Technologies Supporting Improvements in Container Terminal SafetyA Global Operators Perspective

NMSA Annual MeetingJune 27th 2013

Ross ClarkeHead of Design & Innovation

• Introduction to APM Terminals

• Approach to Terminal & Process Design

• Experiences with Personnel Proximity

Warning Systems

• Load Collision Prevention for RTG’s and

STS Cranes

• Remote STS crane operations

2

APM Terminals is one of four primary business units of the A.P. Moller–Maersk Group

A.P. Moller-Maersk Group Copenhagen, Denmark

• 2012 Revenue: $59b USD(Shipping, Energy, Ports)

• 117,000 employees in over 130 countries.

APM Terminals The Hague, Netherlands

• 2012 Revenue: $4.8b USD

• 2012 container volume: 35.4m TEUs (Container Volumes weighted by equity share)

• 25,000 employees, 68 countries

3

The Hague, Netherlands

History: 55 years of innovation, growth and progress

APM Terminals named winner of Lloyd’s List Global Safety Award

First dedicated A.P. Moller terminal facility opens, in the Port of New York.1958

Containerization begins to change patterns of global trade and growth; the company opens its first dedicated container terminal at Berth 51, Port Newark, NJ USA.

1970s

Ongoing evolution of containerization and economic efficiencies of international trading patterns lead to the rapid establishment of global port load centers and transhipment networks, requiring highly coordinated and specialized container terminal operations and equipment as vessels grow in size and capacity.

1980s

Maersk Line acquisition of US-based Sea-Land Services enlarges scope of terminal operations globally.1999

APM Terminals is established as a separate container terminal operating company within Maersk Line.

2001

APM Terminals becomes an independent corporate entity, with HQ in The Hague, Netherlands.2004

Revenue of $2.5 billion, $111 million profit; APM Terminals reports earnings separately.2007

Only true Global Terminal Network in port industry; Focus on emerging market investment.2008

Named "Port Operator of the Year" by Lloyd's List.; Revenue of $3 billion 2009

Named “Port Operator of the Year” by Containerisation International Magazine.2006

Inland services unit transferred to the APM Terminals; combined revenue of $4.2 billion2010

2011

APM Terminals: The world’s only geographically balanced Global Terminal Network

Port and container terminal development, management and

operation, and associated inland services capabilities.

5

68 inland services

companies in:

171 locations 48 countries

62 operating ports and terminals:

40 countries7 new projects;15 expansion and upgrade programs

Customer base:

60shipping lines

and leading importers

and exporters

Global market share of container throughput:

5.7%in 2012

Annual container throughput:

35.4m TEUs (by equity-weighted volume)

25,000 employees in:

68 countries

5 continents2012 Revenues of $4.8b USD

Lost-Time InjuryFrequency Rate:

37%To 2.42 per million man hours worked for 2012 from 2011 (including inland services)

MAGNUM advanced management training:

Participation70% of the 2012 MAGNUM class came from operations in emerging market countries.

Reported injuries:

484 Continued decline for combined marine and inland services

Global Transformation Project:

8%Increase in crane lifts per hour across the portfolio in 2012.

Workforce diversity

72% of employees find APM Terminals’ leadership to be genuinely committed to attracting, training and retaining a diverse workforce.

CO2 output per TEU:

4%25% reduction from base year 2010 is the goal for 2020

Protecting our people and the environment: Safety and sustainability progress and goals in 2012

APM Terminals was named winner of the 2012

Signal Mutual Gerald H. Halpin Safety Excellence Award

6

Our port facilities: A balanced global network serving all major markets

Current Projects

8

Monrovia

Projects under implementation

Salalah

MV2

Aqaba

Santos

Vado

Callao

Moin

Poti

Pipavav

Apapa

New Terminal Project

Terminal Expansion/Upgrade

Gothenburg

Lazaro CardenasTanjung Pelepas

Algeciras

Ningbo

Itajai

Buenos Aires

Pointe-Noire

Luanda

QingdaoIzmir

Our Priorities

Safety

Productivity

Cost

Competitiveness

Innovation

9

Automated Handling Reduces Man / Machine Interaction Risk

10

Personnel exposure to risk of accident

with heavy machines greatly reduced.

ASC operations greatly reduce traffic

collision risks.

Trucker safety during receival and

delivery greatly ops improved.

But, new risks need to be identified and

addressed such as; access to reefer racks,

procedures for working near ASC rails, and

for servicing broken down AGV’s.

Personnel Proximity Detection & Warning

Objective : To provide a means of alerting mobile equipment

operators to the presence of people who are in close proximity to

the machine, thus improve the safety of personnel working in the

vicinity of mobile equipment.

• Method of alerting vehicle/machine operators to other vehicles

and personnel in their vicinity

• Provides an additional layer of protection, but cannot be a

substitute for good training and S.O.P’s.

11

Driver Training

SOP

Personnel Detection

x%

y%

z%

Total %

Risk

Reduction

MineSite – Magnetic Field Technology

12

Around corner detection ability

typically:

•At 60m –Detects 20m around

corner.

•At 30m –detects 40m around

corner.

Callao, Peru

13

Largest port on West Coast of South

America.

APM Terminals began operations

July 2011.

A multi-purpose terminal handling

both containerized cargo and general

cargo such as metals, grains,

fertilizers and chemicals, coal,

vegetable and fish oils and

machinery.

Extensive modernization plans will

transform APM Terminals Callao into

a benchmark for South American port

operations. The first two phases of

construction are expected to be

completed by 2015.

ZoneSafe – RFID TechnologyImplemented at APM Terminals Callao

14

• Installed on 22 reach stackers in February

2013.

• Needs to be modified so that system is

disabled when machine is stationary, to

eliminate pointless alarms.

• Modifying system so that detection is only in

direction of travel being considered.

• Technical operation is very satisfactory.

Detection ranges are accurate and

consistent.

• Range of forward facing detection needs to

be reduced slightly to ensure truck drivers in

cab do not trigger an alarm.

• Approx 1,000 tags will be issued to local

trucking companies, who make up approx

90% of all truck visits.

• 1,000 truck drivers have received 15 minute

training about the system.

• Tags will be required pass through gates to

gain access to operational areas. Also serves

as a tag test opportunity.

ZoneSafe and AME Detection Zones can be Tuned

15

Detection range and shape of field can be accurately tuned.

An ability to vary detection range according to speed may also be

beneficial.

RFID Tag Based Systems - Considerations

16

• A personnel proximity detection and warning system should only be implemented after all non-essential personnel have first been removed from operational areas.

• Up to date operational SOP’s and risk assessments need to be in place prior to considering implementation of a PDS.

• Rigorous access controls need to be in place to ensure that people in operational areas are wearing RFID tags.

• A process for issue, control and return of tags needs to be

implemented.

• Risk that equipment operators may become reliant on the warning

• System and tags will require regular checking and maintenance to ensure correct operation.

• Alarms need to be infrequent events to avoid complacency. Avonwood and AME record all alarms in a database to enable later analysis.

We Need To Eliminate This…

17

RTG Stack Profiling for Load Collision Prevention

18

Stack profiling uses 3D laser scanners to build up a map of where the containers are on a ship, or in a stack. Because the crane “knows” where the containers are, damage due to accidental impacts, or heavy landings can be virtually eliminated.

Knowing the shape of the container stack enables the “flight path” of the container to be automated and optimized – reducing cycle time.

Now standard on all new RTG’s for APMT. Options for retro-fit to existing machines under investigation

We Need to Eliminate These Types of Accidents…

19

Load Collision Prevention Systems for STS Cranes

20

• Soft landing systems being trialed

at APMT Elizabeth, NY, and

APMT Mobile, AL.

• System operation and operator

feedback are both positive.

• Requirement for load collision

prevention on all new cranes is

under consideration.

• Retro-fitting of load collision

prevention for existing STS cranes

under consideration.

Remotely Operated STS Cranes

21

From this…

To this…

Maasvlakte 2 – Remotely Operated STS Cranes

22

• Remote STS operations provide significantly improved working environment for

operators.

• Operator change overs will be more efficient than with conventional cranes.

• Soft Landing, and load collision prevention systems are an integral part of the

remote operating system.

• MV2 and ABB working with TNO1 to design ergonomically correct operator

stations and work environment.

1. TNO is a Dutch organization with extensive experience in remote

operations of canal locks and bridges in The Netherlands.

Personnel detection – possible future application?

23

A possible further development of personnel proximity warning systems is to

use this technology to provide a warning when are working too close to STS

crane ops.

www.apmterminals.com