Office of Operations Freight Management and Operations
Table of Contents

FHWA Operations Support - Port Peak Pricing Program Evaluation

Appendix A. Port Market Analysis Results

A.1 Port of Seattle

Market Characteristics

  • High-Volume Shippers – The Port of Seattle is a major container port on the U.S. west coast. The port is used as an international trade gateway for Asian containerized cargo by many high-volume shippers. According to statistics compiled by the port from PIERS data, it is estimated that high-volume shippers account for around 80 percent of the total container market at the port, and represent 20 percent of the total number of shippers using the port. Many of these shippers operate large warehouses and DCs; however, according to port officials, most do not operate on a 24-hour basis.
  • Low-Margin Shipments – The port’s export container market represents more than one-third of the total loaded container movements moving through the port. More than half a million loaded export TEUs moved through the port in 2007 (an increase of close to 15 percent from 2006). The port handles many kinds of low-margin shipments in its export market. Information on the exact shares of low-margin shipments of the port’s total export market is not tracked by the port; however, the share of this market of total exports is not expected to be significant, as the export container market is dominated by farm and food products.
  • Off-Dock Rail – Of the total volume of intermodal container traffic moving through the port, around 85 percent of the containers move through near-dock intermodal yards (the rest are on-dock) operated by the Union Pacific and Burlington Northern & Santa Fe railroads. Given that around 70 percent of the total container traffic is intermodal, near-dock rail represents close to 60 percent of the total container traffic. Based on these statistics, a large share of the truck traffic generated by the ports is destined to near-dock rail yards.

Congestion

The Port of Seattle does not have any significant congestion problems as being faced by the San Pedro Bay ports. According to information provided by port officials, the port terminals are congestion-free for most time-periods of the day. The terminals experience some truck congestion during the lunch time-period when they operate at reduced staffing, and are unable to process any surges in truck traffic, leading to truck queuing/idling. Truck congestion also occurs, though not frequently, before the opening of the gates (at 7:00 a.m.) when trucks arrive and start queuing at the terminal before 7:00 a.m. Port truck traffic is also not contributing to truck traffic congestion on major highways around the port, since most of the port trucks do not use the most congested segments of the major highway corridors in the region (such as the downtown sections of I‑5).

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

Air quality is not currently an issue in the Puget Sound region where the Port of Seattle is located. The region is in attainment of the NAAQS established by the U.S. EPA. Nevertheless, the port has been working on a proactive, voluntary basis to do its part in reducing air quality and associated public health impacts of port activities, and protecting the region’s attainment status.  The Port led a three year effort under the Puget Sound Maritime Air Forum to conduct an emissions inventory of all maritime-related sources in the Puget Sound region. The inventory estimated emissions for the year 2005 using an activity-based approach from port-related sources, including cargo-handling equipment, rail, heavy-duty vehicles, light-duty vehicles, ocean-going vessels, and harbor craft. Table A.1 summarizes the results of the emissions inventory, in terms of the share of maritime activity emissions of total emissions by pollutant for the four-county Puget Sounds Clean Air Agency region (King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish):

Table A.1 Contribution of Maritime Activities to Total Emissions by Pollutant, Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Region – 2005

Pollutant

Share

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)

11%

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

2%

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

1%

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

33%

Fine Particulate Matter

4%

Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM)

28%

Source: Puget Sound Maritime Air Emissions Inventory, http://www.maritimeairforum.org/emissions.shtml.

Figure A.1 shows the share of heavy-duty truck emissions relative to other sources for the Port of Seattle. As seen from the above table, the contribution of port-related heavy duty truck traffic to pollutant emissions is relatively low compared to other port sources. With the port’s objective to increase the share of on-dock intermodal container traffic in the future, the relative impacts of port trucking activity compared to other sources on air quality are expected to decline in the future.

Figure A.1   Port of Seattle Share of Emissions by Source and Type of Pollutant – 2005

figure a.1
figure a.1 - diagram - this diagram is showing the share of emissions for each pollutant contributed by various sources at the Port of Seattle in 2005. The pollutant categories include Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM), PM2.5, PM10, SO2, CO, VOC, and NOx. The source categories include ocean-going vessel hotelling, ocean-going vessel maneuvering, harbor vessels, rail, cargo handling equipment, heavy-duty vehicles, and fleet vehicles. The graph does not show the magnitude of emissions for each pollutant type, but only shows the share of total emissions contributed by various sources.

Source: Puget Sound Maritime Air Emissions Inventory, http://www.maritimeairforum.org/emissions.shtml.

Interport Competitiveness

Interport competitiveness is expected to be an important factor impacting the success of a peak pricing/extended gate operations program at the Port of Seattle. The Port of Seattle shares a long history of competition with the Port of Tacoma, its neighboring port in the Puget Sound. Due to the proximity between the two ports, they compete with each other not only for “discretionary” cargo, but also for “local” cargo. From the Port of Seattle’s perspective, the effect of this competition on its market position, particularly for Asia-Pacific trade, cannot be ignored, more so now than anytime in the past, as the Port of Tacoma has grown to be a major west-coast port rivaling the Port of Seattle in total container traffic volumes, as well as strong intermodal rail connections to the eastern U.S. The fact that the Port of Tacoma has a lot more available space for capacity expansion compared to the Port of Seattle also places the Port of Tacoma in a strong position to leverage available resources to increase capacity and potentially gain market share relative to the Port of Seattle in the future. In addition, the Port of Seattle also faces competition for “discretionary” cargo from other ports on the west coast, such as the Port of Vancouver (British Columbia) and most notably from the newly developed Port of Prince Rupert in British Columbia, which offers the fastest intermodal route between Asia and the U.S. Midwest.

Port officials indicate that any future efforts towards the implementation of a peak pricing/extended gate operations program at the port would entail working together with the Port of Tacoma, and potentially with other ports such as the Port of Vancouver, so that a joint program can be developed (a program implemented solely at the Port of Seattle is expected to induce some loss in market share, particularly to the Port of Tacoma). These ports have already worked cooperatively in the past to address environmental issues through the development of the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy.

A.2 Port of Houston

Market Characteristics

  • High-Volume Shippers – The Port of Houston Authority (POHA) handles a large share of the total container market in the Gulf of Mexico. According to port estimates, POHA accounts for 98 percent of the container market in Texas, and around 75 percent of the container traffic in the Gulf of Mexico. A significant share of the total container market for the port is consumed locally; owing to the strategic geographic location of the port (more than 17 million people live within 300 miles of the city). It is estimated that around 75 percent of all the containers moving through the port stay within 250 miles of the port. POHA’s strategic location has spawned the growth of large warehouses and DCs around the port, as big box shippers are realizing the future potential of the port as a key alternative trade gateway to the San Pedro Bay ports for international imports with the expansion of the Panama Canal. In 2005, Wal-Mart opened a huge 4 million square foot DC in the Houston Ship Channel area, and Home Depot has a 750,000 square-foot DC in Baytown. These are some of the big-box retailers who are importing large volumes of containers through the port that are destined by truck to local warehouses/DCs for subsequent distribution for local consumption, or reshipment to other destinations. It is estimated that currently, around a dozen big-box shippers are moving containers through the port. Though the port does not track the operational times of warehouses and DCs operated by these big-box shippers, it is estimated that some of these facilities are operating 24-hours a day. Future container market trend projections indicate that expected growth in population in the port hinterland (such as in major metropolitan areas in Texas) and expansion of the Panama Canal will spur the development of new warehouses/DCs around the port, and result in increased local container traffic movements through the port.
  • Low-Margin Shipments – Unlike some of the other ports, POHA has a very diversified portfolio of commodities moving through the port, which include low-margin shipments as well. However, low-margin commodities do not account for a significant share of the total export container market, which is dominated by plastics and cereal products.
  • Off-Dock Rail – Intermodal rail cargo at the port moves through near-dock and off-dock rail yards. The port does not track how much of the container traffic is moving by off-dock rail intermodal, but the share of this traffic is expected to be fairly low as majority of the containers are destined for the local market, which move by truck to warehouses and DCs.

Congestion

Unlike the San Pedro Bay ports, POHA does not experience any congestion within the terminals, at terminal gates, as well as on the surrounding highway corridors. This is because the port is continually expanding to add infrastructure capacity to handle the growing container traffic demand. The first phase of the new Bayport container terminal became operational in January 2007. At full build out, the terminal will have seven container berths with the capacity to handle up to 2.3 million TEUs annually. The Barbour’s cut container terminal at the port was built in the 1970s and is the other major container terminal at the port, currently handling bulk of the port’s container traffic. The port has extensive highway connectivity provided by 8 major highways, and other major arterials. In addition to available highway system capacity, the absence of high-density container truck traffic occurring on specific highway corridors (like the I‑710 in Southern California) is another reason why congestion is not an issue at the port.

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

POHA is located in a nonattainment area for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 8-hour ozone pollutant. Thus, air quality is a serious issue in the Houston-Galveston area. However, the air quality issues being faced by POHA are inherently different from the kinds of issues plaguing the San Pedro Bay ports. Most notably, POHA does not have the level of truck traffic generated by the San Pedro Bay ports. Also, there is no truck traffic congestion/idling in and around POHA, which is a major contributor to air pollution around the San Pedro Bay ports. To meet the air quality challenges in the region, POHA plays a very active environmental stewardship role in mitigating the air quality impacts of port activities. It is the first port in the U.S. to have achieved ISO 14001 certification, which recognizes the port for identifying and controlling the environmental impacts of its activities, and continually improving its environmental performance.

Interport Competitiveness

POHA handles 98 percent of the Texas container market and around 75 percent of the container market in the Gulf of Mexico. So, the port faces a stronger competition from other Gulf of Mexico ports for the “discretionary” container cargo market (as compared to local container market in Texas). Since a large share of the container market is local, discussions with port officials indicate that the port is not really worried about the competition for discretionary cargo from other ports in the Gulf of Mexico. Port officials indicated that the port is expected to lose some market to the Port of New Orleans if a peak pricing program is implemented in the future. However, owing to the port’s strong customer base and container market shares in the region, it is expected that the port will quickly recover any such loss in market through the attraction of new customers.

A.3 Port of New York and New Jersey

Market Characteristics

  • High-Volume Shippers – According to information provided by port officials, high-volume shippers constitute a relatively small percentage of the total container throughput at the Port of New York and New Jersey (PONYNJ). It is estimated that in 2007, the top five import receivers accounted for approximately only three percent of total TEUs, while the top five exporters accounted for about five percent of the total containerized exports. Recent interviews with regional trucking firms conducted by PONYNJ also indicate that only a small percentage of cargo coming into the port is destined for large wholesalers or distributors. Thus, the port’s import container market destined for local consumption is largely dominated by a significant number of small and midsized importers.
  • Low-Margin Shipments – A total of close to 1.5 million loaded export TEUs moved through PONYNJ in 2007, an increase of 13.7 percent from 2006. Among the top 20 export commodities moving through the port, 5 can be characterized as low-value (low margin) commodities. Waste paper is one of the largest export commodities, accounting for 20 percent of the total export TEUs. Low-margin shipments, in all, account for close to 30 percent of total export TEUs.
  • Off-Dock Rail – Off-dock rail shipments account for a very low share of the total port container throughput. According to data reported by the port, the amount of port-generated containers moving via off dock rail is in single digits and declining. This is due to the increased attention in the port’s capital development program towards increasing on-dock rail capacity at each of the terminal facilities. The $600 million ExpressRail on-dock rail project, when completed by 2012, will double the current on-dock rail capacity to serve rail growth for decades to come.

Congestion

PONYNJ does face truck traffic congestion within the marine terminals, attributed primarily to marine terminal operating conditions. The Bi-State Carriers Association, which represents around 80 percent of the drayage carriers serving the port, is critical of the in-gates processes of most MTOs. The association claims that gate related container pick-up and drop-off processes, which vary from terminal to terminal, are generally slow and inefficient, which is leading to in-terminal truck congestion/idling. Truck traffic congestion, particularly on the local connectors just beyond the port’s Marine Terminal Highway System, has also been expressed as a critical problem by the MTOs.

General a.m. and p.m. peak-period traffic congestion on major highway corridors, such as the New Jersey Turnpike, I‑78, and I‑80 is impacting port trucking operations.  Also, functionally obsolete segments (particularly bridges) of key local service roads such as Truck Routes 1 and 9, and the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJ DOT) designated Portway route are slowing and hampering truck operations, since they are major routes used by port-related trucks. The capacity of these highway systems in light of substantial port-related truck traffic growth predicted for the region is a major concern of the freight community in the region.

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

PONYNJ lies in the New York-New Jersey-Long Island nonattainment area for PM-2.5 and 8-hour ozone. PONYNJ, like the San Pedro Bay ports, is faced with the serious challenge, to find ways of accommodating growing cargo volumes and realizing associated economic benefits, while at the same time minimizing the impacts of port growth and expansion on the environment. Being the largest port on the east-coast, the port is a significant contributor to air pollution in the region. In order to assess the relative impacts of port emissions on air quality, and identify prioritized solutions for impact mitigation, the port has been proactive in conducting detailed air emissions inventories of the primary sources of air emissions, which include ocean-going vessels (OGV), heavy-duty trucks, and cargo handling equipment (CHE). These analyses, the results of which are not available at this time, have indicated that trucks are a major contributor to air pollution from port-related sources. This can be attributed to the fact that a large share of the container traffic moving through the port is destined for local distribution by truck. Also, off-terminal truck trips have been identified to be the primary contributors to truck-related pollution, followed by on-terminal truck idling. Based on these findings, the port has identified several key issues to mitigate air pollution from trucks, and has made notable strides in addressing these issues, which are discussed below:

  • Finding alternatives to trucks (such as ExpressRail): ExpressRail, the port’s on-dock rail service, handled 358,043 lifts in 2007, saving over 610,000 truck trips on the region’s roads. When complete in 2011, ExpressRail will have the capacity to handle 1.5 million containers a year, taking approximately 2.5 million trucks off the roads, resulting in significant air quality benefits;
  • Finding ways to finance acquisition of newer trucks (SmartWay Plus loans): The port is working with lenders and other funding sources to promote U.S. EPA’s SmartWay Partnership for trucks serving the port. This includes the installation of SmartWay upgrade kits, which can achieve between 20 percent and 90 percent reductions in Particulate Matter emissions, and SmartWay Plus low-interest loans to finance acquisition of newer trucks, equipped with a Particulate Matter filter that would cost the truck owner $100 to $200 less/month than what they are paying currently for their trucks.
  • Reducing the length of off-terminal trips (near-port warehouse/DCs on Portfields to reduce truck vehicle miles traveled (VMT): The port is working with regional development entities and the New Jersey Economic Development Authority on a Portfields initiative to establish near-port warehouses and DCs on abandoned former industrial sites. Bringing these dormant, unproductive sites back into productive use will not only benefit the economy with jobs and the environment through remediation of a contaminated site, but significantly reduce port truck VMTs, bringing significant energy consumption and air quality benefits.
  • Reducing on-terminal congestion and associated idling (for example, implementation of electronic gates, and extended gate hours): Some of the terminals at the port are experimenting with extended gate operations as a way of adding system capacity and improving the efficiency of trucking operations. The results of any potential improvements in trucking operations as a result of extended gates are not available at this time.

Interport Competitiveness

PONYNJ faces competition from others ports in the U.S. mainly for international containerized imports. The major competitors for the port include:

  • The San Pedro Bay ports for Asian imports to the U.S. Midwest and Northeast markets (however, the port is showing strong gains in market shares for containerized imports to the local market relative to the San Pedro Bay ports as evidenced by the recent declines in goods coming to local markets through the west coast); and
  • Other East Coast ports along the North Atlantic range (Boston to Norfolk/Hampton Roads), particularly the Port of Virginia, for containerized imports destined to the upper Ohio valley and Chicago. The Port of Virginia has a 21 percent market share for “discretionary” cargo moving to the U.S. Midwest through the North Atlantic range, which is expected to increase in the future with the ongoing development of the Heartland Corridor.

The port has a strong market share for containerized imports through the North Atlantic range for local markets. Consequently, the port is not particularly concerned about losing any of the local market share to other east-coast ports under a peak pricing/extended gate operations program. The port has expressed interest in analyzing the impacts of a peak-pricing/extended gate operations program on potential market diversion for “discretionary” cargo. However, the impact is expected to be minimal since most of the cargo moves via on-dock intermodal, which will not be affected by the program.

A.4 Port of Virginia

Market Characteristics

  • High-Volume Shippers – The Port of Virginia’s customer base includes several large shippers, including the traditional big box retailers. They represent more than 25 percent of the port’s share of total container traffic. With respect to imports alone, these big-box retailers are estimated to account for around 40 percent of the total containerized imports through the port. Some of the big-box shippers have 24-hour warehousing/DC operations in the region. Over the past few years, the port has had notable success luring some major retailers to establish regional DCs near the port. Some of the notable big-box retailers importing containers through the port, and having large warehousing/DC operations in the region include Wal-Mart, The Home Depot, Target, and Dollar Tree.  It is estimated that around 13-million square feet of warehousing/DC space has been added near the port in the past few years to service the big-box retailers. In 2005, Wal-Mart expanded its 2-million square-foot DC in James City County, Virginia by 50 percent.
  • Low-Margin Shipments – The commodity mix of cargo traveling through the Port of Virginia is varied and diverse. The primary low-margin commodities exported through the port include waste paper and scrap metals.  An updated analysis has not been performed but 2006 data show low-margin shipments accounting for less than 10 percent of the total TEU volume.
  • Off-Dock Rail – The Port of Virginia has one of the highest percentages of cargo that moves by rail for east-coast ports. Intermodal rail shipments account for approximately 25 percent of total container shipments, and are expected to grow in the future.  Of the total intermodal rail volume, 81 percent is on-dock and 19 percent is off-dock drayage to the Norfolk southern Rail Ramp in Portsmouth Virginia.

Congestion

According to port officials, the port does not experience any truck traffic congestion at terminal gates, and within the marine terminals. The Hampton Roads region, where the port is located, faces growing highway congestion, like other metropolitan areas. The major highways used by port trucks include I‑64, I‑664, and Route 460. Majority of the port trucks also use the bridge-tunnels (underwater tunnels) along I‑64 (Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel) and I‑664 (Monitor Merrimac Memorial Bridge-Tunnel). Congestion is particularly an issue along the I‑64 Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel, which carries around 3 million vehicles each month. Also, growing auto and truck traffic volumes are worsening the traffic conditions on Route 460 and sections of I‑64 in the peninsula (north of Newport News). Even though the region is taking a proactive approach towards implementing transportation solutions (for example, Interstate quality access was recently completed at the Portsmouth Marine Terminal (Route 164), and a major east-west route (U.S. Route 460) is being upgraded to an Interstate highway), there remains some uncertainty in the implementation of some key projects – notably, the Hampton Roads Third Crossing, and I‑64 widening from Newport News to New Kent – primarily due to funding constraints. Unless these projects are implemented, which are key corridors used by port trucks, congestion is expected to remain a critical issue in the region.

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

The Hampton Roads region is currently in attainment of EPA’s NAAQS for all criteria pollutants. However, the region has been on the border line for attainment/nonattainment for 8-hour ozone. The region was recently redesignated (nonattainment to attainment status) for 8-hour ozone, and has a maintenance plan in place to ensure attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the future, through the year 2018. The port’s contribution to air pollution in the region relative to other sources has not been made available as of this time. Since port truck traffic accounts for a significant share of the NOx emissions from ports, and reducing NOx emissions in the Hampton Roads region is critical to maintaining the attainment status for 8-hour ozone, the port is taking a proactive leadership role in reducing port truck emissions. Notable among these efforts is the port’s partnership with the EPA in a new program that encourages truckers through facilitation of grants to purchase new trucks or retrofit older units to cut emissions. As a result of all the port air pollution reduction efforts, it is estimated that between 2005 and 2015, the port will experience a surge in cargo volumes by 49 percent, while port emissions will drop 38 percent. Also, with the development of the Heartland rail corridor, the port is well positioned to increase the share of containers moving on the rail system, which will have a net benefit in terms of port air quality impacts.

Interport Competitiveness

The Port of Virginia faces competition in varying degrees from other East Coast Ports.  The port has one of the highest percentages of cargo on the East Coast that moves by rail. In that respect, the port faces strong competition for “discretionary” cargo from PONYNJ, and the ports of Savannah and Charleston. The port has a strong market position for local containerized imports. As with PONYNJ, interport competitiveness is not expected to play a role in the success of a peak pricing/extended gate operations program at the port, owing to the following reasons:

  • It is expected that the port will be able to retain its strong position for local containerized imports owing to minimal competition in this market;
  • Even though the port faces competition for “discretionary” cargo from other East Coast ports, a peak-pricing/extended gate operations program will not have an impact on the land-side supply chains for “discretionary” cargo moving primarily via on-dock intermodal.
  • Table A.2 summarizes the results from the performance evaluation of selected ports.

Table A.2 Peak-Pricing/Extended Gate Operations Program Performance Evaluation of Selected Ports

Port

Performance Factors

Summary of Issues/Characteristics

Peak-Pricing/Extended Gate Operations Program Performance Evaluation

Port of Seattle

Market Characteristics

A significant share of high-volume shippers in the market; 24-hour warehousing/DC operations not prevalent currently; Relatively low share of total export container volumes accounted for by low-margin shipments; A major share (85 percent) of total intermodal imports accounted for by off-dock rail

Yes

Port of Seattle

Congestion

Congestion not an issue for port truck traffic within terminals, at terminal gates, and on major highway corridors around the port

No

Port of Seattle

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

NAAQS attainment area for all criteria pollutants; Relative impacts of port truck traffic on air pollution observed to be low, owing to lack of truck idling and relatively lower magnitude of truck volumes compared to other large ports (such as Los Angeles/Long Beach)

No

Port of Seattle

Interport Competitiveness

Serious competition for Asia-Pacific trade with the Port of Tacoma (and with the Port of Vancouver to a certain extent). Implementation of a peak-pricing program at the port expected to result in a notable loss in market share, particularly to Tacoma

No

Port of Houston

Market Characteristics

Significant presence of high-volume shippers in the import container market; 24-hour warehousing/DC operations prevalent to a certain extent; Relatively low share of total export container volumes accounted for by low-margin shipments; Not a major rail port; Most of the container market is local. Some off-dock rail related truck trips for intermodal container traffic

Yes

Port of Houston

Congestion

Congestion not an issue for port truck traffic within terminals, at terminal gates, and on major highway corridors around the port; and not expected to be a major issue in the next five years

No

Port of Houston

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

NAAQS nonattainment area for 8-hour ozone; Relative impacts of port truck traffic on total emissions not available at this time; however, the region experiencing no truck idling/congestion and its exacerbating environmental impacts; the port taking a leadership role in mitigating environmental impacts of its activities (ISO 14001 certified)

No

Port of Houston

Interport Competitiveness

Primary competition from the Port of New Orleans in the Gulf of Mexico, mostly for “discretionary” cargo; Port having a very strong market position for local cargo; Interport competitiveness not expressed as a primary concern for a peak-pricing program, because of the port’s strategic location, strong customer base and market position for local container traffic (98 percent of Texas container market)

Yes

Port of New York/New Jersey

Market Characteristics

Low share of the local container market accounted for by high-volume shippers; Low share of low-margin shipments in the export container market; Low share of off-dock rail in the total port container throughput

No

Port of New York/New Jersey

Congestion

Significant truck traffic congestion within marine terminals, local connectors beyond the port’s Marine Terminal Highway System, and on major highway corridors (New Jersey Turnpike, I‑78 and I‑80)

Yes

Port of New York/New Jersey

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

Nonattainment area for PM-2.5 and 8-hour ozone; Port trucking activity and truck idling/congestion contributing significantly to air pollution; Extended gate hours identified as a key strategy to reduce truck congestion, and realize environmental benefits

Yes

Port of New York/New Jersey

Interport Competitiveness

Primary competition from the Port of Virginia in the North Atlantic range for “discretionary” cargo; Port having a very strong market position for local containerized imports; Interport competitiveness not expressed as a major concern for the implementation of a peak pricing program, owing to the port’s strong market position

Yes

Port of Virginia

Market Characteristics

Notable share (40 percent) of the import container market accounted for by high-volume (big-box) shippers, which is expected to grow in the future; Some of these shippers operate 24-hour warehouses/DCs; Low share of low-margin shipments in the port’s container traffic; Low-share of off-dock rail shipments of the total port container traffic

Yes

Port of Virginia

Congestion

Congestion not an issue at marine terminal gates, and within the terminals; Truck congestion a critical problem on certain specific corridors such as the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel and the I‑64 corridor in the peninsula

Yes

Port of Virginia

Air Quality/Environmental Issues

NAAQS attainment area for all criteria pollutants; however, 8-hour ozone air quality remains a critical problem; Port truck congestion on certain key corridors (such as the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel) exacerbating air quality impacts; Port implementing a clean truck/retrofit program in partnership with the EPA; however, extended gate operations could have additional air quality benefits through reduction in highway truck congestion

Yes

Port of Virginia

Interport Competitiveness

Strong market position for local containerized imports; Competition from PONYNJ, and the ports of Savannah and Charleston for “discretionary” cargo; Interport competitiveness not expressed as a concern for a peak-pricing program

Yes

Previous Section | Next Section | Top