The Port of Long Beach will shortly release its final environmental review documents for the Middle Harbor Development Project.  My, how times have changed since the Pier J debacle of 2004.  In 2004, "green" was a four-letter word when talking to the ports and most industry lobbyists about port expansion.  Back then, there were claims that commerce and environmental and public health safeguards could not coexist.  Now, industry lobbyists, the ports, and others have cloaked commerce in a large green cape.  The key for environmentalists, like myself, is to look under this green cape to make sure the ports are doing what they say can be done to expand commerce while protecting the environment and community.

Now, I assure you I have not pre-determined my views on this project.  I will review the plans for the expansion project, and then make recommendations on how it can be improved.  If it is good, I will praise the Port of Long Beach.  The Port of Long Beach and others will claim that this project is a lot better on environmental issues than previous projects.  There is no doubting that this is probably the case, but the Port of Long Beach set a very low bar before.  It would be like a parent rationalizing a D- on a report card as good because their child previously received an F.  We need a project that is an A.  The community and health concerns about port operations are so grave, that they need to be addressed now (for more blog posts on this topic, click here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here).  

Now, I want to provide a little background on this project.  It is massive, and when I say massive, I mean massive.  At full build-out, the combined reconstructed terminal will process approximately 33% more containers than the current throughput at the Port of Oakland, the fourth busiest container port in the nation.  The increase in containers is the equivalent of inserting the Port of Vancouver into Long Beach. And, this is going to be just one of the many facilities that the Port of Long Beach operates. The project will cost $750 million dollars to build and includes a decade of construction.  The factual predicate of the project is that commerce will dramatically increase at some point in the future -- even despite the current slump we are facing.  I'm not clairvoyant, so I will not predict whether commerce will pick up in the region.  However, whether it does or not, the Port of Long Beach must clean up its act.   

Our review process for these projects is very transparent.  NRDC is looking at the expansion project under the following lens: 

• NRDC will examine whether it includes adequate measures to protect residents from pollution from ships and locomotives.  The region where Long Beach is located is one of smoggiest, polluted places in the nation.  Dr. Jane Hall of California State University at Fullerton has determined that residents of the region are paying a hefty price for failing to meet federal clean air standards: $1,250 per person per year, according to a recent study she released.  The Port of Long Beach is a major polluter in Southern California, and it must do more to reduce its share of the pollution stew that exists in this region. Besides, minimizing the air pollution costs that residents in Southern California are paying through our health is an economic stimulus that cannot be ignored.
• We will work with allies to examine whether the project includes the legally required level of mitigation for community impacts, including air filtration systems for schools and adequate resources for health clinics to help alleviate the impacts from the tons of air pollution the Port of Long Beach spews into the community on a daily basis.
• We will also examine how the Port of Long Beach is dealing with the attacks on the clean trucks program and the inability it has had to place clean trucks on the road.  
• Finally, we will be looking to see if the Port of Long Beach has adequately addressed the new elephant in the room -- global warming.    

All in all, I hope the Port of Long Beach does a good job addressing the concerns of the community, environmentalists, and other stakeholders.  If the project does not resolve these concerns, we will have to look into our options.  All in all, we must go back to what Councilwoman Rae Gabelich said during the Pier J debate to measure the success of this project.

"This city has to decide, are they about trade and tourism, or are they about good, healthy neighborhoods and good quality of life?" said Councilwoman Rae Gabelich, who represents Bixby Knolls. "This can't be about progress and the almighty dollar. It's got to be about people."

It is my view that the Port can have it all -- e.g. good, healthy neighborhoods, good jobs and robust commerce.  However, we need to ensure the people don't get short changed on this port expansion deal.