The Port of Los Angeles expects its newly automated TraPac mega-container terminal to be operational by late 2015 and hopes productivity will equal or exceed the new, automated Port of Long Beach’s Middle Harbor terminal also scheduled to open in 2015. TraPac is majority owned by Mitsui OSK Lines (MOL) and equipped by Cargotec Corporation (of which container crane supplier Kalmar is a subsidiary). Recently, MOL announced that it formed a strategic alliance with a Canadian venture capital group, Brookfield Asset Management, to expand its container terminal business. MOL said that it will transfer a partial stake in its subsidiary, International Transportation Inc., of which the TraPac project is a part, to a fund operated by the Canadian VC. Port of Los Angeles deputy executive director Michael Christensen told AJOT that he expects the Port’s $510 million TraPac investment will maintain the Port’s leadership and attract new mega-container ships to Los Angeles. Christensen is the number two-ranked executive at the Port. He currently leads the Port’s Development Bureau that includes Engineering, Construction, Environmental Management, and Goods Movement divisions. Skyrocketing Costs The TraPac project has been controversial because construction costs doubled in four years amid charges by Los Angeles City Council members that they were kept in the dark about automation plans. Christensen said some of the cost increase resulted from the project evolving from a conventional terminal project to a project involving automation. He noted the project required substantially more power and voltage than originally planned. Voltage increased from 3 kilovolts to 11 kilovolts resulting in increased costs, he said. Christensen said that the new automation at TraPac has been subject to a number of arbitration challenges by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), which is currently negotiating with the PMA (Pacific Maritime Association) on a new labor agreement. The Union challenges were rejected, and TraPac’s automation program is going ahead. The ILWU has accepted the arbitrator rulings. The numbers, at least for the moment, support the need for TraPac. In April, imported containers for Los Angeles and Long Beach increased by 11% and the two ports’ market share increased compared to other Pacific coast ports in the United States, Canada and Mexico. The combined North American Pacific Coast market share of Los Angeles and Long Beach was 61.4 %, up from 59.6 % in the first quarter of 2013. German Model in Container Handling Christensen told AJOT that the new TraPac container terminal could be more productive than the Middle Harbor terminal at Long Beach. He explained that TraPac was developed on a Port of Hamburg, Germany model. Terminal technology focuses on a single hoist crane to lower containers on six possible lane locations for pickup by Automated Straddle Carriers (ASC’s). Faster crane moves will be coordinated from multiple pickup sites by the ASC’s. Christensen says this contrasts with the dual hoist cranes at the Port of Long Beach, which unload containers onto Automated Guided Vehicles (AGV’s). TraPac believes that simplifying crane moves will improve productivity in contrast to a more complicated crane technology at the Port of Long Beach. In both cases, automated vehicles will move containers from shipside cranes to a series of container stacks. From the stacks, containers move along an automated, conveyor belt-type system that eventually feeds containers onto truck chassis or rail cars. This “grooming process” identifies the container and schedules it for delivery at the front of the stack for transport by truck or by rail. A human operator lowers the container onto the chassis by a remote control system. TraPac will have the capacity to handle two mega container ships with an annual throughput of 2.4 million teus (twenty-foot unit containers) at a cost of $510 million. The Long Beach Middle Harbor terminal will have the capacity to handle three mega container ships with an annual throughput of 3.3 million teus and will cost $1.3 billion, Christensen noted. Extension of berth space to accommodate a third mega-ship at TraPac is a possibility. With more ocean carriers building 18,000 teu vessels and as the demand for imported goods to Europe declines, it is only a matter of time before these big ships will be calling at Los Angeles and Long Beach, Christensen believes. Truck Congestion Christensen does not believe the new terminal will cause a surge of new trucking on the 710 and adjacent freeways, “ We don’t see the surge in trucking because the ‘grooming process’ will regulate the flow of trucks that go out the terminal gate and onto the freeways.” He admits that there are congestion problems at the Port and the ability of truckers to pickup and deliver at an economical rate has been undermined, “The turn time moves for truckers is a bad problem and unfortunately impacts owner operator truckers who are challenged to move cargo expeditiously at a time when there has been a slow down in trucking operations.” The Harbor Trucking Association has raised concerns about the congestion problem at both Los Angeles and Long Beach and says the problem for drivers is getting worse. The Association has discussed creating a fee on all containers to help marine terminal operators hire more personnel so that terminals can operate on a 24-hour basis seven days a week so as to reduce delays. A longer-term solution to reduce congestion generated by the flow of containers might be to transfer the 40 foot ocean containers into larger 53 foot containers and reduce the number of truck moves and cost. Christensen says that 15% of containers leaving the Port are shifted into larger 53 foot truck trailers at nearby off dock locations. To do so inside the port would require a considerable amount of space, time and the employment of unionized ILWU members and would be costly.