Damage Prevention/Railroad & Inspection Project Update History - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Damage Prevention/Railroad & Inspection Project Update

History of Project

Rick Maul - BNSF

Boxcar Shipment Complaints

• Continued compilation of complaints regarding

boxcar shipments aired at annual meetings

• Lack of common defect codes
• Reporting equipment repair needs
• Limited technology available
• Roll placement identity during loading
• Inconsistent inspection processes
• Lack of common claim forms
• Information collection and retention

Committee Formed To Investigate

• Factors that contribute to damage
• Where and when damage is occuring
• Ways to reduce damage
• Line of possession recording method
• Systematic inspection and reporting

processes

• Transport vehicle damage reporting

processes

Results of Investigation

• Industry awareness and desire to improve is

high

• Individual members are trying to institute

corrective measures

• Isolated attempts are being made to improve the

situation

• Actions are consistent but methods vary greatly

– Processes, communication, record retention

• Limited ability to participate

– Resources, budgets

• No broadly coordinated effort

Industry Objectives

• Consider adoptable industry standard processes
• Identify damage as early as possible in the

supply chain process

• Begin to process the damage event within 24

hours of awareness

• Build a lessons learned capability to identify and

reduce the root cause of damage

• Minimize the impact on operational performance

Summary & Recommendations

• Summary

– It is in the best interest of the industry to reduce damage to material – The best way to reduce damage is through a better means of information sharing which leads to improved processes – The needs of the industry can best be served through the establishment of a centralized data repository – Because the industry is so large and involves so many companies any broad solution must be cost effective, easy to implement and have minimal impact

• n operations

Summary & Recommendations

• Recommendations

– Form a sub-committee to work with VoIPcare Technologies to:

• Develop a prototype system
• Identify the appropriate companies to participate in

the prototype test period

• Oversee the test process and confirm the results
• Participate in the delivery of the results following

the test period

• Centralization

– System Processes

• System Management
• Change Management
• Integration

– Data Storage

• Archival Storage
• Unified Access
• Statistical Information
• Accountability

– Transactional Process - Capture all relevant information – Event Recording - Time and date stamping – Site Identification - Where event

• ccurred

– User Identification - Who executed the transaction

Features of a Production System

• Standardization

– Format

• Data collection elements
• Records and reporting

– Language

• Common terms
• User interfaces

– Method

• Repeatable process
• Information access

– Data Security

• Efficiency

– Streamlined Process

• Replacement of manual steps
• Simplified transactions

– Automated Interfaces

• Integration to unique systems
• Fact based interaction
• Information in one place

– Intercompany Collaboration

• Common ground for communication

Project Update

Bob Eckles – VoIPcare Technology

Project Goals

• Prove that automated inspection technology can

be deployed simply with minimal disruption to work flow and at a minimal cost

• Prove that the inspection and reporting process

can be centralized and standardized

• Prove that the use of automated inspection

technology can improve the overall quality of delivery, reduce damage and streamline damage reporting and claims processing

Setting Up the Test

• Established centralized server and

communication connections at the VoIPcare data center in Melbourne, FL

• Designed and developed the inspection

applications

• Designed and developed the visualization

tiles

• Tested, documented and prepared training

materials

VoIPcare System

Who Participated

• Carriers

–NS –CSX

• Mill

–UPM

• Printers

–Quebecor –Quad Graphics

• Publisher

–JC Penney

Inspections Included

• Railcar Inspection

– Condition of the railcar when delivered for loading

• Shipping Inspection

– Protective measures utilized

• Receiving Inspection

– Condition of the load and protective measure performance

• Damage Inspection

– Identify specific damage encountered

Equipment Inspection

• Seven Questions

– Is the car useable – Does the door operate properly – Are the door seals intact – Are there holes in the car – Is the floor in good condition – Has the car been swept – Has all dunnage been removed

Has all dunnage been removed? Has the car been swept? Is the floor in good condition? Are the door seals intact? Are there holes in the car? Did the door

• perate

correctly? Is the car suitable for use?

Visual Representation

Mill View Condition of delivered cars Grouped by order

Visibility To Multiple Cars

Railroad View Cars in need of repair Grouped geographically Mill View Status of delivered cars Grouped by order

Updated Visualization

Tests Conducted

• UPM to Quebecor

– From 10/15/08 to 12/02/08 – All paper for JC Penney projects – Shipped 105 railcars – 4 people were involved at the Mill – 5 people were involved at the Printer

• UPM to Quad Graphics

– From 12/22/08 tp 04/17/09 – All paper for JC Penney projects – Shipped 36 railcars – 3 people were involved at the Mill – 1 person was involved at the printer

Equipment Required

• Any type of telephone

– Cell, Desk, Pay, Can & String

• Access to the Internet

– Web Browser (IE, Safari, Mozilla)

• No capital investment required

Training Requirements

• Training sessions were a maximum of 20

minutes

• Operations staff were able to use the

system immediately after training

• Some participants learned the system

without formal training

• All users agreed that the system was

simple and easy to use

Test Results

• UPM to Quebecor

– Processed 105 railcars – 16 were unusable

• 6 had bad floors
• 12 had bad doors
• 4 had bad seals
• 2 had holes

– 80 needed to be swept – 26 needed dunnage removed – There were 2 damaged rolls

• UPM to Quad Graphics

– Processed 36 railcars – 1 was unusable – 34 needed to be swept – There were no damaged rolls

Proof Of Concept Conclusions

• It is technically feasible to implement a

standardized data gathering system

• There would be no capital expenditures

necessary to implement the system

• The system could be implemented quickly and

easily with minimal impact on operations personnel

• Centralized access to information would provide

process improvement throughout the supply chain

Feedback So Far

Critical to the

• ngoing survival
• f the industry

Could have a very positive impact on damage rates Of value if it can improve the damage claim process Can help the turn around time for repairs

Revisiting Project Goals

• Prove that automated inspection technology can

be deployed simply with minimal disruption to work flow and at a minimal cost

• Prove that the inspection and reporting process

can be centralized and standardized

• Prove that the use of automated inspection

technology can improve the overall quality of delivery, reduce damage and streamline damage reporting and claims processing

Reducing Damage

• Damage to paper can be reduced by:

– Establishing accountability – Timely damaged equipment notification to the railroad – Accumulation of relevant data – Six Sigma Attitude

• Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control
• Gathering and analyzing data about delivery performance
• ver a large range of shipments
• Making continuous improvements to processes and

procedures

The Next Phase

• Expand the number of users and the level
• f detail in the project
• Gather data over a larger number of

shipments

• Expand the system to a production

environment

• Working with the proof of concept

participants VoIPcare has developed the spec for the next phase of the project

TAPPI Inspection System Features

• Real Time Data Collection
• Automated Inspection
• Automated Claims Processing
• Centralized Photo Storage
• Automated Notifications
• Increased Efficiency
• Visual Information

Equipment Inspection Diagram

Railcar Fleet Equipment Inspection Customer User Table Empty Railcars Rejected Railcars Load Railcar Inspected Railcars Equipment Inspection Table Equipiment Damage Notification Inspection Results Damage Information Photo Archive Damage Photos Damage Photos Damaged Equipment Table Equipment Number Equipment Status User ID Damage Information

Industry Problems*

• Lack of common defect codes
• Reporting equipment repair needs
• Limited technology available
• Inconsistent inspection processes
• Lack of common claim forms
• Information collection and retention

* TAPPI Damage Prevention Committee Report – April 2008

Industry Objectives*

• Identify damage as early as possible in the

supply chain process

• Begin to process the damage event within

24 hours of awareness

• Build a lessons learned capability to

identify and reduce the root cause of damage

• Minimize the impact on operational

performance

* TAPPI Damage Prevention Committee Report – April 2008

Summary & Recommendations*

• Summary

– It is in the best interest of the industry to reduce damage to material – The best way to reduce damage is through a better means of information sharing which leads to improved processes – The needs of the industry can best be served through the establishment of a centralized data repository – Because the industry is so large and involves so many companies any broad solution must be cost effective, easy to implement and have minimal impact

• n operations

* TAPPI Damage Prevention Committee Report – April 2008

Moving Forward

• Initial ground work has been done
• High level design document is done
• Need critical mass

– Minimum of 25 sites to participate – Must have all segments represented

• Mills, Railroads, Printers, Publishers
• Next evaluation in 6 months

System Adoption Plan

2009 2011 2013 2016

Next Phase Participants

• Signed Letter of Commitment

– JC Penney – BNSF

• Companies Considering Participation

– NewPage – Quad Graphics – Quebecor – UPM – Verso Paper – Abitibi-Bowater – CSX – UP – CPR

Uncle Rick Wants You!!

B N S F