USER MANUAL- PORT

PERFORMANCE MONITORING
CAP-HAITIEN PORT REGULATORY STRENGTHENING PROJECT

October 2017
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | I

USER MANUAL- PORT

PERFORMANCE MONITORING

Activity Title: Cap-Haitien Port Regulatory Strengthening Project

Sponsoring USAID Office: Office of Infrastructure
Contract Number: AID-521-C-16-00003
Contractor: Nathan Associates Inc.

Disclaimer

This document is made possible through the support of the American people through the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this document are the
sole responsibility of the author or authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID
or the United States government.
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 1

CONTENTS
ACRONYMS 1

INTRODUCTION 2

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF CALCULATING PERFORMANCE

INDICATORS 4
Berth Performance Indicators 5
Gate Performance Indicators 9
Yard Performance Indicators 11

PROCEDURES FOR FULFILLING REGULATORY FUNCTIONS:

MONITORING, ENFORCEMENT AND TAKING CORRECTIVE
ACTIONS 14
Data collection forms, PI calculation and dashboard 14

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figures
Figure 1. Vessel Operations Report 6
Figure 2. Crane Operations Report 7
Figure 3. Gate Operations Report 10
Figure 4. Yard Performance Summary Report 12
Figure 5. Berth Performance Monthly Report 16
Figure 6. Gate Performance Monthly Report 17
Figure 7. Yard Dwell Time Report 17
Figure 8. Terminal Monthly Dashboard 18

Tables
Table 1. Data Items and Performance Indicators 4
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 1

ACRONYMS
APN Autorité Portuaire Nationale
CHP Cap Haïtien Port
MHC Mobile Harbor Crane
PI Performance Indicators
USAID U.S. Agency for International Development
TEU Twenty foot equivalent units
TOS Terminal Operation System
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 2

INTRODUCTION
This purpose of this User Manual is to provide guidance on defining methods and processes of
compiling data on the operations of Cap Haitien Port (CHP) container terminal and the
respective calculations of a set of recommended performance indicators (PIs). The manual
identifies the data requirements for each indicator, the source of these data items, the forms to
be used for compiling these items, and the formulas for calculating the various indicators. It also
discusses the necessary procedures for Autorité Portuaire Nationale of Haiti (APN) staff to fulfil
their regulatory functions related to monitoring port operational performance. This manual is
accompanied by an Excel-based spreadsheet and complement’s the CHP Regulatory
Strengthening Project’s Practical Guide and Tool for Monitoring Port Performance.

As described in that report, when a private-sector terminal operator holds a monopoly position
and is not be subjected to competitive influences, the government must impose minimum
performance standards outlined within the concession contract to ensure a reasonable level of
service and productivity in the terminal.

In addition to imposing these standards, APN is also interested in monitoring other dimensions
of operations not under the terminal operator’s control or not necessarily addressed within the
contract’s performance provisions. Such monitoring can be used for benchmarking against prior
years’ performance or against rival or best practice operators in other ports, or for planning
purposes to prepare for capacity expansion.

Our main recommendation in the Practical Guide and Tool was that due to the unique
circumstances of CHP, APN should be actively monitoring the operations of the CHP container
terminal and, in fact, all of its container terminals. Accordingly, we suggested that the terminal
operator(s) should provide APN with detailed operational data to enable APN to calculate a
detailed list of indicators – well beyond the two indicators included in the draft concession
contract. More specifically, we suggested that the operator provides APN with three operations
reports encompassing the main operations of container terminals, including:

• Vessel Operation Report;

• Gate Operation Report; and

• Yard Operation Report.

 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 3

This does not mean, however, that the operator will have to manually prepare and submit
signed, hard-copies of these reports to APN. The draft contract mandates that the future CHP
terminal will be managed via computerized terminal operating system (TOS), and most
computerized TOS automatically generate these reports. Moreover, modern TOSs allow the
terminal operator to share these reports “live” with APN (and others) via Electronic Data
Interchange. This report takes the provision of a TOS as a given and assumes that much of the
required data will come from the TOS.

The following chapters:

• Provide illustrative examples of calculating performance indicators; and

• Describe the procedures that APN should follow in fulfilling its regulatory functions.
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 4

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF
CALCULATING PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS
In this section, we further detail the technicalities of compiling operational data and calculating
the performance indicators (which were further detailed in the Practical Guide and Tool). The
accompanying Excel file includes simple forms to collect relevant data and to calculate the
indicators. The forms are populated with a simple numerical example for illustration purposes.

A typical container terminal can be depicted as a stock and flow system with two flows: one
through the berth and the other through the gate moving boxes into or out of a common stock,
or a storage yard. In accordance with this depiction, we first discuss the two flows, or the berth
and gate operations and their respective indicators, and then the stock and the container yard
operations and respective indicators.

Table 1 presents the main data items related to CHP terminal operations to be collected,
compiled and submitted to APN, along with the related performance indicators (PIs) calculated
based on these items.

Table 1. Data Items and Performance Indicators

No. Data Item/Indicator Description Unit of Measure

1 Port Time Buoy-In to Buoy Out Hours

2 Berth Gross Time First Line to Last Line Hours
3 Berth Work Time First Box to Last Box Hours
4 Crane Work Time by Crane Type First Box to Last Box Hours
5 Call Size Number of Moves Moves
6 Crane Net Productivity by Crane Type Moves/Work Time Moves/Hour
7 Berth Net Productivity Moves/Work Time Moves/Hour
8 Berth Gross Productivity Work Time/Berth Time Moves/Hour
9 Berth Utilization Total Berth Gross Percent
Time/Available Time
10 Truck Turn Time by Transaction Type Wait + Terminal Time Minutes
11 Yard Utilization by Box Type Occupied/Capacity Slots Percent
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 5

12 Dwell Time by Box Type Time Unload to Pickup Days

The first eight data items and the following three performance indicators based on them refer to
each ship call. The other items refer to daily reports. The set of data items and indicators
included in the table above are well beyond those specified in the draft container terminal
concession contract, which only included monthly averages of Crane Productivity and Truck
Turn-Around Time. Our suggestion for an expanded monitoring system is in line with our view
of the future APN acting as an “involved landlord”. Accordingly, we consider the indicators
listed here as an effective tool, assisting APN in fulfilling its three roles of regulation,
administration and planning. The two PIs in the contract are only monthly averages—which
provide limited insight, if any, into CHP operations. We follow below with examples of each of
Table 1’s indicators.

BERTH PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Crane and Vessel Operation Report

The Berth Net Productivity PI is equal to the Crane Net Productivity indicator in situations like
that expected at CHP where ships are only working with a single MHC. However, it could well
be that in the future additional MHCs and/or ships’ cranes will be deployed for ship handling. In
this case, the Crane Net Productivity indicator will have to be separated from Berth Net
Productivity indicator. Separate data on Crane Net Productivity indicators would also have to
be collected according to the different types of cranes serving ships at CHP (for example,
separately for MHC, ship’s gears, and gantry cranes if applicable). Hence, for illustration and
training purposes, we present below two separate reports, a Crane Operation Report and a
Vessel Operating Report, even though under present conditions they would be one in the same
at CHP.

Typically the Crane Operation Report is part of the Vessel Operating Report. For clarity, the
two reports are presented using a simple format and a simple case of ship handling as a
numerical example. Figure 1 shows a typical Vessel Operation Report form, taken from a major
regional terminal. The sample form includes all the data items and performance indicators
included in Table 1. For simplicity, we decided to present here a more rudimentary version of
the Vessel Operation Report along with a preliminary form of a Crane Operation Report
(Figure 2).

Figure 2’s Crane Operation Report describes the operation of a single crane. Operation times
included in this report and in the Vessel Operation Report usually are provided by the terminal
operator. These times are taken from a log-book of the checker (tallyman, clerk) stationed on
the dock nearby the crane. In most modern terminals checkers use hand-held tablet computers
for reporting, whereby to each event the computer automatically attach clock time.

Note that Figure 2 is a simple form for collecting and analyzing operational data of the activities
of a single crane (or gang) during one shift. The form is incorporated as one column in the
Vessel Operation Report. The basis for the report is a time-log, describing the main events
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 6

during the handling process of a vessel by a single crane, including their clock (continuous) times
and performance, mainly the number of moves or other activities (or idling). The clock times are
recorded at the end of each event which often includes a group of related activities such as
discharging the 25 boxes stowed in Bay 1. For simplicity, the selected example only includes 10
events, depicting the handling of 100 moves (boxes), located in 2 bays. Section II. Crane Time
Log & Activity of the Vessel Operation Report includes the times, activities and events during
the ship-handling process of each crane. The clock time and number of moves are presented in
black and the calculated data and indicators in red; explanations of the indicators calculations are
in blue.

Figure 1. Vessel Operations Report

I. General
Ship Name Hope
Crane Number MHC 1, Ship
Date 17-Jul-17
Shift Day

II. Ship's Time Log

Description Clock Elapsed
Arrival at Buoy 5:00
1 Wait for Pilot 5:30 30
2 First Line 6:00 30
3 First Box 7:30 90
4 Last Box 15:00 450
5 Last Line 15:45 45
6 Departure Buoy 16:00 15
Minute 660
Total
Hour 11.00

III. Crane Activity

Crane Number
Description Total
MHC 1 Ship 1
Crane Net-WorkTime 6.25 5.00 11.25
Unavoidable Delays 0.75 1.00 1.75
Crane Time 7.00 6.00 13.00
Avoidable Delays 1.00 2.00 3.00
Crane Gross Time 8.00 8.00 16.00
Total Moves 100 90 190
Crane Net-Work Productivity 16.00 18.00 16.89
Crane Net Productivity 14.29 15.00 14.62
Crane Gross Productivity 12.50 11.25 11.88

III. Analysis
Time Breakdown:
Berth Work Time 7.50 = 15:00 - 7:30
Berth Occupied Time 8.25 = 15:45 - 7:30
Port Time 11.00 = 16:00 - 5:00
Port Access Time 2.75 = 11.00 - 8.25

Performance Indicators:
Berth Net Productivity 25.33 = 190 / 7.50
Berth Gross Productivity 23.03 = 190 / 8.25
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 7

Figure 2. Crane Operations Report

I. General
Ship Name Hope
Crane Number MHC 1
Date 17-Jul-17
Shift Day

II. Crane Time Log & Activity

Time (min.) Import Export Total
Prod.
Description Work Delays 20 40 20 40 Moves
Clock Elapsed
Net Unavoidable Avoidable Moves Moves Moves Moves Moves Moves/Hr
Gang Onboard 7:00
1 Wait for Crane 7:30 30 30
2 Open Hatch 1 7:40 10 10
3 Unload - Bay1 9:00 80 80 15 10 25 18.75
4 Close Hatch 1 9:10 10 10
5 Move Crane 9:20 10 10
6 Unload - Bay 2 11:45 145 145 25 20 45 18.62
7 Crane Breakdown 12:15 30 30
8 Load - Bay 2 14:00 105 105 8 10 18 10.29
9 Move Crane 14:15 15 15
10 Load - Bay 1 15:00 45 45 12 12 16.00
Minute 480 375 45 60 40 30 20 10 100 ---
Total
Hour 8.00 6.25 0.75 1.00

III. Analysis
Time Breakdown: Performance Indicators:
Crane Net-WorkTime 6.25 Crane Net-Work Productivity 16.00 = 100 / 6.25
Unavoidable Delays 0.75 Crane Net Productivity 14.29 = 100 / 7.00
Crane Time 7.00 Crane Gross Productivity 12.50 = 100 / 7.75
Avoidable Delays 1.00 Crane Time / Shift Time 88% =7.00 / 8.00
Shift Time 8.00
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 8

As seen in the simple example included in Figure 2, the crane productivity varies during the
handling process according to type of activity. Usually, unloading (discharge) is faster than
loading and handling deck boxes is faster than handling hatch boxes. Section III. Analysis, Time
Breakdown of the figure includes a summary of the elapsed times grouped according to 3 types
of activities:

• Working – Box handling;

• Unavoidable Delays -- Open & close hatch-covers, move crane to/away from vessel and
alongside dock, changing spreaders, bad weather, etc.; and

• Avoidable Delays -- Late arrival of labor, breakdown of equipment, waiting for orders,
waiting for boxes, etc.

Figure 2’s Section III. Analysis, Performance Indicators includes a calculation of four indicators,
based on data already compiled in other sections of the report. The indicators include three
levels of crane productivities along with an indicator related to crane’s time utilization. The
Crane Net-Work Productivity and Crane Time / Shift Time are not included in the list of
indicators recommended included in Table 1. Nevertheless, we suggest to collect and compile
these indicators because of the important insight they convey. 1

Figure 1’s Vessel Operations Report illustrates a simplified version of this common form used
for collecting and analyzing operational data of all cranes involved in the handling process of a
vessel, during the entire time of stay at CHP. Ships times (e.g., buoy arrival time) are sourced
from external parties (e.g., Port Captain or ship agent). It is suggested that the future CHP’s
operator will also be required to obtain these data items and input them to the Vessel
Operations Report. Another, more advanced option, is that these data items will be directly
fed into the TOS by the Port Captain via electronic data interchange.

Figure 1’s Section II. Ship’s Time Log includes the clock and elapsed times of the main events
during the ship stay at the port. Section III. Crane Activity is similar to the same section in the
Crane Operation Report, with the activities of each crane described in a summary format using
a single column. For simplicity, the specific example included in Error! Reference source not
found. assumes that the ship stays only one shift, during which it is served by two cranes, a
MHC and a shipboard crane. Section III. Analysis includes a summary of the main times and
calculation of indicators for the entire ship, based on the two cranes that served it, the Gross
and Net Berth Productivity. As shown in the Figure, the time-related calculations are in red and
explanations for the Time Breakdown and indicators section are in blue.

As seen in the Figure 1 example, the total time that the ship spends in CHP, from arriving at the
entrance buoy until departing, defined as Port Time, extended 11.00 hours, of which the time
the ship was tied to the berth, defined as Berth Occupied Time (First line to Last Line), is 8.25

1 For example, the Crane Net-Work Productivity is most comparable regarding crane-operator proficiency, since it
excludes delays over which the crane operator has no control.
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 9

hours and the time during which the cranes were involved in ship handling, defined as Berth
Work Time (First Box to Last Box) was 7.50 hours. Of special interest is the Port Access Time,
defined as ship’s time spent on maneuvering and, mostly, ship’s waiting for berth, pilot, tug and
other avoidable delays which, in our case, is 2.75 hours. The call size or the number of boxes
handled by the 2 cranes is 190; crane MHC 1 handles 100 moves and the ship-crane 90 moves. It
should be noted that the operational unit is a move (box, container) and not TEU and that the
reporting does not differentiate between various types of boxes (full, empty, dry, etc.).

Periodic Summaries
The operational data per ship will be aggregated into a monthly report, including data on Berth
Net and Gross Productivities, Berth Work Time, Berth Gross Time and Port Time. The
monthly report is a simple list, with each ship’s data appears in one row. The form will provide
for calculating the monthly averages, including that of Net Berth Productivity, the equivalent to
the crane productivity indicator required by the Contract. The summary monthly report could
be provided by using a common spreadsheet program, identifying high and low performances for
the month and overall. The program will allow, using regression, to quantify the relations
between productivity and ship size, call size, shipping line, etc. The analysis also could flag
outliers according to pre-determined criteria, drawing the attention of the terminal operator
and APN and provide for the generation of graphical dashboard.

Another indicator that should be calculated on a monthly basis is:

Berth Utilization (%) = Total Berth Gross Time / Available Time

Where

Available Time = Calendar Time – Holidays – Bad Weather

Berth utilization is an important determinant of both ship’s waiting for berth and the overall
capacity utilization of the terminal and should be closely monitored by APN as part of both its
regulatory and planning role.

GATE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Figure 3 shows a simple form for daily collection and analysis of data on gate activities. The
activities are arranged according to trucks arrival time and include a time-log of all gate
transactions and activities in which the truck (or driver) is involved during its stay at the
terminal. The proposed report provides for allocating elapsed times according to 8 types of
transactions, pre-gate waiting and no transaction, defined as Problem. The 8 transactions
include:

• 4 single transactions:
o Full-In,
o Full-Out,
o Empty-In, and
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 10

o Empty-Out; and
• 4 double transactions:
o Full-In+Full Out,
o Full-In+Empty Out,
o Empty In+ Full Out, and
o Empty-In+Empty-Out.

The last transaction, involving empty boxes moving in opposite directions, relates to either
different types of boxes or boxes belonging to different shipping lines. Since a typical 40-ft
chassis can carry either one 40-ft or two 20-ft boxes the gate transactions can also be
differentiated by the number of boxes. E.g., the Full-In could relate to a single 40-ft or two 20-ft,
with the second one includes an additional gate inspection and yard lift, resulting in a longer turn
time. The clock time (log) recording for each transaction relates to 3 times:

Arrival Time = The time that the truck driver presents his documents at the pre-gate office
after parking his truck at the parking lot outside the gate;

Gate-In Time = The time that the actual transaction at the gate begins, with the truck on its
way into the terminal; and

Gate-Out Time = The time that the actual transaction at the gate ends, with the truck on its
way out of the terminal.

Figure 3. Gate Operations Report

Gate Operations Daily Report
Date 3-Jul-17 Open 7:00
Gate Open 7:00:00 AM Close 19:30
Gate Close 7:00:00 PM
Clock Times Elapse Times (Min) Boxes Transactions Time (Min)
Full In Empty
Truck Number Full In Empty
In - Out - Full + Empty Empty In +
Arrive In Out Full In + Full In +
Arrive In Full- Full- Mty- Mty- Out Empty In Out Empty
Out Full Out
In Out In Out Out Out
1 12345ABC 7:00:00 AM 7:10:00 AM 8:00:00 AM 10 50 1 50
2 9:03:00 AM 9:05:00 AM 10:00:00 AM 2 55 1 55
3 11:00:00 AM 11:30:00 AM 12:00:00 PM 30 30 1 30
4 11:09:00 AM 11:30:00 AM 1:15:00 PM 21 105 2 2 105
5 12:00:00 PM 2:40:00 PM 5:00:00 PM 160 140 1 1 140
6 2:00:00 PM 2:40:00 PM 3:00:00 PM 40 20 1 20
7 3:00:00 PM 3:00:00 PM 5:59:00 PM 0 179 1 1 179
8 4:00:00 PM 4:30:00 PM 5:00:00 PM 30 30 1 30
9 5:00:00 PM 6:30:00 PM 7:00:00 PM 90 30 1 30
10 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
11
12
Number of Transactions 9 9 2 4 3 3 1 2 0 1 1 2 2 0
Total Time 383 639 3 4 3 4 50 75 0 105 30 319 60 0
Average Time 43 71 50 38 - 105 30 160 30 -

The daily gate report will be aggregated on a monthly basis and monthly average times per
transaction calculated, along with an overall average for all transactions as required by the
Contract. Since, as noted in Report I, most of the gate information is collected as required by
the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) convention, the preparation of this report
should not add much work to the terminal operator. The Gate Operation Report can be
automatically generated by the computerized TOS.
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 11

The Contract only requires the calculation of a single performance indicator related to a
monthly, all-average, truck turn time. We suggest to expand the Contract requirement to
include a breakdown by transaction type and the pre-gate waiting time. Since CHP does not
have pre-gate parking, it is suggested that the driver will walk to the gate to record their arrival
times. Alternatively, though less reliably, this information could be compiled through dispatchers
of truck companies.

Accordingly, our suggested PIs include:

Truck Turn Time (minutes) – The average time per truck per transaction type since starting
the gate-in process until completing the gate-out one; and

Truck Waiting (Pre-Gate) Time (minutes) – The average time per truck since arriving at the
gate-in until starting the gate-in process.

We also suggest to provide statistics about the failed transaction (“problems” or “trouble
cases”), including incidence (% of completed transaction) and description of the reasons
(problems with Delivery Orders, Customs Release, etc.).

In addition to averages, a more in-depth analysis should include a time distribution of the various
transactions, focusing on flagging out outliers. The distribution of gate transactions should also
be by the hour of the day, days of the week, etc., in order to identify peak or idle periods.

CHP has only one gate, serving both full and empty containers with no differentiation between
lanes. Larger terminals may have separate lanes for full and empty or even a special gate for
empty trucks. This arrangement allows for trucks leaving the terminal with no containers (e.g.,
after dropping off a full or empty box) to avoid waiting in line in the general gate.

YARD PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

The yard performance indicators are more relevant to the administrative and planning roles of
APN and less for its regulatory role. Still, the yard performance affects that of both the berth
and gate, including their respective PIs in the Contract. Therefore, although no data on yard
performance is required by the Contract, we suggest including such requirement, along with
calculations of related indicators. The yard data and indicators relate to the number of boxes
stored inside the terminal (“inventory”), the utilization of storage capacity and, separately, the
dwell times of these boxes.

Figure 4 shows a simple form for the daily collection and analysis of yard inventory and the
calculation of performance indicators related to storage capacity utilization. The daily inventory
report includes the number of boxes stored in the terminal at a certain time (usually at the end
of the previous day), categorized by box type (dry/reefer, full/empty). Sometimes the full
(loaded) boxes are further categorized by direction (import/export). 2 As noted several times in
our discussion thus far, the suggested form included in the figure below is for illustration

2 A similar, but more detailed inventory report, is provided by the terminal operator to each of the shipping lines
regarding their own boxes.
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 12

purposes. In reality there is no need for such a manual report or even any hardcopy report,
since the computerized TOS usually provides the data “live”. The suggested form in Figure 4 is
monthly, with each row describing a day. All the figures in this report are in TEUs. The report
includes three sections for compiling traffic data: Inventory, Berth and Gate. Positive numbers
represent in-flows or traffic which increases the inventory and vice-versa. The Inventory column
relates to the number of boxes (in TEUs) stored inside the yard at the beginning of the day,
which is equal to that at the beginning of the previous day with the daily traffic through the
berth and the gate added or subtracted. The Space Utilization section includes the storage
capacity of the yard for each type of box and the utilization is calculated by simply dividing the
respective inventories by their storage capacity.

Figure 4. Yard Performance Summary Report

y p y
Utilization
Inventory Berth Gate
Date Capacity 200 30 500
Dry Reefer Total Dry Reefer Empty Dry Reefer Empty Dry Reefer Empty Dry Reefer Empty
Starting 200 30 322 100 22 200 5 -1 10 10 7 -10 50.0% 73.3% 40.0%
2/1/2017 200 30 350 120 30 150 10 5 -20 5 -6 10 60.0% 100.0% 30.0%
2/2/2017 200 30 304 135 29 140 -4 2 4 -25 -5 5 67.5% 96.7% 28.0%
2/3/2017 200 30 281 106 26 149 1 -10 53.0% 86.7% 29.8%
2/4/2017 200 30 272 97 26 149 5 8 48.5% 86.7% 29.8%
2/5/2017 200 30 285 110 26 149 -8 2 55.0% 86.7% 29.8%
2/6/2017 200 30 279 104 26 149 9 6 52.0% 86.7% 29.8%
2/7/2017 200 30 294 119 26 149 6 9 59.5% 86.7% 29.8%
2/8/2017 200 30 309 134 26 149 4 7 67.0% 86.7% 29.8%
….
2/28/2017 200 30
Average 327 127.5 29.5 145 3 3.5 -8 -10 -5.5 7.5 63.8% 98.3% 29.0%

Note: Dry and Reefer only include full boxes

The proposed performance indicator for the container yard performance relates to its monthly
average inventory and slot-capacity utilization or per each type of box:

Inventory (TEUs) = Average number of TEU in the yard

Yard Utilization (%) = Average number of Occupied TEU-slot / Total TEU-slot

In addition to calculating monthly averages a statistical analysis should identify peak situations,
whereby utilization approaches 100%, signaling a shortage of space and congestion. The
utilization of the dry containers is usually of most interest since high utilization, commonly
considered that exceeding 60 – 70% (pending on yard equipment), results in box shuffling and
respective additional costs for box moving and truck waiting. Sometimes, the shuffling may delay
vessel loading, especially while looking for export boxes.

A second performance indicator related to the yard operation is the average dwell time for
boxes. This indicator is directly related to the indicator that measures inventory, since a longer
dwell time increases the inventory. Analysis of long dwell times is especially revealing in the
case of import boxes, including investigation of the underlying reasons and, perhaps, the need to
take actions (removal to outside storage, condemnation, etc.).

Average Dwell Time (days) = by type (reefer/dry) and direction (import/ export)
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 13

Unlike the data on yard inventory, data on dwell time (“aging”) is difficult to compile manually.
It requires a comprehensive database in which every container is registered along with a
compilation of a succession of relevant events and times (e.g., for full imports: discharged from
vessel, departed through the gate, brought back empty, etc.). However, most digitized TOSs
generate aging reports, including flagging out outliers according to pre-determined criteria. It
should be noted that dwell time is also important because of the storage fees related to it as
discussed in the next session.
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 14

PROCEDURES FOR FULFILLING

REGULATORY FUNCTIONS:
MONITORING, ENFORCEMENT
AND TAKING CORRECTIVE
ACTIONS
The objective of the performance operating system and respective performance indicators is to
support APN in its regulatory, administrative and planning roles. Outside of the two indicators
in the draft contract, our additional proposed indicators are not enforceable and no sanctions
are stipulated for not reaching their target values. The indicators proposed in our report are
essentially a management tool that should assist APN, the terminal operator(s), port users,
Customs and the entire port community in improving the performance of the port system.
Accordingly, we suggest that APN will publish a monthly performance report with the indicator
results compared to their target value for the community to review. This report is likely to
attract much attention especially in such cases where results are unsatisfactory, in which case
we suggest APN should lead a corrective effort, being the most senior participant in the port
system.

It should be noted that the underlying causes for unsatisfactory results may not necessarily be
attributed to the terminal operator. For example, unduly long port time of vessels could be the
result of unavailability of pilotage and tug services during nights, failure of ship agents to
communicate with APN or the terminal operator, delays in vessel clearance by Customs and
Immigration, etc. Likewise, low berth productivity could be the result of interruption of the
container activities by commercial activities. The envisioned role of APN is to identify and
investigate these problems and initiate a collective effort to remedy them.

DATA COLLECTION FORMS, PI CALCULATION AND

DASHBOARD
It was previously indicated that almost all container terminals, including the future CHP terminal,
employ computerized TOSs. Accordingly, the basic operations reports discussed in the previous
chapter: Crane Operations Report, Vessel Operations Report, Gate Operations Report and
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 15

Yard Operations Report are automatically produced by TOS and can automatically accessed by
the regulatory authority. The TOS, however, does not usually records operational events taking
place outside the terminals, such as vessel arrival time, pilot-on-board, pre-gate waiting, etc.
Some of these events are usually recorded by the maritime authority, or its local representative,
the Port (Harbor) Captain, but others (e.g., trucks arrival time at the gate), are still not
reported. It also should be noted that in the case of CHP, the container berth remains under
the control of APN and is not part of the container terminal concession.

Altogether, while TOS is an important source of operational data, TOS usually also does not
compile, summarize and calculate the full list of PIs in Table 1above required for performance
monitoring and regulatory control. The following sections present and discuss three reports,
summarizing the operations of the three main components of the container terminals: berth,
gate and yard and are used for calculating the respective PIs. Each report is discussed in a
separate section, including defining input data items, identifying sources for obtaining them,
explaining the formula used in calculation of PIs and comparing calculated (actual) values to
contract values (standards). A summary Dashboard Report includes an assembly of graphics
illustrating the main PIs.

Berth Performance Monthly Report

Figure 5 presents an example of a proposed form to compile monthly berth operations data,
calculates respective PIs and compare the results to contract values. Each line in the Berth
Performance Report refers to the performance during one vessel call with the information taken
from Vessel Operations Report presented in Figure 1 above.

For illustration, Figure 5 includes hypothetical data for CHP during July 2017, summarizing the
operations of 10 vessels. As seen in this figure, during July 2017 CHP had two liner services,
each having a fixed-day-of-the-week schedule. The service with the larger call size, to which the
vessel named Hope presented in Figure 1 belongs, was handled by two cranes: a Mobile Harbor
Crane (MHC) and Ship’s Crane (gear). The other service was only handled by a MHC. The
monthly summary is included at the bottom of Figure 5, which also includes the comparison to
the contract standards. Accordingly, in the hypothetical example here, the Gross Berth
Productivity, the most important productivity indicator exceeds the standard by 0.69
moves/hour, while Net Berth Productivity is equal to the standard and Gross Crane Productivity
1.90 moves/hour below the standard. The example of the monthly report in Figure 5 does not
differentiate between the two cranes; such differentiation can be added if deemed important.
There also is the possibility of compiling two separate, per-service monthly reports.

Figure 5 also includes, in the lower section, a table for calculating the monthly berth utilization.
With only two services, each staying about 10 hours at berth, the utilization is quite low at
13.4%.
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 16

Figure 5. Berth Performance Monthly Report

Berth Performance Monthly Report
Times (Hours) Productivities (Moves/Hour)
Arrival Call Size
Vessel Name
Date (Moves) Port Time Berth Gross Berth Net Crane Gross Berth Gross Berth Net Crane Gross
a b c d e c/a d/a e /a
1 --- 7/1/2017 92 10.00 8.50 7.00 7.00 10.82 13.14 13.14
2 --- 7/3/2017 165 10.50 9.75 8.86 20.41 16.92 18.62 8.08
3 --- 7/8/2017 85 8.95 7.61 6.26 5.50 11.18 13.57 15.45
4 --- 7/10/2017 150 9.17 6.88 6.50 22.41 21.82 23.08 6.69
5 --- 7/15/2017 88 9.78 8.31 6.84 5.80 10.59 12.86 15.17
6 Hope 7/17/2017 190 11.00 8.25 7.80 17.27 23.03 24.36 11.00
7 --- 7/22/2017 95 10.67 9.07 7.47 7.30 10.47 12.71 13.01
8 --- 7/24/2017 162 9.05 6.78 6.17 17.91 23.88 26.27 9.05
9 --- 7/29/2017 101 10.86 9.23 7.60 7.10 10.94 13.29 14.23
10 --- 7/31/2017 178 9.56 8.87 8.07 18.63 20.06 22.07 9.56
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Total / Average 1,306 99.53 83.25 72.58 129.33 15.69 17.99 10.10
Contract Value 15.00 18.00 12.00
Calender Hours 744.00 = 31 x 24 Difference 0.69 (0.01) (1.90)
Berth Gross Hours 99.53
Berth Utilization 13.4% = 99.53 / 744.00

A Berth Performance chart is included in the monthly Dashboard Summary, providing graphic
representation of the numerical results. The chart is automatically generated if the attached
Excel model is used for compiling and calculating PIs. The chart intends to facilitate the
identification of exceptions, such as vessels with low productivities, large differences between
product ivies, large differences between port time and gross berth time, etc. To analyze these
cases, the regulator should have the option to link to the TOS and retrieve the specific Vessel
Operations Report.

Gate Performance Monthly Report

Figure 6 presents an example of a proposed form to compile monthly gate operations data,
calculates respective PIs and compare results to contract values. Unlike the previous Berth
Monthly Performance Report in which each line refers to a vessel call, the Gate Monthly
Performance Report refers to each day of the month in which the gate was open. Accordingly,
each line in the report is the bottom (summary) line of the Gate Daily Report. For example, the
bottom lines (Average Time) of the Gate Daily Report (Figure 3). The performance data in both
the daily and monthly report refers to the truck turnaround time recorded at the terminal gate
for 8 separate types of transactions. In addition the report includes statistics on the pre-gate
waiting time. The bottom line compares the actual results (recorded turnaround times) to the
contract standards, calculate the difference in minutes and as percentage of the standards. As
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 17

seen from the hypothetical data included in Figure 6, in all but the Empty In + Empty Out, the
actual times were shorter than the contract standard.

Figure 6. Gate Performance Monthly Report

Gate Performance Monthly Report
Total Full In + Full Full In + Empty Empty In + Full Empty In +
Wait Full In Full Out Empty In Empty Out
Date Trucks Out Out Out Empty Out
Num Min Num Min Num Min Num Min Num Min Num Min Num Min Num Min Num Min
1 7/1/2017 2 20 3 50
2 7/3/2017 9 43 1 50 2 75 0 0 1 105 1 30 2 125 2 60 0 0
3 7/4/2017 20 50 2 55 5 70 2 92 3 85 5 27 3 140 5 56 1 25
4 7/5/2017
5 7/6/2017
6 7/7/2017
7 7/8/2017
8 7/10/2017
9 ---

30
31
Total 29 3 7 2 4 6 5 7 1
Average 15 47 53 71 92 90 34 134 79 25
Contract 20 35 45 60 45 20 60 20 30
Differ. 27 18 26 32 45 14 74 59 (5)

A Gate Performance chart included in the monthly Dashboard Summary depicts the monthly
averages of the turnaround times for each transaction along with its respective contract time.
As seen in this chart, in the case of Empty In + Empty Outs, the blue bar depicting actual
turnaround time is shorter than the orange bar depicting contract standard.

Yard Inventory Monthly Report

Figure 4, discussed previously, includes the monthly summary data and related discussion. A
related Yard Inventory chart is included in the Dashboard, depicting the storage capacity
utilization rates for full containers, dry and reefer, and for empty containers.

Figure 7. Yard Dwell Time Report

Yard Dwell Time Report

Dwell Days
Container Type Total
1-3 4-7 8 - 15 16 - 30 31+
Import Dry 32 45 11 9 5 102
Export Dry 9 3 12
Import Reefer 6 2 8
Export Reefer 1 1

The other PI related to yard inventory is dwell time. The data, as previously discussed, is
compiled by TOS. Figure 7 presents a typical dwell time distribution report, sometimes dubbed
“aging report”. Commonly, the report is produced once a month. The hypothetical data on
dwell time provided at Figure 7, typical of most container terminals, indicates that:
 USER MANUAL- PORT PERFORMANCE MONITORING | 18

• The dwell time of import boxes is higher than export ones, since export boxes are
usually brought in close to vessel’s arrival time (but not after the cut-off time, usually 24
hours prior to arrival);
• The dwell time of reefer boxes is short, especially for produce with short shelf life; and
• Most boxes are concentrated in the first category of dwell time, 1 – 3 days, which
usually is the free (storage) time category.

Monthly Dashboard
Figure 8 presents the monthly dashboard, a series of charts and tables providing a monthly
summary of the performance of the main components of the container terminals: berth, gate
and yard. The two tables included under the berth and gate performance charts are intended to
facilitate contractual compliance, providing a comparison between the actual performance
(monthly averages) and standard values specified in the concession contract. Incompliance is
emphasized with red lettering through conditional formatting.

Figure 8. Terminal Monthly Dashboard

Terminal Monthly Dashboard

Berth Performance (Moves/Hour) Gate Performance Monthly Report (Min/Truck)

26 130
24 120
22 110
20 100
18 90
16 80
14 70
12 60
50
10
40
8
30
6 20
4 10
2 -
- Wait Full In Full Out Full In + Full In + Empty In Empty In Empty Empty In
--- --- --- --- --- Hope --- --- --- --- Full Out Empty + Full Out Out + Empty
Out Out
Berth Gross Berth Net Crane Gross Contract Actual

Full In + Full In + Empty In Empty In

Wait Full In Full Out Empty In Empty Out
Productivities (Moves/Hour) Full Out Empty Out + Full Out + Empty
Berth Gross Berth Net Crane Gross Average 47 53 71 92 90 34 134 79 25
Average 15.69 17.99 10.10 Contract 20 35 45 60 45 20 60 20 30
Contract 15.00 18.00 12.00 Differ. 27 18 26 32 45 14 74 59 (5)
Differ 0.69 (0.01) (1.90)

Yard Inventory Monthly Report (Num of Dwell Time Distribution (Storage Days)
Boxes/Capacity) 50
120% 45
40
100% 35
80% 30
25
60% 20
40% 15
10
20% 5
0% 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1-3 4-7 8 - 15 16 - 30 31+

Dry Reefer Empty Import Dry Export Dry Import Reefer Export Reefer