA. Figure 9–2. On-time performance of major ocean carriers.

imports and exports depends on the way in which the change is handled as well as on the nature of the change itself. Procedural Changes On the lower end of the scale, marine container terminals frequently make minor procedural changes. These changes range from the way in which information is communicated at gates to the processes for handling trouble tickets. Such changes will generate temporary confusion that can be exacerbated by language differences. Drivers who regularly serve the terminal will adjust to the new procedures with the first few trips. Drivers who do not visit the terminal regularly, however, may have a longer learning period. Minor Facilities and Operations Changes Marine terminals likewise make frequent minor changes to facilities. Parking and stacking arrangements are changed, pavement is re-striped, and new lift equipment is put into service as needed. These changes also will result in temporary confusion; again, drivers who visit the port most frequently will adjust quickest. New Programs and Regulations The advent of TWIC requirements, clean truck plans, and new chassis pools has led to more extensive disruption than routine procedural or facilities changes. New Terminals Although the opening of new terminals invariably requires some adjustment period in which operations are anything but smooth, there are mitigating factors, as follows: • The opening of a new terminal is usually accompanied by more detailed planning and com- munication than changes to existing terminals; • New terminals (usually) open at far less than their ultimate capacity, giving them substantial operating slack at the outset; • Stevedores and ocean carriers routinely assign their most experienced and successful staff to assist in the opening of new terminals; and • Although new equipment and systems have “teething” problems, they also are generally free of “make do” legacy accommodations. As a result, most new terminals go through only a brief adjustment period. Persistent Congestion The serious, port-wide congestion at Los Angeles and Long Beach during the peak season of 2004 received widespread media and industry coverage. The congestion resulted from unanticipated cargo growth coupled with a longshore labor shortage and disruptions to UP rail service. The outcome was an inability to move cargo through the terminals fast enough for peak season vol- umes (which average 11% above the annual average throughput at LALB). During the worst period, over 100 vessels were waiting in San Pedro Bay to be unloaded, and terminals were diverting all available resources to handling the vessel backlog. There were the following multiple, compounding repercussions for drayage: • As terminals filled up with containers that should have been moving elsewhere, inventories and location systems fell behind, making it harder and more time-consuming to locate and transfer the correct container; • The shortage of longshore labor and the priority given to vessel operations meant that the shortfall would be most keenly felt in gate, clerical, and CY operations that support drayage; • Drayage firms found themselves unable to efficiently return containers in their possession, yet were being charged demurrage for keeping them beyond the authorized free time; and 74 Truck Drayage Productivity Guide

• As delivery of import containers fell farther behind, import customers became more insistent on retrieving the highest priority containers, thus reducing the drayage firms’ flexibility. Ocean Carrier Tenant Shifts Occasionally, ocean carriers change terminals. This may occur when a new terminal becomes available, when a carrier changes consortium or vessel sharing partners, or for a variety of other operational or financial reasons. At a minimum, a shift will lead to a brief period of confusion as drivers who had not previ- ously served that terminal learn the system, ocean carrier staff establish operations there, and equipment is repositioned (remember that at any given time, a substantial part of the container and chassis inventory may be in the hands of drayage drivers or customers). The shift will go rel- atively smoothly, if the new terminal has ample capacity and similar management and systems. More serious disruptions can occur when the terminal is not adequately prepared for the new client line or the trade volume. The immediate symptoms of the problem will be long turn times and very long gate queues. In some cases, these lines have caused the port authority to change the traffic patterns around the marine terminal, blocked access to neighboring freight facilities, and forced port police to send draymen away from the terminal. The terminal often responds by working longer hours, adding special gates to increase capac- ity, and adding remote parking facilities for loads and empties to increase CY capacity. Longer working hours are a temporary measure that cannot be sustained without a long-term increase in the workforce. Remote lots create additional work. Planning and Communication The logical antidote to poorly planned or poorly understood changes is better planning and communication, a theme echoed in other sections of the guidebook. The ongoing port commu- nity meetings cited as best practices are a potential vehicle for informing the relevant stakehold- ers regarding upcoming changes and obtaining feedback. Container Yard Solutions Drayage firms and drivers have a long-standing—and apparently valid—complaint that all other terminal processes slow or stop when terminals divert available resources to serve a vessel, partic- ularly if that vessel is late. This study did not attempt to prescribe changes in terminal operations or resources. It is clear, however, that ocean carriers and terminals that economize by having only enough resources to accomplish part of the overall transportation task simultaneously are doing their customers a disservice in the long run. One promising approach is to design the terminal so truck and vessel operations do not over- lap or share equipment. The APM Portsmouth terminal and the proposed Ports America termi- nal for Oakland are examples of designs with container stacks perpendicular to the vessel. These stacks are served by one set of gantries to load and unload the vessel from the berth end, and by a second set of gantries to load and unload drayage trucks on the CY end. Such large-scale investment and reconfiguration is beyond the short-term need and capabil- ity of most port terminals. A more modest means of improvement would be to ensure enough lift equipment and staffing to handle both vessels and trucks in existing configurations. It is likely that this kind of marine terminal staffing commitment will only come as shippers and receivers work actively with the stakeholders to address drayage turn time costs. Marine Terminal Container Yard Congestion 75

Next: Chapter 10 - Extra Drayage Trips »
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!