News / Row over terminal project at port of New Orleans heats up

The port of New Orleans has described a consultancy report, which claims its proposed Louisiana International Terminal is a strategic mistake, as “illegitimate”.

Residents of New Orleans’ Violet area formed “The Committee to Stop the Destruction of St Bernard”, and have been attempting to block the $1.8bn LIT development by US terminal operator Ports America in partnership with MSC.

Last year, the campaigners launched a lawsuit to stop the port authority from operating in the parish, and more recently commissioned port analyst Vickerman & Associates to dissect the plans. It published its findings a fortnight ago, as reported by The Loadstar.

Now, the port authority has hit back at the report’s conclusions, which were broadly negative on the LIT project and suggested a better location for new container facilities would be down river, nearer the mouth of the Mississippi.

“The lack of research, facts, key data and engagement with any of the parties involved in the state’s thriving 50-year container business, in concert with a poor understanding of the Louisiana container market, qualifies this report as illegitimate,” a detailed five-page document from the port authority, passed to The Loadstar, said.

The criticisms in Vickerman’s paper, Critical Development Issues Overview Report, largely centred on aspects including whether the market needed the new facility, the site selection, the subsequent increase in truck traffic, and its impact on local road congestion, and safety issues arising from the prospect of large containerships calling at a city centre.

Its last point included the assertion that “82% of the navigational river traffic would be completely blocked during vessel departures” from LIT, and claimed vessel movement simulations demonstrated “manoeuvres were not successful due to unsafe clearance issues”.

However, the port authority pointed to a study three years ago by Michael Bopp, president of the Crescent River Port Pilots Association. Capt Bopp said: “We studied every possible scenario and found no issues. Big ships turn around in the river every day without a problem.”

Vickerman’s market analysis also came in for heavy criticism from the port authority.

“The Vickerman report references outdated market studies more than a decade old, with volume projections that Louisiana has already well exceeded, due to the e-commerce explosion, supply chain shifts made as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and the diversification of cargo owners’ portfolios to have a tri-coast approach to optimise supply chains,” it said.

It added that the selection of the Violet site had only been approved after more than 20 years’ analysis of the New Orleans’ container supply chains and port operations.

The port authority said: “Multiple site studies have been conducted over the past two decades by multiple parties, with many starts and stops. Port NOLA and its partners studied sites in St Bernard and Plaquemines parish.

“MSC/TIL and Ports America and Port NOLA have operated on the lower MS river for 50 years and are well versed in the pros and cons of each site, from a water, land and intermodal perspective.

“We, along with our teams of maritime and industry experts that have built the most modern terminals across the US and the globe, are confident that Violet offers a superior site for Louisiana’s next generation container facility based on flood protection, existing intermodal assets, ability to invest in economically reasonable infrastructure and ability to serve the market demands,” it said.

It also argued that wherever a new facility was located, it would inevitably lead to an increase in trucks, and claimed that Violet’s “proximity to the interstate highway system and rail infrastructure” mean that the “cost of transportation upgrades to accommodate terminal volumes is reduced, and the cost to move cargo to inland destinations is less”.

The US government has so far awarded $300m in federal funds to the project, while MSC and Ports America have publicly committed to jointly investing $800m.