union pacific railroad - results...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Union Pacific Railroad System Overview and Intermodal Operations
November 06, 2013 – AAPA Conference
G. Bisaillon – General Director Intermodal Operations
2
Agenda
US Intermodal System Overview
UP Intermodal Operations
The Port Connection
Industry Challenges
– Regulatory
– Chassis
– Weights
– Communication
Emerging Technology
– Wide Span Gantry at Inland Terminals
– AGS
– Scales
3
Union Pacific Railroad
US Intermodal Overview & UP’s Intermodal Operations
4
All United States Railroad Intermodal Terminals
Seattle Tacoma
Vancouver
Portland
SLCIT
TacSim
Sparks
Stockton Lathrop Oakland
Fresno
Las Vegas
Phoenix San Diego
Long Beach San Bernardino Los Angeles
- City of
Industry
- Los Angeles
- ICTF
- LATC
Albuquerque
El Paso
Amarillo
Laredo
SAIT
Houston (Settegast)
- Englewood
Dallas (Mesquite)
DIT
Alliance
New Orleans
Mobile
Memphis
- Marion
Birmingham
Huntsville
Nashville
Oklahoma
City
St. Louis
East St. Louis Kansas City
Council
Bluffs
Omaha
Denver
Billings
Shelby Spokane
Dilworth
St. Paul
Global III
Chicago
Columbus
Detroit
- Delray
- Livernois
Toledo Cleveland
Indianapolis
Miami
Tampa
Orlando
Jacksonville
Savannah
Charleston
Charlotte
Greensboro
Cincinnati
Georgetown
Louisville
Evansville
Front
Royal Norfolk
Portsmouth
Alexandria
Waterville
Albany
Buffalo Syracuse
Baltimore
Beauharnais
Ayer
Worcester Springfield
Croxton, Dockside, Erail
Dockside, Little Ferry,
North Bergan, South Kearny Philadelphia Morrisville
Ameriport
Taylor
Bethlehem Rutherford
Harrisburg Pittsburgh
Atlanta
- Fairburn
- Husley
Austell
Chicago (UP)
- Canal St
- Global I
- Global II
- Global III
- Global IV
Yard Center
Chicago (CSX)
- 59th Street
- Bedford Park
Chicago (NS)
- Calumet
- 47th Street
- 63rd Street
- Landers
Chicago (BNSF)
- Cicero
- Corwith
- E. Peoria
- Remington
- Willow Springs
Union Pacific Intermodal Ramps
CSX Intermodal Ramps
Norfolk Southern Intermodal Ramps
BSNF Intermodal Ramps
Sacramento
Richmond
Tucson
5
Intermodal Comprises 47% of 2013 US Class 1 Rail Volume
Source: AAR CS54 (UP, NS, CSX, BNSF, KCS)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2000 2010 2013 YTD
Intermodal
Energy
Ind Products
Chemicals
Ag Products
Autos
35% 42%
47%
6
Intermodal Traffic Breakdown
7
Seattle TacSim
Albina
Oakland
Port of Long Beach
Denver
Las Vegas
Phoenix
Santa Teresa
SAIT
Global 2
KC Neff
Council
Bluffs
Shreveport
Brownsville
Laredo
Eagle Pass
El Paso Nogales
Calexico
Dupo
GGN
Tacoma
Brooklyn
Salt Lake City
Lathrop
Sparks
Eastport
Port of Los Angeles
ICTF
City of Industry LATC
East LA
Tucson
Marion
Mesquite
DIT
Houston Englewood
Barbours Cut
New Orleans
Avondale
Memphis
Salem Armourdale
Global 1
Global 4
Global 3
Yard Center
Rio Valley
Port Laredo
Canal St
Legend
Intermodal Ramp
Suspended Operations
Steel wheel Interchange
On Dock Locations
Paper Ramp
Union Pacific’s Intermodal Network
2012 Fast Facts – Intermodal 34 Ramps – 14 States
5.3 mil annual lifts
28,835 trains annually
11,600 Cars daily
Ownership :
54,285 Containers
38,233 Chassis
250 RTG’s/Packers
$1.1 bil Capex New/Expanded
Terminals past 10 years!
Port of
Oakland
8
Intermodal Franchise 2013 YTD- Actual
Domestic 56%
Chicago
Houston
LA Basin
El Paso
Dallas
47%
49%
4%
Domestic International Trailers
Unit Mix
9
Union Pacific Railroad International Intermodal Market Coverage
Portland
Oakland
Los Angeles Long Beach
El Paso
SeattleTacoma
San Antonio
Salt Lake City
Houston
Kansas City St. Louis
Council Bluffs
Denver
Laredo
Dallas
Memphis / Marion
Chicago / G2-4
New Orleans / Avondale
Shreveport
Tucson
Nogales
Larger Ships – UP has larger market coverage
More Destinations = More Options
UP coverage includes eastern points and destinations north and south of the US borders
Interchange Points International Destinations Destinations from PNW Destinations from Oakland Destinations from LA/LB
Santa Teresa (2014)
8 Markets Served
14 Markets Served
19 Markets Served
3 Days 4 Days 5 Days
Minimum Scheduled
Transit from W.C.
10
Union Pacific Railroad
The Port Connection
11 Source: Datamyne
Region % Share
2012
% Share YTD Sept ‘13
California 55.3% 55.3%
No. East 13.0% 12.9%
Mid- Atlantic 4.6% 4.7%
So. Atlantic 11.3% 11.4%
Gulf 2.1% 2.3%
PNW 10.2% 9.4%
Canada 3.4% 4.1%
% Change >+/- 1%
63.0%
55.8% 55.8%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
Coastal Share Percentage - Total Asian Imports (TEUs)
California
PNW
So Atlantic
East
Mid Atlantic
Gulf
Canada
• California Ports still primary for Asian imports/exports
• Stable share since 2009
• Union Pacific well positioned to handle growth and large
volumes off the larger vessels
• North East Coast Ports share stable
• Some growth via South Atlantic Ports
• British Columbia Ports have gained some share
12
Union Pacific Volumes by Port/Port Region
100,000
300,000
500,000
700,000
900,000
1,100,000
1,300,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 (E)
Union Pacific Volume by Port - Imports/Exports/Empties
LA Basin Oakland Seattle/Tacoma
Note: Other Western Ports served by UP have volume
less than 50,000 units annually
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 (E)
UP Import and Export Shipments via Barbours Cut,TX (Port of Houston)
Barbours Cut
• UP volume in line with overall import trends
13
Growth in Transloading
• Slow steady growth of transloading from ISO boxes to domestic 53’ boxes driven by BCO overall
supply chain strategies
Source: IANA
57.1%
46.9% 47.8%
42.9%
53.1% 52.2%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3
YR_2008 YR_2009 YR_2010 YR_2011 YR_2012 YR_2013
Estimated Western Rail Carrier IPI moves vs. Domestic moves % of Total USWC imports
Int'l %
Domestic %
14
Union Pacific Railroad
Intermodal Industry Challenges
15
The Growth Challenge
Intermodal volumes expected to continue strong growth
Investing in:
– Terminal Infrastructure
– Line of Road
– Technology
– Locomotives
– People
16
The Chassis Puzzle
Changing chassis model in N. America
– Steamship line
– Chassis pools
– Trucker model
Terminal design dependancies
– Wheeled
– Grounded
17
The Weight Challenge
Industry wide issue
Pilot Study
– 1166 containers
– 1 in 3 off by 2000# or more
Importance of accurate weights
– Ship stowage
– Train load planning
– Terminal handling
– Train performance
18
The Regulatory Challenge
PTC
– Unfunded Federal mandate
FMCSR
– 49CFR SS.385, 386, 390
CARB
– Facility Operators
Local Jurisdictions
– Influences by Cities
19
Union Pacific Railroad
Emerging Technologies
20
Intermodal Technology AGS
Automatic Gate System
Records information on gate transactions
Includes images for damage inspections
Improved security / driver validation
Tire Inspection Technology
21
Intermodal Technology MIV
Mobile Inventory Vehicle
Real time inventory updates
OCR technology
GPS mapping
Image Viewing capable
Reduced inventory time
Data analytics for root cause of misplacements
22
Intermodal Technology GPS Cranes
GPS Cranes
Autosteering
– Improved productivity
– Improved safety
23
Intermodal Technology Crane Scales
Crane Scale Technology
24
Intermodal Technology Other Initiatives
Drag Reduction / Fuel Conservation
– Aerodynamics
– Wheel-Rail
Automated Flip Station
Movement optimization
Terminal Automation
25
Thank You!
26
Union Pacific Railroad 2013 AAPA Conference
Vancouver, BC
27
Backup Slides
28
Santa Teresa, NM
29
Picture of RTG Operations
30
Santa Teresa Intermodal Terminal Enhanced Technology
Camera Surveillance
Enhanced security
Video recording for playback purposes
Gate activity monitoring
Incident investigation
31
The Weight Challenge
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60
Un
its
Avg
Co
st
Sum of Units Sum of Avg Cost Calc
• Weight is a significant part of the cost component
• Ability to double stack is major cost consideration
• Over one half of UP ISO box shipments weigh over 25 tons