Count on MOL for rail to vessel connections.

Count On MOL.

Missed Vessel Connections (Due to Rail Issues)

U.S. to Asia Export. On a monthly basis, MOL measures the percentage of containers that in-gate prior to our published intermodal inland cut-offs for all U.S. West Coast strings but miss the vessel connection due to a rail issue. The measure currently includes only major volume origin rail ramps. We exclude the impact of extreme weather conditions from the result.

While MOL understands that realistically there will always be a few misses, we consider any miss of the vessel connection to be a serious problem. We believe that our standard is very bold for the industry but that is an achievable result based on our strong relationship with our rail partners.

    MOL Target:
    Keep this percentage below 1%.

MOL Results and Action Plan:
March 2014. In preparation for the upcoming G6 Alliance service deployment, MOL (America) Inc. is reevaluating our intermodal service KPI.

During this period, the results of our missed vessel connections KPI and intermodal transit on time performance KPI won't be published.

Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns.

February 2014. We did not meet our target. We had 238 containers miss their intended vessel. 66 containers missed their intended vessel due to lack of power, 54 due to weather, 43 due to congestion, 31 due to max footage, 3 due to bad orders, and 1 due to waiting for mate,   The balance of the misses were attributed to delays in transit or lack of car supply.

MOL works closely with our rail providers. We continue to work with them to improve handling of terminal congestion, crew shortages, bad order flat carts, and the ongoing impacts of track maintenance during peak months. Both MOL and our rail partners are focused on delivering excellent service. Therefore, all efforts are being exhausted by both MOL and our rail partners to improve the performance.

January 2014. We did not meet our target. We had 238 containers miss their intended vessel. 161 containers missed their intended vessel due to low volume, 35 missed due to weather, 4 due to max footage, 2 due to bad orders, 2 due to crew shortages, and 1 due to derailment.  The balance of the misses were attributed to train annulment, lack of equipment or lack of power.

December 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 156 containers miss their intended vessel. 52 containers missed their intended vessel due to low volume, 57 missed due to weather, and another 19 missed due to bad order flat cars. The balance of the misses were comprised of delays due to shortage of locomotives and delayed departures due to congestion.

November 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 123 containers miss their intended vessel. 32 containers missed their intended vessel due to low volume, 19 missed due to max footage, 4 missed due to weather, and another 9 missed due to bad order flat cars. The balance of the misses were comprised of terminal/port congestion, derailment, stalled trains, interchange delays, and track maintenance.

October 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 41 containers miss their intended vessel. About 46% of these misses (19 of 41) were the result of:  containers being left behind due to low volume (8), delays due to bad order cars (5), or, delays due to max footage related issues (6). If not for these 19 misses, we would have nearly met the target with a result of 1.1% (22 misses).

September 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 33 containers miss their intended vessel. 14 of the 33 misses were a result of either insufficient volume or trains being at max footage. Another 4 containers missed their intended vessel due to weather related issues in Colorado.

August 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 43 containers miss their intended vessel. 15 of the 43 misses were a result of either insufficient volume (4) or trains being at max capacity (5) or because of flooding/washouts (6).

July 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 25 containers miss their intended vessel. 15 of the 25 misses were a result of either insufficient volume or trains being at max capacity. 10 of the 25 misses were attributed to either unavailable trains, shortage of railcars to load units, or late departures from origin ramps.

June 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 22 containers miss the train. 12 of our misses came from either containers being left behind due to max tonnage or trains being delayed due to insufficient volumes.

May 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 22 containers miss the train either due to max tonnage, max capacity, or idle trains due to low volume. 12 containers were delayed due to crew shortage and congestion. 5 containers didn't make their intended vessel due to derailments.

April 2013. We did not meet our target. We had 8 containers miss the train either due to max tonnage or max footage related issues.

March 2013. We met our target. Of the containers that missed their intended vessel, 11 were left behind due to a combination of trains being at max capacity/max tonnage and trains being held up waiting for enough volume. There were also three containers that didn't make their intended vessel because of derailments.  It should be noted that this KPI now excludes non-standard routings.

February 2013. Of the containers that missed their intended vessel, two were 20' units that did not have a mate. Several units were left behind due to insufficient volume. Although the number of containers that missed the vessel connection was less than in January, we still fell short of the goal of less than 1%.

January 2013: Some of the missed connections due to rail error that occurred in January 2013 were from low density origins. In December 2012, some of the misses were the result of trains being or slowed down due to weather related issues. This was not a factor in January and our result improved. We did see a number of trains annulled due to a lull coming off the holiday season, insufficient volumes causing delays to build full trains, and max capacity issues on higher volume lanes causing congestion.

We continually review our schedules to see if a change in cutoff is required to reduce the likelihood of a missed connection. Each missed connection is addressed with our rail partners. We do not hesitate to work with them to find a long-term solution. It is in part for that reason that the results have improved so drastically over the past year.

U.S. to Asia Export Missed Vessel Connections Due to Rail Issues U.S. to Asia Export Missed Vessel Connections Due to Rail Issues

Have you seen our advertisement?


What’s behind a number What’s behind a number
Which of the following KPI are most important to you?

Share This