WCCC Executive CommitteeRail and Inter-modal Committee

Port Overview

Jeannie Beckett, Port of Tacoma

San Diego, January 18, 2006

Rail Committee Reports

• Ports– LA/LB– Portland– Tacoma– Seattle

• Rail Roads– BNSF– UPRR– Alaska RR

(Thousands) 2004 TEUs

7,3215,7804,4782,043

5. Charleston, SC 1,8641,8091,7981,7761,665

10. Savannah, GA 1,662

1. Los Angeles2. Long Beach3. NY/NJ4. Oakland

6. Virginia7. Tacoma8. Seattle9. Vancouver, BC

North America Container Ports

Today’s Rail Capacity

Described multiple waysOn – Dock Ramp CapacityNear – Dock Ramp CapacitySupport Track CapacityTideflats CapacityConnector CapacityMainline Capacity

Port Rail Issues• Insufficient destination specific

volume at each terminal• Lack of combining neighboring

terminal volumes (Block Swap)• Adequate equipment inventory• Insufficient rail infrastructure• Longer Arrival / Departure

tracks needed• Higher ratio of storage to

working tracks

Port Rail Issues• Near-dock rail facility essential• Rail / terminal communication• Rail car movements during terminal

operating hours• Additional port locomotive service

facilities needed• Inland rail yard• Maximize on-dock rail

Constraints Volume YTD(September Annualized)Build out @ 7650/ ac

Seattle

Vancouver

Tacoma

Oakland

Los Angeles

Long Beach

Houston

Miami

Savannah

Charleston

Virginia

Baltimore

NY/NJ

2003

2004

2005

2010

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Assumes Build outGrounding and Less Dwell

Courtesy of SSA

Challenges• Growth Outpaces Expectations• Infrastructure takes up to 10 years

to build• Who should pay for the

infrastructure?• Who truly benefits from the

infrastructure?• Funding is Always an Issue

WA OR State Regional Railways

BNSF

UP

Rail Mainlines

Blue: UPRR

Orange: BNSF

Graphic Source: Mainline Management, Inc. Summer 2002.

Union Pacific

ARGO Facility

Terminal 5 On-Dock Rail

Burlington Northern SIG Yard

ON-DOCK & NEAR-DOCK RAIL

Union PacificARGO Facility

Burlington Northern SIG Yard

Terminal 5 On-Dock RailTerminal 5 On-Dock Rail

Jeannie BeckettSr Dir, Inland Transportation

WCCC Jan 17, 2006

Jeannie BeckettSr Dir, Inland Transportation

WCCC Jan 17, 2006

MManaging Infrastructure in a

Capacity Constrained Environment

KK--LineLine

YangYangMingMingMaerskMaersk

HorizonHorizon

HyundaiHyundai

AutosAutos

EvergreenEvergreen

TOTETOTE

Port of Tacoma Today

Rail – 2005

PCT PCT Intermodal Intermodal

YardYard

North North Intermodal Intermodal

Yard Yard (NIM)(NIM)

South South Intermodal Intermodal

Yard Yard (SIM)(SIM)

Hyundai Hyundai Intermodal Intermodal Yard (HIM)Yard (HIM)BullfrogBullfrog

JunctionJunction

AutoAutoWorkingWorking

Mainline Rail Access

BNSF BNSF Tacoma Tacoma YardsYards

UPRR UPRR Fife Fife YardYard

Puyallup Puyallup River River

BridgeBridge

BullfrogBullfrogJunctionJunction

Recommended 5 Year Rail Plan

RunRun--aroundaroundA & DA & DStagingStaging

WorkingWorkingClassificationClassificationAuto StagingAuto Staging

Track TypesTrack Types

2006: Creating SolutionsRespond to Customer Growth and Success

Chilcote JunctionBullfrog Junction

Adding Redundancy = Increasing Capacity

Port of Portland Rail Overview

Land and Transportation -Rivergate

Rivergate Rail - Foundation for Growth

San Pedro Bay Ports Rail Study Update

Rail Western Region Corridor Committee Meeting

January 17, 2006

San Pedro Bay

APM – 484

APL – 292

Evergreen -205

YTI – 185

P&O – 84

CSCL - 75

WBCT - 186

TRAPAC - 173

Hanjin - 375

Pier A - 170 Matson - 70

CUT - 108

LBCT - 102

ITS - 246

PCT - 256

POLA/POLB – Container Growth Trend (TEU)

2.25.4

9.511.8

13.6

19.6

26.3

35.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1985 1990 1995 2000 2003 2005 2010 2015 2020

3.8

On-dock/Near-dock Rail Accomplishments

2004 Total on/near-dock lifts: 1,836,823-On-dock lifts: 72%

-Near-dock lifts: 28%

UP ICTF 1986

Pier A (SSA/MSC) 1997

Pier T (TTI/Hanjin) 2003

Pier F (LBCT) 1991

Pier J (ITS/K-Line) 1975

Pier J (SSA/Cosco) 1989

Yang Ming / West Basin 2000

TICTF (Evergreen / YTI 1997

Pier 300 (APL) 1997

Pier 400 (Maersk) 2002

Future Rail Projects/Expansion8. Pier A 9. Pier B 10. Pier J

(ITS)11. Pier S12. Pier E (Middle

Harbor)13. Pier J

South

1. UP ICTF 2. SCIG3. West Basin4. West Basin

East5. TICTF

1

2

3 4

5

6

7

89

10

11 12

13

6. Pier 3007. Pier 400

West Coast Corridor Coalition ReviewSan Diego, CAJanuary 17, 2006

Rick Wilson, Director of Port Development

West Coast Port Capacity Strategy

32

West Coast Port Capacity Strategy Project Overview

Demand Analysis Port Capacity Facility CapacityRecommendations and Initiatives

Forecast through 2025

• Port projections (Port provided)• BNSF projections (Global Insight)

Growth• BNSF market share• On-Dock/Off-Dock

Estimated capacity through 2025

• Expansion Plans• Process changes

Scope:• Port of Los Angeles• Port of Long Beach• Port of Oakland• Port of Seattle• Port of Tacoma

Estimated capacity through 2025

• Expansion Plans• Process changes

Scope:• SCAL

• Hobart• Commerce• SCOD• SCIG

• OIG• SIG• Tacoma

Understand “gaps”between BNSF and Port forecasts

Develop framework of current and required initiatives

West Coast Port Capacity Strategy Team

Coordinate BNSF approach to short and long-term strategies

Cooperative initiative with Ports - Coordinate approach to short and long-term strategies

West Coast Port Capacity Strategy Project and Team Matrix

West Coast Port Capacity Strategy Team

Ports and On Dock Operations

BNSF FacilitiesOperations

and Line CapacityGovernmental Affairs, PPP, Joint Facilities

Short-Term ProjectsSCOD Operations Improvement Initiative Vessel Rotation/Capacity Impact ProjectVolume/Capacity Review with PortsOIG – Port of Oakland Improvement ProjectsTacoma BFJ and Chilcote Junction UpgradeContainer Growth Program - POS

Other Considerations and IssuesPort merger of Oakland/Sacramento

Short-Term ProjectsHobart Improvement ProjectWide Span Cranes at SIG NORTH

Short-Term ProjectsNetwork Capacity Strategic PlanThird Main Track at CommerceIncreased Train Length Initiative

Short-Term ProjectsJoint Facilities Updated Agreement –

POT (BNSF, TMBL & UPRR)OTIS Initiative – POT (PPP potential)

Mid-Range ProjectsSCIG Initiative POLB Rail Infrastructure Improvement ProgramPort of Oakland Grade Separation &

Realignment ProjectTacoma Expansion Plans

Mid-Range ProjectsExplore Wide Span Crane technology

at OIG Explore PNW Logistics Park

Mid-Range ProjectsBlock/Swap Facility InitiativeThird Main Track at Cajon

Mid-Range ProjectsGovernmental Affairs/PPP initiatives

with POLA/POLB

Long-Range ProjectsReview Port Rail Capacity Master Plans with

all Ports

Long-Range ProjectsAdditional capital investment to increase

capacity and productivityContinued Wide Span Crane

deployment

Long-Range ProjectsOther Double and Triple Track Initiatives

Long-Range ProjectsPPP Joint Initiatives with all Ports

• implement a plans that:– Identifies short-term priorities and projects– Achieve higher on-dock utilization in 2006 and beyond

• Components of plan include:– “One Size Does Not Fit All” strategy for marine terminals– Hobart Allocation Strategy – Car Purification (switching out 53’ platform doublestack

cars) – Increased Units Per Train (UPT) of 250+ and increased train

length of 7,500+– Align train service to match 2006 volume & vessel schedules– Additional supervisory staffing– Additional switch crews and switching support– BNSF/UPRR/PHL improved command and control

2006 Improvement Initiatives

Summary of findings

35

• The Ports’ estimates of TEU growth appear somewhat conservative compared to BNSF, and to an extent, appear based on their projected capacity

• Port TEU CAGR’s range from 4% to 7% through 2025

• BNSF CAGR is 7.4% overall– “Too aggressive”– Concern over publication of findings, due to public

concern about ports expanding to handle growth

• General consensus is that demand will exceed W t C t t it th ti i

Conclusions• Rail On-Dock % are increasing

• More Port rail infrastructure (on-dock / near-dock)

• Do nothing - Rail capacity shortfall by 2010

• Better and more utilization of on-dock rail

• Expand block swap concept – near term

Conclusions• Rail operations efficiency plan needed

• Enhance rail operation communications

• Additional 24/7 on-dock rail operations

• Shuttle trains (short distance)

• Agile port

• Extended terminal gates