Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY IN U.S. MARINE CONTAINER TERMINALS Committee on Productivity of Marine Terminals Marine Board Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council National Academy Press Washington, D.C. 1986

OCR for page R1
National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors ac- cording to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technol- ogy with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. The Council operates in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy under the authority of its congressional charter of 1863, which establishes the Academy as a private, nonprofit, self-governing membership corporation. The Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in the conduct of their services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. It is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences. The project described in this report is supported by Cooperative Agree- ment No. 14-12-0001-30301 between the Minerals Management Service of the Department of the Interior and the National Academy of Sciences. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 86-62194 International Standard Book Number 0-309-03694-1 Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON PRODUCTIVITY OF MARINE TERMINALS CLIFFORD M. SAYRE, Chairman, E. I. du Font de Nemours & Co., Wilmington, Delaware CHARLES F. CONNORS, Port of Long Beach, Long Beach, California HUGH M. LACEY, Sea-Land Service, Inc. (retired), Iselin, New Jersey HENRY S. MARCUS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts ROBERT J. NOLAN, International Terminal Operating Co., Inc., New York, New York RUDY RUBIO, International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, San Francisco, California PETER G. SANDLUND, Council of European and Japanese National Shipowner's Associations, Washington, D.C. SVEN I. THOOLEN, Matson Navigation Company, San Fiancisco, California WILLIAM C. WEBSTER, University of California, Berkeley, California L. Matson JOHN PISANI, U.S. Maritime Administration, Washington, D.C. Staff C HARLES A . BO OKMAN, Associate Director for Programs AURO RE BLECK, Senior Secretary 111

OCR for page R1
MARINE BOARD BRAMLETTE McCLELLAND, Chairman, McClelland Engineers, Inc., Houston, Texas WILLIAM C. WEBSTER, Vice Chairman, University of California, Berkeley, California ROGER D. ANDERSON, Cox's Wholesale Seafood, Inc., Tampa, Florida ROBERT D. BALLARD, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts WILLIAM M. BENKERT, U.S. Coast Guard (retired), McLean, Virginia KENNETH A. BLENKARN, Amoco Production Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma DONALD F. BOESCH, Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium. Chauvin, Louisiana H. RAY BRANNON, JR., Exxon Production Research, Houston, Texas ROBERT G. DEAN, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida CHARLES D. HOLLISTER, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts PETER JAQUITH, Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine KENNETH S. KAMLET, URS Dalton, Washington, D.C. DON E. KASH, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma WILLIAM M. NICHOLSON, U.S. Navy (retired), Annapolis, Maryland ERNEST L. PERRY, Port of Los Angeles (retired), Sun City, Arizona RICHARD J. SEYMOUR, University of California, La Jolla, California WILLIAM H. SILCOX, Chevron Oil Co. (retired), San Fiancisco, California RICHARD T. SOPER, Sea-Land Service, Inc., Iselin, New Jersey 1V

OCR for page R1
Staff RALPH D. COOPER, Director CHARLES A. BOOKMAN, Associate Director for Programs DONALD W. PERKINS, Associate Director for Planning RICHARD W. RUMKE, Senior Program Officer MARTIN J. FINERTY, JR., Program Officer DORIS C. HOLMES, Administrative Assistant JOYCE B. SOMERVILLE, Administrative Secretary AURORE BLECK, Senior Secretary JANET CROOKS, Senior Secretary v

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
PREFACE Expanding world trade and the consequent fast growth in ocean freight traffic have stimulated the construction of mammoth con- tainer ships and larger containers, round-the-worId container ser- vices, and integrated intermodal ocean and land transportation, with double-stack trains crossing the continent. In the United States this growth has been accompanied by much deregulation of freight transportation. The hub of this rapidly changing interna- tional transportation universe is the marine terminal, a complex network of receiving, storing, container stuffing and stripping, and transporting facilities for cargo carried by ships. At marine termi- nals, cargo is transferred between deep-sea vessels, feeder vessels, and inland transportation modes. While dramatic change continues to occur in intermodal freight transportation, no such breakthroughs have occurred within the marine terminal since the adoption of containerization in the 1960s. The gantry cranes of today are similar in productivity to those of 20 years ago. Similar methods of materials handling, with similar levels of productivity, also still prevail. The major change has been an immense expansion in size and volume, and hence in the complexity of marine terminal operations. Many in the marine terminal industry, and also many who rely on the effi- cient handling of cargoes in world trade, have come to feel that the ~ V11

OCR for page R1
marine terminal is on the verge of becoming a bottleneck rather than a funnel for world general cargo commerce. This report appraises issues pertinent to the productivity of U.S. marine terrn~nals that handle containerized general cargo. It was prepared by a committee operating under the auspices of the Marine Board of the National Research Council (NRC). The project was requested by the U.S. Maritime Administration, responding to the need expressed by the National Association of Stevedores and others in the marine terminals industry. Members of the committee were selected with regard for the expertise necessary and to achieve a balance of viewpoints. Com- mittee members' backgrounds spanned the fields of ocean shipping and transportation logistics, marine terminal design and engineer- ing, intermodal terminal operation, port operation, foreign cargo handling and ship operation, U.S. cargo handling and ship op- eration, vessel and terminal integration, transportation system analysis, and labor. Biographies of the committee members ap- pear in Appendix A. The principle guiding the constitution of the committee and its work, consistent with the policy of the NRC, was not to exclude the bias that might accompany expertise vital to the study, but to seek balance and fair treatment. The committee was charged with investigating issues pertinent to the productivity of marine terminals handling general cargo in the United States. It was asked to make a preliminary assessment of their relative importance, areas needing further study, and any impediments or barriers to productivity improvement. The committee was instructed to address the following subjects: . state of the art of technology and engineering design in gen- eral cargo terminals, and the state of application and practice in the United States; . comparison with technology and design in other countries; . interrelations of port and terminal practices, advanced tech- nology, institutional arrangements, capital investments, energy, and other factors, with a view to measurement and improvement of terminal productivity; and . implications of port and terminal costs, practices, engineer- ing design, and use of technology for import and export trade of the United States and competitiveness of U.S. terminals. . van

OCR for page R1
The committee focused its efforts on large, general cargo con- ta~ner terminals because they are the most dynamic sector of the terminals industry and also because containers overwhelmingly dominate U.S. general cargo handling. In spite of this focus, the committee considers much of its assessment of issues, especially its comments on utilization of human resources, to be germane to the entire marine terminals industry in the United States, including other types of general cargo and bulk cargo terminals. Productive operations imply the most efficient use of capital, labor, and material to obtain optimum throughput of freight. Measuring productivity traditionally involves the ratios of two quantities that generally reflect an input to a process and its output. The committee was directed to convene a symposium and work- shops to investigate these issues and produce a proceedings. Thus, the committee convened the National Meeting on Productivity of U.S. Marine Terminals on January 8-10, 1986, in Long Beach, California. Participants in the meeting included representatives of marine terminals, port and shipping labor and management, as well as technical experts. A list of participants is provided in Appendix B; the agenda of the meeting is presented in Appendix C. The meeting included a symposium with invited papers and discussion, and workshops to identify and appraise issues. This proceedings contains the invited papers and discussion as well as the reports of the workshops. A summary, with conclusions and recommendations, presents the committee's assessment. The committee is indebted to all who participated in the na- tional meeting for their willingness to give of their time, for their forthrightness, and for their remarkable professional insight and fair-mindedness. Special thanks are due to Thomas D. Wilcox and Mary Dyess of the National Association of Stevedores and to John Pisani of the Maritime Administration for their sustained encouragement. 1X

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS SUMMARY REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON PRODUCTIVITY OF MARINE TERMINALS ... Findings, 1 State of the Art of Marine Container Terminals, 3 Opportunities for Improving Productivity in Marine Terminals, 11 PART 1. WORKSHOP REPORTS MEASURES OF MARINE CONTAINER TERMINAL PRODUCTIVITY 25 The Elements and Constituencies Involved in Productivity, 27 A Profile of Productivity Measures, 30 Using a Profile to Improve Productivity, 37 ISSUES IN IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY 38 New Technologies Requiring Major Capital Investment, 39 Incremental Operational Improvements Not Requiring Capital Investment, 42 Improving Labor and Management Performance and Relations, 44 X1

OCR for page R1
IMPLICATIONS OF TECHNOLOGICAL AND OPERATIONAL FACTORS FOR COMPETITION AND TRADE............................... Principal Findings, 53 PART 2. SYMP O SIUM PAPERS INTRODUCTION ....... James H. Mc~unk~n TRENDS IN WORLD TRADE: IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. MARINE TERMINALS.................................... Richard King Trends in International Bade, 62 The Role of the U.S. Economy in the World Uading System, 64 International Bade in the Pacific Basin, 65 Government Policy Impact on World Trade, 66 Corporate Strategies, 67 THE MARINE TERMINAL AN ELEMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ............................... Productivity from a Rail Transportation Perspective. David Burns Improving System Productivity, 70 Marine Terminal Productivity as it Relates to the Mucking Industry .......................................................... Robert A. Curry Grounded Container Operations, 77 Gate Operations, 78 Available Productive Working Hours at a Marine Terminal, 79 51 59 62 69 69 75 Marine Container Terminal Productivity 81 1;. P. Robinson Who Cares?, 83 How to Improve Stevedoring Productivity, 85 Conclusion, 93 X11

OCR for page R1
Productivity Concerns in Intermodal Terminal Operations 94 John Gray Discussion U.S. MARINE TERMINAL TECHNOLOGY AND OPERATION ..... 97 104 Technology Development and Application in U.S. Marine Terminals 104 Frank Nolan, JO. The Rail Perspective, 106 Civil Engineering Aspects, 106 Labor Productivity and Manning Levels, 107 Equipment and Facilities, 107 Management Systems, 108 Bulk Cargo Systems, 108 Summary, 108 Marine Terminal Operations in the United States. Dan Rayacich Container-Handling Systems, 110 Overview of Operating Procedures, 114 Throughput, 117 Container Terminal Cost Breakdown, 118 The Effect of Work Rules on Productivity, 119 Viewpoints Concerning Productivity, 120 Application of Information Systems to Marine Terminal Operations and Productivity Nancy Friedman Automatic Equipment Control, 123 Raining Technology, 129 Material-Handling Systems, 132 Decision Support Systems, 134 Conclusion, 134 ..... 109 121 The Human Element in Marine Terminal Productivity 135 Michael Gagney and Joe! Fadem Why Change?, 136 Direction of Change, 137 Recommendations, 148 x~n

OCR for page R1
PRODUCTIVITY AT SELECTED FOREIGN MARINE TERMINALS 149 Terminal Productivity at Europe Container Terminus, Rotterdam: A Variety of Factors 149 Joan Rijsenbrij Productivity: What is the Product?, 149 Productivity Control, 157 Future Trends, 165 Opportunities for Better Productivity and Cost Control, 169 Technology, Operations, and Productivity at Marine Terminals of Scandinavia Calle Westman Historical Background, 171 Terminal Technology, 172 Terminal Operation, 175 Productivity of Canadian Marine Terminals Richard Bose! Conclusion, 184 THE IMPORTANCE OF PRODUCTIVE, EFFICIEI\-T INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION FOR INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS Robert Kleist APPENDIXES A. B. List of Participants .... C. D. Biographies of Committee Members .. 170 178 . .185 ......... 193 .................................... 196 .199 203 Agenda .... e ~ Composition of Workshops................................ XIV

OCR for page R1
IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY IN U.S. MARINE CONTAINER TERMINALS

OCR for page R1