Detailed Project Report Coal Handling Te

Detailed
Project Report

Coal Handling Terminal at Berth No. 7 in the Port of
Mormugao, Goa

Volume: I

AMPTPL 12.03.2010
Detailed Project Report for Adani Mormugao Port
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................7
1.1 INTRODUCTION 7
1.2 DEVELOPER DETAILS 7
ADANI GROUP 7
1.2.1 Introduction 7
1.2.2 Adani enterprises ltd: an evolving conglomerate 9
1.2.3 Mundra port & SEZ LTD (MPSEZ): the port and infrastructure vehicle 10
1.2.4 MPSZ: business areas 11
1.2.5 Role of MPSEZ in Port Development 12
1.3 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE COAL TERMINAL 15
2 EXISTING PORT FACILITY ................................................................................17
2.1 GENERAL 17
2.2 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT 17
2.3 SITE LOCATION 19
2.4 CONNECTIVITY ‐ ROAD 20
2.5 CONNECTIVITY ‐ RAIL 21
2.6 EXISTING PORT RELATED INFORMATION 23
2.6.1 GENERAL 23
2.6.2 APPROACH CHANNEL 23
2.6.3 PORT FACILITIES 23
2.6.4 MOORING AND ANCHORAGE 24
2.6.5 CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT 24
2.6.6 MECHANICAL ORE HANDLING PLANT (MOHP) 24
2.6.7 LIQUID BULK HANDLING FACILITY 24
2.6.8 WAREHOUSING & STORAGE 25
2.6.9 STORAGE FACILITIES FOR LIQUID CARGOES 25
2.6.10 BUNKERING 26
2.6.11 DRY DOCK & SHIP REPAIR 26
3 SITE CONDITION AND PHYSICAL SETTINGS...........................................27
3.1 SITE LOCATION 27
3.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES 27
3.3 BATHYMETRY 27
3.4 METEOROLOGICAL AND OCEANOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS 27
3.4.1 RAINFALL 28
3.4.2 TEMPERATURE 28
3.4.3 PREVAILING WIND AND CYCLONES 29
3.4.4 WIND CONDTIONS 29
3.4.5 TIDES 30
i Introduction
3.4.6 CURRENTS 30
3.4.7 WAVE CONDTIONS 31
3.4.8 RELATIVE HUMIDITY 33
3.4.9 VISIBILITY 33
3.4.10 SEISMIC CONDITIONS 34
4 TRAFFIC PROJECTION .......................................................................................35
4.1 INTRODUCTION 35
4.2 HINTERLAND ASSESSMENT 35
4.2.1 COAL BASED THERMAL POWER PLANTS 35
4.2.2 CEMENT PLANTS 36
4.2.3 SPONGE IRON PLANTS 36
4.2.4 INTEGRATED STEEL PLANTS 36
4.3 INTEGRATED LOGISTICS COST ANALYSIS AND TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS 37
4.4 TRAFFIC PROJECTION 39
4.4.1 SCENARIO 1 39
4.4.2 SCENARIO 2 40
4.5 CONCLUSION 41
5 SITE INVESTIGATIONS .....................................................................................43
5.1 INTRODUCTION 43
5.2 TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY 43
5.3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 43
5.3.1 AVAILABLE SUB‐SOIL DATA 44
5.3.2 PRESENT SUB‐SOIL INVESTIGATION 44
5.3.3 SUB‐SOIL PROFILE 45
6 PLANNING CONSIDERATION ........................................................................48
6.1 GENERAL 48
6.2 NAVIGATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS 48
6.2.1 VESSEL TYPE, PARCEL SIZE AND DIMENSIONS 48
6.2.2 OPERATIONAL CRITERIA 49
6.2.3 DIMENSIONS OF BERTHING AREA 50
6.2.4 BERTHING REQUIREMENTS 51
6.2.5 MANOEUVRING AREA 52
6.2.6 NAVIGATIONAL AIDS 52
6.2.7 MECHNIZED HANDLING SYSTEM 52
6.2.8 MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS 53
6.2.9 ANNUAL THROUGHPUT 53
6.2.10 SHIP SIZES AND DIMENSION 54
6.2.11 DESIGN STANDARDS 54
6.2.12 CAPACITY AND PERFORMANCE 56
6.2.13 HANDLING RATES & STORAGE CAPACITY 57
6.2.14 STOCKPILES 60
6.2.15 RECLAIM RATES 61
ii Introduction
6.2.16 LAYOUT 62
* Lift & power mention in table are preliminary and will be finalised during detailed
engineering. 64
6.2.17 FLOW DIAGRAM 64
6.2.18 WAGON LOADING SYSTEM 65
6.2.19 TRUCK LOADING OPERATION 65
6.2.20 MECHANICAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT 65
6.3 FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM 66
6.4 DUST SUPPRESSION SYSTEM 67
7 ENGINEERING MARINE CIVIL WORKS .......................................................68
7.1 INTRODUCTION 68
7.2 SCOPE OF WORK 68
7.3 SITE INFORMATION 69
7.3.1 GENERAL 69
7.3.2 OCEANOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 69
7.4 GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION 69
7.5 SEISMIC CONDITIONS 70
7.6 DESIGN LOADING CRITERIA 70
7.6.1 DEAD LOADS 70
7.6.2 LIVE LOADS 70
7.6.3 DESIGN VESSEL SIZES FOR BERTHING AND MOORING FORCES 70
7.6.4 BERTHING LOADS 71
7.6.5 MOORING LOADS 71
7.6.6 EARTHQUAKE LOADS 71
7.6.7 DYNAMIC LOADS 71
7.6.8 LOAD COMBINATION 72
7.6.9 MATERIAL PROPERTIES 72
7.7 STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION 72
7.7.1 MAIN BERTH 72
7.7.2 DREDGING AND RECLAMATION 73
8 ENGINEERING OF CIVIL WORKS IN BACK UP AREA .............................78
8.1 GENERAL 78
8.2 DESIGN PARAMETERS 78
8.2.1 DEAD LOADS (DL) 78
8.2.2 LIVE LOADS (LL) 78
8.2.3 IMPACT FACTOR 79
8.2.4 WIND LOADS (WL) 79
8.2.5 SEISMIC LOADS (SL) 79
8.2.6 EARTH PRESSURE LOADS 79
8.2.7 LOAD COMBINATION 79
8.3 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 79
8.4 FOUNDATIONS 80
iii Introduction
8.4.1 TRESTLE / COLUMN FOUNDATIONS 80
8.4.2 STACKER TRACK FOUNDATIONS 80
8.4.3 MACHINE FOUNDATIONS 80
8.5 CONCRETE MIX 80
8.5.1 REINFORCEMENT 80
8.6 BRICK MASONRY 81
8.7 PLANT ROADS 81
8.8 STEEL STRUCTURES 81
8.8.1 GENERAL 81
8.8.2 DESIGN PARAMETERS 81
8.9 DESIGN STANDARDS 88
9 ENVIROMENTAL ASPECTS ..............................................................................91
9.1 INTRODUCTION 91
9.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR OBTAINING CLEARANCES 91
10 UTILITIES................................................................................................................93
10.1 POWER AND LIGHTING 93
10.1.1 POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 93
10.1.2 SUBSTATION‐1 95
10.1.3 CSS‐1 95
10.2 LT POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM: 95
10.3 STANDBY LT POWER SUPPLY 95
10.4 ILLUMINATION 96
10.5 CABLES 96
10.6 EARTHING & LIGHTNING PROTECTION 96
10.7 POWER FACTOR IMPROVEMENT 97
10.8 DRIVES & PLC SYSTEM 97
10.9 WATER 98
10.9.1 WATER DEMAND 98
10.9.2 SOURCE OF WATER AND WATER 98
10.9.3 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 99
10.10 SEWERAGE SYSTEM 99
10.11 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM 99
10.12 COMMUNICATIONS 100
10.13 FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM 100
10.14 DUST SUPPRESSION SYSTEM 101
10.15 MAJOR BUILDINGS IN THE PORT 101
10.16 INTERNAL ROADS, PAVED AREAS, FENCING ETC 101
10.17 ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION MEASURES 102
iv Introduction
10.18 GREEN BELT 102
11 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE....................................................................103
12 COST ESTIMATION...........................................................................................104
13 PROFITABILITY PROJECTION & FINANCIALS ........................................105
13.1 PROJECT COST AND MEANS OF FINANCE: 105
13.2 ASSUMPTIONS 105
13.2.1 CARGO ASSUMPTIONS: 105
13.2.2 REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS: 106
13.2.3 EXPENSE ASSUMPTIONS: 106
13.2.4 FINANCIAL COST ASSUMPTIONS: 107
List of tables
Table 1‐1 Details of Project Experience MPSEZL .............................................................................15
Table 2‐1 Main Rail Connectivity........................................................................................................22
Table 2‐2 Existing Approach Channel................................................................................................23
Table 2‐3 Existing port Facilities .........................................................................................................23
Table 2‐4 Existing port Cargo Handling Equipments......................................................................24
Table 2‐5 Existing port Cargo Handling Equipments......................................................................24
Table 2‐6 Existing port Warehouse and Storage area and Capacity ..............................................25
Table 2‐7 Existing port Storage Facilities for Liquid Cargo ............................................................25
Table 3‐1 Average Monthly Rainfall..................................................................................................28
Table 3‐2 Average Monthly Air Temperatures ................................................................................28
Table 3‐3 Current Measurement ........................................................................................................31
Table 3‐4 Deep Water Wave Climate (Probability of exceedence in % of time) .........................32
Table 3‐5 Operational Wave Climate at Harbour ............................................................................32
Table 3‐6 Average Monthly Relative Humidity...............................................................................33
Table 3‐7 Number of Days per Year with Visibility ........................................................................34
Table 4‐1 (million ton) Decision Matrix for Traffic Projections ......................................................37
Table 4‐2 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenarios 1 (MMT) .............................................39
Table 4‐3 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenarios 1 with KPCL’s coal (MMT) ..............40
Table 4‐4 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenario 2 (MMT) ...............................................41
Table 4‐5 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenario 2 with KPCL coal (MMT)...................41
Table 5‐1 Location and Elevation details of Boreholes Available...................................................44
Table 5‐2 Location and Elevation details of Boreholes Planned.....................................................45
Table 6‐1 Bulk Carrier Dimensions....................................................................................................49
Table 6‐2 Area summary for MPT Goa .............................................................................................52
Table 6‐3 Material Specifications ........................................................................................................53
Table 6‐4 Storage capacity & annual throughput of Terminal........................................................54
Table 6‐5 Details of 20,000 DWT Vessel .............................................................................................54
Table 6‐6 Details of 1,00,000 DWT Vessel ..........................................................................................54
Table 6‐7 Mechanical Engineering Codes..........................................................................................55
Table 6‐8 Details of Computations .....................................................................................................58
Table 6‐9 Stockpile Capacity in MT ....................................................................................................60
Table 6‐10 Summary of Key Conveyor Design Parameters ............................................................63
Table 8‐1 CIVIL.....................................................................................................................................89
Table 8‐2 Geotechnical.........................................................................................................................89
v Introduction
Table 10‐1 LT load data sheet .............................................................................................................93
Table 10‐2 HT load data sheet ............................................................................................................94
Table 10‐3 HT load data sheet ............................................................................................................98
Table 12‐1 Statement of Project Cost ............................................................................................... 104
Table 13‐1 Project Cost of developing the berth ............................................................................ 105
Table 13‐2 Cargo Assumption year wise ........................................................................................ 105
Table 13‐3 Profit & Loss account...................................................................................................... 108
Table 13‐4 Balance Sheet ................................................................................................................... 109
List of Figures
Figure 1‐1: Adani Group Turnover, Net Profit and Gross Block 8
Figure 1‐2: Adani Group of Companies 8
Figure 1‐3: Mundra Port & SEZ Operating and Holding Companies 10
Figure 1‐4: MPSEZ port servicies. 11
Figure 1‐5: Yearwise trend of cargoes handling at Mundra Port (in M.T.) 13
Figure 2‐1 Geographical location of Mormugao Port 18
Figure 2‐2 Geographical location of Mormugao Port 19
Figure 2‐3 Proposed Berth 7 location 19
Figure 2‐4 Road map, Goa 21
Figure 2‐5 Rail Network in Goa 22
Figure 6‐1 Relationship between waiting time to service time ratio and berth occupancy 59
Figure 7‐1 Location of Proposed Berth No. 7 and Immediate Back‐up Yard 74
Attachment:
Annexure A: Drawings
Annexure B: Hydraulic Model Studies
Annexure C: Survey charts for MPT Goa
Annexure D: I‐maritime Report
Annexure E: Detailed soil investigation Reports
Annexure F: EIA Report
Annexure G: Implementation Schedule
vi Introduction
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Mormugao is one of the 13 major ports of India. Located on the west coast, it is
the foremost iron‐ore exporting ports in India. It handled more than 27
million MT of iron‐ore FY 2008, primarily to China. Coal (thermal and coke) is
the second most important commodity handled at the port (4.2 million tonnes FY
2008).
In reference to Bid dated 27th June 2009 submitted by the Consortium of M/s.
Mundra Port & Special Economic Zone Limited, Ahmedabad and M/s. Adani
Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad in response to the RFP for the Development of the
coal Handling Terminal at Port of Mormugao, Goa on design, Built, finance,
operate and transfer (DBFOT) basis Berth no. 7, MPT Goa has awarded LOA on
dated 7th Aug 2009.
Mundra Port & Special Economic Zone Limited (MPSEZL), India’s largest
private port and integrated SEZ, is operating a state‐of–the‐art, SEZ based port
terminal at Mundra, Gujarat. In addition to this, MPSEZL is planning to
develop and operate berth no 7 at Mormugao Port on DBFOT basis.
Mormugao Port Trust has issued a Letter of Award (LOA) to Mundra Port & SEZ
Limited for to design, Built, finance, operate and transfer the proposed coal
handling terminal at Mormugao Port. India.
To perform the development of Mormugao Port under the concession agreement
granted by Mormugao Port Trust to MPSEZL has formed a wholly owned
subsidiary named “Adani Mormugao Port Terminal Private Limited”
(hereinafter referred as AMPTPL or Developer).
1.2 DEVELOPER DETAILS
ADANI GROUP
1.2.1 Introduction
Adani Group, a diversified conglomerate, has interests in various activities

including Power, Infrastructure, Global Trading, Logistics, Energy, Edible Oil
refining and infrastructure projects and services. The group is recognized for
creating benchmarks; being the operator of largest private port in India, the
7 Introduction
developer of largest multi product port led SEZ in India, the largest edible oil
refining capacity in India, and being one of the largest trading houses in India,
Adani group is committed to constantly deliver good returns to its stakeholders
and convert partnerships into winning combination.
Having leadership in trading operations and development of private
infrastructure projects, Adani Group is one of the fastest growing business
houses in India, with a total turnover of around USD 6000 mn. Concomitantly,
the group’s asset base has increased to around USD 3000 mn.
Net Profit (USD mn.) Turnover (USD mn.) Gross Block + CWIP (USD mn.)
3080
6026
196
4271
121 3654 1667
75 904
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
Figure 1‐1: Adani Group Turnover, Net Profit and Gross Block
Adani group has emerged as a fast emerging conglomerate with diversified
operations. Adani Enterprise (AEL), the global energy trading arm is the flagship
company of Adani Group, Mundra Port & SEZ Ltd (MPSEZL) has emerged to be
the group’s infrastructure and logistics arm. Adani Power Ltd (APL) is the
group’s power generation, distribution and transmission company. Supported
by several integrated businesses and project vehicles, these companies have
placed Adani group amongst the front running business conglomerates in India.

Figure 1‐2: Adani Group of Companies
8 Introduction
1.2.2 Adani enterprises ltd: an evolving conglomerate
AEL has over the years transformed itself into a diversified asset backed
commodities trader, sourcing, producing, marketing and transporting various
commodities globally. The company operates through various offices including
eight overseas offices in USA, UAE, China, Singapore, Indonesia and Mauritius.
To further strengthen its presence in the commodity landscape, it is venturing
into asset backed commodity trading to help it de risk the commodity trading
portfolio and avoid the ever increasing pressure on the margins. Today it has a
diversified presence in five business sectors Energy (Comprising Power, Coal
and Oil & Gas), Real Estate, Agro & Metals and Minerals, with shipping acting as
backbone to its various businesses.
AELʹs diversified status originates from its corporate strategy aimed at creating
multiple drivers of growth anchored on its time‐tested core competencies:
unmatched distribution reach, superior brand‐building capabilities, effective
supply chain management and acknowledged service skills.
AEL over a period of time has developed its subsidiaries across various business
segments,
- Power Generation Business – Adani Power Limited.
- Coal Mining Operations – Adani Mining Private Limited.
- Oil & Gas Exploration – Adani Welspun Exploration Limited
- City Gas Distribution – Adani Energy Limited
- Edible Oil crushing and refining – Adani Wilmar Limited
- Controlled Atmospheric Storage Facility – Adani Agrifresh Limited.
- Vertical Food Grain Storage Silos – Adani Agri Logistics Limited.
- Shipping as a backbone to the Trading operation – Adani Shipping Pte. Ltd.
- Global Markets Proximity – Adani Global FZE & Adani Global PTE.
- Real Estate Development – Adani Infrastructure Developers Pvt. Ltd.
The philosophy, as enunciated by Adani Group is to invest in sustainable
ventures in the emerging fields and develop and nurture them to a value added
entity and in the process to develop the Holding Company Adani Enterprises
9 Introduction
Ltd., as a fast emerging conglomerate with diversified operations with high
margin annuity business models.
1.2.3 Mundra port & SEZ LTD (MPSEZ): the port and infrastructure vehicle
Mundra Port and Special Economic Zone Ltd is Adani group’s port
Infrastructure, SEZ and logistics development. Awarded with various awards
and accreditations, MPSEZL has emerged as India’s fastest growing port with
world class allied backup facilities. MPSEZL operates Mundra port with a water
front of about 40 kms.
Mundra Port & SEZ

(Operating and Holding Company)
Adani Petronet Adani Adani

(Dahej) Port Logistics Ltd. Mormugao Port
Pvt. Ltd. Terminal Pvt.
Container Coal
Dahej terminal at
Train ICD’s
Mormugao
Figure 1‐3: Mundra Port & SEZ Operating and Holding Companies
Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Private Limited (“APPPL”) is a joint venture
between the MPSEZL and Petronet LNG Limited (“PLL”). APPPL has been
appointed and granted the exclusive right by PLL and GMB to finance, develop,
operate and maintain a solid cargo port terminal at Dahej, Gujarat. A fully
mechanized dry cargo port; Dahej port is being developed to have a handling
capacity up to 15 mMT of cargo. The Port is expected to be operational in July
2010.
Adani Logistics Ltd a subsidiary of MPSEZL is engaged in the business of
developing, constructing, operating and maintaining the Inland Container
Depots and running container trains across India.
Coal Terminal at Mormugao Port: MPSEZL led consortium has recently been
awarded concession to construct and operate a 330 meter coal bulk berth at
10 Introduction
Mormugao Port at Mormugao at Goa in September 2009. The berth is proposed
to be operational in three years time.
1.2.4 MPSZ: business areas
MPSEZL the developer and operator of the Mundra Port, is one of the largest
private sector ports in India based on volume of cargo during fiscal 2009.
MPSEZL has the exclusive right to develop and operate Mundra Port and related
facilities for 30 years within the notified port limits pursuant to the Concession
Agreement entered on February 17, 2001 with the GMB and the Government of
Gujarat. MPSEZL received approval as a developer of a multi‐product SEZ at
Mundra and the surrounding areas from the Government of India on April 12,
2006, making it one of the first port‐based multi‐products SEZ in India.
Mundra port is principally engaged in providing port services for (i) Bulk cargo
(ii) Container cargo (iii) Crude oil cargo (iv) Value‐added port services, including
railway services and (v) land related and infrastructure activities.
MPSEZ
Land and
Bulk Cargo Crude Oil Container Railway Infrastructur
Figure 1‐4: MPSEZ port servicies.
The Company operates 8 bulk loading berths at Mundra port comprising of a
dedicated multi‐purpose terminal (“Terminal I”) with a total of four berths and a
barge berth. Second multi‐purpose terminal (“Terminal II”), with an
approximate length of 575 m and a width of 47 m with a total of 4 berths,
commenced is operations in FY2007. Mundra Port also has two Container
terminals viz. (i) Container Terminal I which has two container berths and is
operated by the Sub‐concessionaire pursuant to Sub‐concession agreement
signed with the Mundra International Container Terminal Private Limited
(MICT) and operational since July 2003 and (ii) Container Terminal II also has
two Container Berths operational since April 2008. Both container terminals have
container yard area of approx 25 hectares each. The port has also allocated land
to various port users to set up container freight stations, tankage space for POL
products, crude oil and other ancillary facilities.
11 Introduction
Mundra port operates a Single Point Mooring (SPM) facility for handling imports
of crude oil for Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL) since year 2005. It is
operational 24x7 and has a capacity to handled 50 MMTPA. The port has
constructed rail link connecting the port to Indian Railways network at Adipur
thus facilitating movement of cargo in and out of port. The rail operation within
the Port complex is done by port owned locomotives. Besides, the port has
created adequate warehouse space of approx 137,000 sq. m. closed godowns ,
approx. 800,000 sq m for bulk cargo and 342,000 KL of liquid storage facility.
MPSEZL is currently developing India’s largest coal bulk terminal at Mundra to
cater up to 50 million ton of imported coal. The said facility will be operational
by FY 11 and would catapult MPSEZL as on of the leading ports in South East
Asia.
1.2.5 Role of MPSEZ in Port Development
Mundra port and Special Economic zone Ltd. (MPSEZL) manages the largest
privately developed port in the country. Mundra Port has been accredited with
“Private Port of the Year 2009” the Indian Maritime Gateway Award 2009.
MPSEZL is the first successful private Greenfield port developer in India.
MPSEZ is operating, Mundra Port under a thirty (30) years concession agreement
with Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB) and Government of Gujarat (GOG) as
confirming party. Recently MESEZL has signed a concession agreement with
Mormugao Port Trust for Development of Coal Terminal on BOT basis for 30
year.
Mundra Port at a glance:
• Mundra port have eight operational Bulk/General Cargo Berths with
along side depths ranging from 13 ‐17 m suitable for berthing Post –
Panamax & Capesize vessel
• Port also have four separate container berths which are capable of
handling Ultra‐large container ships.
• Port has established a Single point mooring (SPM) facility at a depth of
32 m for handling crude oil.
• Ships with 1,50,000 MT parcel sizes (Cape Size) can be handled at berths
• The port has efficient Road Connectivity to the National Highway 8A.
• The Port has privately developed 64 Km long railway line from
Mundra to Adipur which connects itself to the national railway network.
12 Introduction
• Port has handled 35.8 mMT of diverse cargo in year 2008‐09
• The port targets Volumes upto 50 mMT in Year 2010‐11
• MPSEZL prides itself on their excellent customer relations .It always
strive to keep its customer satisfied through its value added service .
Yearwise Trend of cargoes handling at Mundra Port (in MT)
40
35.8
35
30 28.8
25
19.78
20
15
11.73
10 8.61
4.2 5.17
5
0
2002 - 03 2003 - 04 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 2006 - 07 2007 - 08 2008 - 09
Figure 1‐5: Yearwise trend of cargoes handling at Mundra Port (in M.T.)
Cargo Handling & Storage system:
• Ship unloader & conveyer system for coal & fertilizer imports
• Ship loader & conveyor system for exports of dry bulk
• Storage area of 1 Mil m²
• 1400 Ha of land leased by Government of Gujarat ( State Government )
• Rights to reclaim waterfront area & developed land
• State of art technology of handling all kinds of liquid bulk including
edible oil , petroleum products & chemicals
• Port is having a storage capacity of 2,85,000 KL inside the port limits for
storing Liquid bulk
• Only port in India to have Bulk Bitumen handling facility inside port
• Port is capable of handling oversized & overweight cargo
13 Introduction
Crude Oil Handling
• SPM is operational at 8 Km Offshore , at a depth of 32 m for handling
crude oil
• The SPM’s location makes it capable of handling VLCCs & ULCCs of
upto 5,00,000 DWT ( Tons in Dead weight )
Container Terminals
• 2.2 Million TEU capacity terminal already operational
• State of art handling equipments which includes super post Panamax
quay
• Dedicated rail handling facility
• Fastest growing container terminal in India
• Deepest draft container terminal in India with alongside depth of 17 M
capable of berthing Ultra large container ships
Facilities / Other Infrastructure:
• Own Dredgers
• Bunkering facility
• Own Eight High Powered Tugs
• Custom establishment for statutory clearances
• SAP enabled business process operations & Integrated Port
Management System (IPMS) with customer operation software
• Eight state of art mobile harbor cranes for dry cargo handling
• Ten privately managed container Freight stations
Car / Auto Terminal:
• A car /Truck carrier berth is developed with PDI (Pre Dispatch
Inspection) facilities & appropriate car parking space. Port has entered
into long Term agreement with Maruti – Suzuki India for handling its
car exports
Future Developments:
• LNG Terminal (2013‐14)‐ LNG Terminal JV with Gujarat state
Petroleum corporation with total capacity of 20 Mil TPA; first phase 5
Mil TPA
• Coal Terminal (2010‐11) ‐ Coal Terminal at Vandh ‐20 km from existing
port 40 Mil TPA capacity. It would be the largest coal import Terminal in
the world
14 Introduction
• Second SPM would be setting up at Mundra port by HPCL –Mittal
Energy Limited
Table 1‐1 Details of Project Experience MPSEZL
Investment made for Execution of BOOT Project,
Year
Rs. Cr
2006 – 07 511
2007 – 08 903
2008 ‐ 09 1332
Total 2746
1.3 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE COAL

TERMINAL
• Project facility will broadly include the development of coal terminal in
place of existing berth no. 7, on Design, Build, Finance, Operate and
Transfer basis for handling a minimum quantity of 4.61 Million Tons per
annum.
• Designing and constructing a new berth of 300m length in front of
existing berth no. 7 and in line with existing berth No. 6A and 8 capable
of handling cape size of vessels considering future dredging up to (‐)
16.5 m
• Reclaiming waterfront area (Approximately 35100 m²) in front of
existing berth No 7.
• Developing a suitable stackyard contiguous to new berth no 7.
• Designing and setting up the mechanized coal handling plant and
machinery and equipments of required capacity including laying of
tracks for equipments.
• Installation of suitable equipment and facility of required capacity
(Rapid‐in‐motion wagon loading) for evacuation of coal by rail.
• Provision of installation of suitable equipment and facility of atleast 1
(One) million tons per annum for evacuation of coal by road.
• Dredging shall be carried out alongside of the new berth no 7 and
navigational channel in the water area of approximately 41000 m². The
initial required depth alongside new berth no. 7 shall be (‐) 14.5m CD.
15 Introduction
• The plant shall be designed to the highest environmental standards
using latest dust suppression technology.
• The facility shall provide Electronic Data transfer facility and interface
with port ERP system wherever required.
16 Introduction
2 EXISTING PORT FACILITY
2.1 GENERAL
Goa, the Union Territory of India, is situated on the Western Coast
(Konkan Coast). It shares its border with Maharashtra and Karnataka on the
land side and Arabian Sea towards the sea. It has one Major Port ‐ Mormugao
and 5 Minor ports – Panjim, Chapora, Betul, Talpona and Tiracol. The total traffic
handled at Goa was 47.07 million ton in FY 2008. Of this around 72.75% of traffic
was handled at the major port of Mormugao. The remaining was primarily
handled at the port of Panjim.
Iron ore remains an anchor commodity for Goa, representing 85% (40 million
ton) of total cargo handled in Goa. Iron ore is mined in Goa and exported to
other locations in India as well as to international destinations (China, etc.)
2.2 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
The original port was constructed in 1880’s and included berths 1, 2 and 3. At the
time of liberation from Portuguese rule, berths 4, 5, 6 and 7 had also been added.
Major Port development took place in the mid 1970’s. Berth No. 8 (POL berth)
was commissioned in 1976 and Berth No. 9 (Iron ore berth) along with the
Mechanical Ore Handling Plant (MOHP) in 1978. The deepening of the channel
and harbour basin (dredged to ‐13.40 m.) for large ore carriers was also carried
out in 1978.
The construction of general cargo berth no. 10 in 1985 was the start of a new
phase of development in the port followed by the second general cargo berth no.
11 in 1994. In the meantime berths 3 & 4 had to be decommissioned in 1989 due
to damage to berth no. 3. In 1992, the private use of berths 6 & 7 by Chowgule for
handling of iron ore was discontinued and berth no. 6 with berth no. 5 were used
to supplement berths 10 & 11 for handling general cargo.
In 1993, berths 1,2 and 3 land area of 31,000 square meters and water area of
50,000 square meters were leased to the Western India Shipyard Limited for
setting up a floating dry dock. The lease period is for 25 years. The floating dry
dock became operational in December 1995.
In 1999, the port signed a license agreement with M/s ABG Heavy Industries Ltd.
(Now renamed as South West Port Ltd.) to construct and operate two modern
17 existing port facility
berths named 5A & 6A to handle coal/ coke and other general cargo. The existing
berths 4, 5 and 6 including land area of approximately 40,000 square meters and
water area of 61,000 square meters was handed over to them for this purpose.
The lease period is for 30 years. The facility became operational in June 2004.
The year 2001 saw the addition of three mooring dolphins primarily for handling
iron ore. Though the rated capacity of this facility is 2.50 million tones, during
the year 2007‐08, 5.30 million tones of ore was handled through this facility. The
port is now in the process of constructing 3 more dolphins considering the
demand for this facility particularly during the monsoons. In the year 2003, the
approach channel was deepened to ‐14.40 m and alongside of berth no. 9 to ‐
14.10 m.
The port is also constructing 2 berths, one along the breakwater mole of length
270 m which will be mainly for cruise and other non cargo vessels and the
second berth between the water area of SWPL and WISL. This berth will be for
small crafts. The port has also plans for developing the waterfront west of
breakwater.

Figure 2‐1 Geographical location of Mormugao Port
2.3 SITE LOCATION
The port of Mormugao, one of the oldest ports of India commissioned in 1888
and one among the 13 major ports in India, is situated in Goa state, between the
major ports of Mumbai and New Mangolore. It is located at the mouth of river
Zuari at latitude 15° 25’ North and longitude 73° 48’ East & Goa is located at a
distance of about 580 km south of Mumbai. The current project area is situated
on the right side of South West Port Limited coal handling terminal.
Mormugao
Port Location

Figure 2‐2 Geographical location of Mormugao Port
Figure 2‐3 Proposed Berth 7 location
2.4 CONNECTIVITY ‐ ROAD
Goa, in general has good road infrastructure. The state has a network of 224 Km
of National Highways and 232 Km of State Highways. Two major National
highways connect Goa with the rest of the country. NH‐17 enters in state from
Maharashtra and provides North‐South connectivity with neighboring states of
Maharashtra and Karnataka, while NH‐4A enters the state from Karnataka
and provides East‐West connectivity. NH‐4A gets further connected to NH‐17
at Panjim. NH‐17A connects Mormugao to NH‐17 at Kortalim.
The national highways are currently two‐lane, single carriageways.
External Road: An extensive road network in the Goa region, providing an
important transportation link with the rest of country. Goa is connected with all
major towns of India as well via NH4A, NH17, NH17A and partially built
NH17B.
NH – 17 runs close and parallel to the sea coast and pass through Panvel, Panaji,
and Managlore connected with NH – 47 in Kerala. The total length of NH – 17 is
1269 Km and serves also Mumbai, Karwar and Mangalore ports. The road
presently has 2 lane configurations and provides the access for movement of
cargo towards Mumbai in north direction and towards Kerala in south direction.
NH ‐ 17A approximately 19 Km long connects Mormugao Port to NH17 at
Cortalim. The road presently has 2 lane configurations.
NH – 17A is the east – west connection between the port and Karnataka state.
NH – 17 B of 18 Km long connecting Verna Junction on NH – 17 and NH – 4A.
The entire port bound traffic has to pass through Vasco town to Mormugao from
NH –17A and NH – 17B. It has 2 lane configurations with some section of 4 lane.
NH – 4A joins NH – 4 at Belgaum, which is south‐western stretch of the Golden
Quadrilateral. NH ‐ 4A along with NH – 4 and NH – 17B provide the east – west
accessibility of freight traffic movement to/from the port. It has 2 lane
configurations at present.
Apart form these roads connectivity, other important corridors serving the port
traffic form states of Goa, Karnataka and Maharastra include the followings
• NH – 4 (Mumbai – Chennai)
• NH – 63 (Ankola – Gadag – Bellary – NH 7)
• NH – 206 (Honavar – Shimoga – Tumkur)
The existing road network of Goa is shown in Figure 2.4

Figure 2‐4 Road map, Goa
2.5 CONNECTIVITY ‐ RAIL
Goa is connected with neighboring states via South Central Railways and
Konkan Railways. Railway station at Vasco in Goa is situated a few kilometers
away from Mormugao Port and is linked by a Broad Gauge line. Konkan
Railways network passes through the states of Karnataka, Goa and
Maharashtra with a 105 km stretch in Goa. Konkan railway joins the South
Central Railways at Majorda & leaves it at Madgaon (Margao Railway Station).
Konkan Railway provides north‐south connectivity, while South‐Western
railway provides connectivity to the interiors towards the East.
90% of cargo handled at this Port is bulk cargo consisting of iron ore and coal.
Almost entire coal traffic is moved by rail. It may be noted that both Konkan
railways as well as South Central railway till Bellary is mostly single line with
some sections as double in between.

Figure 2‐5 Rail Network in Goa
There are four routes in the main sections that would influence the rain
connectivity capacity analysis.
They may be summarized as Table 2.1, Konkan Railway provides north‐south
connectivity, while South‐Western railway provides connectivity to the interiors
towards the East.
Table 2‐1 Main Rail Connectivity
Route
Rail routes Traffic Directions
No
1 Vasco‐Majorda‐Madgaon‐Loliem‐Manglore South (Along the coast)
Vasco‐Majorda‐Madgaon‐Kulem‐Castle East & North bound
2
Rock‐Londa‐Belgaum‐Miraj traffic
Vasco‐Majorda‐Madgaon‐Kulem‐Castle
3 East & South East bound
Rock‐Londa‐Dharwad‐Hubli‐Hospet‐Bellary
Vasco‐Cansulim‐Verna‐Mapusa‐Pernam‐
4 West (along the coast)
Ratnagiri‐Mumbai
2.6 EXISTING PORT RELATED INFORMATION
2.6.1 GENERAL
This port is the premier iron ore exporting Port of India with an annual
throughput of around 33.8 m MT. The Port accounts for about 50% of Indiaʹs iron
ore export and ranks among the top 10 iron ore exporting Ports of the world.
Through iron ore is the predominant cargo there has been a liquid bulk and
general cargo since it was declared a Major Port in 1964. Container traffic has
also grown at a quick pace.
2.6.2 APPROACH CHANNEL
Table 2‐2 Existing Approach Channel
Sr No Description Remarks
1. Length Outer Channel ‐ 5.2 km.
Inner Channel ‐ 0.5 Km.
2. Depth below LLWS ‐14.4 m CD
3. Tidal Range 2 to 2.3 meters.
4. Width of Channel 250 meters.
5. Turning Basin Diameter ‐ 480 meters.
Depth ‐14.4 m CD
The approach channel to berth is marked by lighted buoys in addition to
navigational aids prescribed in Admiralty Charts 2020 & 2078.
2.6.3 PORT FACILITIES
Table 2‐3 Existing port Facilities
Length L.O.A.
Berth Draft (in m) Cargo
In m In m
5 210 190 12.5 General Cargo, coal Coke etc.
6 240 198 14.0 General Cargo, coal Coke etc.
7 100 100 3.5 Irone ore and Irone ore pellets, coke, etc.
8 298 260 12.7 Liquid Bulk
9 358 335 14.0 Iron Ore
10 250 225 11.5 General Cargo & Container Cargo
11 270 225 12.7 General Cargo & Container Cargo
2.6.4 MOORING AND ANCHORAGE
Three mooring dolphins capable of accommodating Panamax vessels of about
70,000 DWT are available in mid stream to handle ores and other bulk cargo by
ship’s own gears. 3 additional mooring dolphins are under construction which
would yield a capacity of 5.0 mMT.
2.6.5 CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT
Table 2‐4 Existing port Cargo Handling Equipments
Sr No Equipment Capacity Nos.
1. Mobile Crane 18.0 MT 1
2. Reach Stacker 40.0 MT 1
3. Forklift Truck 3.0 MT 8
4. Forklift Truck 5.0 MT 1
5. Plug points of suitable capacity to cater to the
440 V 56
reefer containers
6. Locomotives 1400 HP 2
2.6.6 MECHANICAL ORE HANDLING PLANT (MOHP)
Loading & unloading of iron ore at the Mechanical Ore Handling Plant at berth
No. 9 is operated by Conveyer Belt System. Details of equipment connected with
it are as follows:
Table 2‐5 Existing port Cargo Handling Equipments
Sr No. Equipment Capacity Nos.

1. Barge unloaders 750 TPH 8
2. Continuous Barge Unloaders 1250 TPH 1
3. Stackers 3250 TPH 3
4. Reclaimers 4000 TPH 2
5. Ship loader 4000 TPH 2
2.6.7 LIQUID BULK HANDLING FACILITY
Specialized facilities are available at berth no. 8 for handling petroleum products
& other liquid cargoes like Phosphoric acid. About 1.5 million tones of liquid
cargoes are handled at Mormugao Port per annum. Phosphoric acid can also be
discharged at berth no. 10 & 11 also. Liquid cargoes like caustic soda, Furnace oil
etc. are also handled at tankages provided by private operators near Berth No 5
& 6.
2.6.8 WAREHOUSING & STORAGE
Table 2‐6 Existing port Warehouse and Storage area and Capacity
No. of Plots/ Area Storage Capacity

Description
Sheds In M² (MT)
COVERED STORAGE
Owned by the Port
Transit Shed 2 10010 15015
Warehouses 5 17096 35644
Total 7 27106 50659
Other Warehouses & Godowns
C.W.C. 3 8412 12618
F.C.I. 2 8268 12402
Total 5 16680 25020
Total Covered Storage 12 43786 75679
Open Storage
Behind B. No. 6 & 7 3 13332 39996
Behind B. No. 10 1 16000 48000(*)

1 22200 66600
Behind B. No. 11
2.6.9 STORAGE FACILITIES FOR LIQUID CARGOES
Table 2‐7 Existing port Storage Facilities for Liquid Cargo
No. of Capacity
Company Products Handled
tanks (in KL)
Indian Oil Corpn. 18 115329 Pol Products
Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. 8 35308 Pol Products
Zuari Industries Ltd. 3 13554 Phosphoric Acid
Furnace Oil, Caustic Soda,
IMC Ltd. 2 4155
Molasses, etc.
Furnace Oil Caustic Soda,
J. R. Enterprises 2 8000
Molasses, etc.
United Storage & Tank Furnace Oil Caustic Soda,
4 5870
Terminals Ltd. Molasses, etc.
Total 37 182216

2.6.10 BUNKERING
Facilities are available to a limited extent for supply of furnace oil, light diesel oil
and high speed diesel oil to vessels visiting the port at the berth with prior
arrangements with oil companies. Furnace oil can be supplied through shore
pipelines on berth No. 8 and 9. HSD can be supplied by trucks only.
2.6.11 DRY DOCK & SHIP REPAIR
A major ship repairing complex with dry docking facilities has been set up at the
Port by M/s. Western India Shipyard Ltd. The Floating Dry Dock is of 15,000 TLC
for accommodating ships up to a maximum size of 60,000 DWT/215m LOA.
Besides this facilities for afloat repairs as well as chipping painting and tank
cleaning are provided by a number of licensed specialized private firms as well
as by Goa Shipyard a Govt. of India undertaking situated in the vicinity of the
Port area.

3 SITE CONDITION AND PHYSICAL SETTINGS
3.1 SITE LOCATION
The port of Mormugao, one of the oldest ports of India commissioned in 1888
and one among the 13 major ports in India, is situated in Goa state, between the
major ports of Mumbai and New Mangolore. It is located at the mouth of river
Zuari at latitude 15° 25’ North and longitude 73° 48’ East & Goa is located at a
distance of about 580 km south of Mumbai. The current project area is situated
on the right side of South West Port Limited coal handling terminal.
3.2 TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES
There is neither significant vegetation nor any habitation in the proposed Port
area. The existing level in the back up area is in the range of + 4.0 m CD to + 5.0 m
CD. Area immediate behind the proposed berth is having levels in the range of –
3.0 m to – 11.0 m CD. Port back up area will be filled with suitable reclaiming
material. Area gently slopes towards sea coast.
3.3 BATHYMETRY
Information regarding Bathymetry in the region is available on Sea Charts 2020
& 2078. The area has also been surveyed by MPT Goa Survey Department by
taking dense soundings. The survey charts developed by Survey department
MPT Goa are attached in Annexure C.
3.4 METEOROLOGICAL AND OCEANOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS
The Met‐Ocean conditions have been previously ascertained at several stages in
the course of various studies conducted in past in respect of MPT Goa Port
Development. The site of the Proposed Port is in the same region. Flow modeling
for the proposed location has been covered in the Model developed by CWPRS
Pune, who has developed the model Port area.
The climate of the region is tropical, characterized by two monsoon seasons viz.
the south west monsoon (mid June‐September) and the north east monsoon
(December‐March). The post monsoon period comprises the months of October
and November while the period April to mid June is the transition period.
27 site condition and physical settings
Main conditions having significant bearing on Planning and Design of the Port
are described here in below.
3.4.1 RAINFALL
Table 3.1 shows the average rainfall for different months of the year and the
number of rainy days in each month. Rainy day is a day with at least 2.5 mm
rainfall.
Table 3‐1 Average Monthly Rainfall
Month Average Number of Rainy
Rainfall (mm) Days
January 0.2 0.0
February 0.1 0.0
March 1.2 0.1
April 11.8 0.8
May 112.7 4.2
June 868.2 21.9
July 994.8 27.2
August 518.7 23.3
September 251.9 13.5
October 124.8 6.2
November 30.9 2.5
December 16.7 0.4
Total 2932 100.1
Source: IMD
90% of the total annual rainfall occurs during the months from June to
September. There are, approximate 100 rainy days per year.
3.4.2 TEMPERATURE
The monthly average air temperatures are as shown in Table 3.2
Table 3‐2 Average Monthly Air Temperatures
Month Average Maximum (ºC) Average Minimum (ºC)
January 31.6 19.6

February 31.5 20.5
March 32.0 23.2
April 33.0 25.6
Month Average Maximum (ºC) Average Minimum (ºC)
May 33.0 26.3

June 30.3 24.7
July 28.9 24.1
August 28.8 24.0
September 20.5 23.8
October 31.6 23.8
November 32.8 22.3
December 32.4 20.6
Source: IMD
From the averages, it is observed that April and May are the hottest months of
the year with the highest average maximum and the highest average minimum
temperatures while January and February are the coldest months of the year
with the lowest average maximum and lowest average minimum temperatures.
The highest temperature recorded was 39ºC on 12 March 1979 while the lowest
recorded was 13.3ºC on 25 February 1965.
3.4.3 PREVAILING WIND AND CYCLONES
The normal wind force varies from 4 to 7 on the Beaufort Scale. The direction is
mainly from South‐West, West and North‐West during the monsoon season.
During the rest of the year wind direction is from North, North‐East, East and
South‐East in the morning and from South‐West, West and North‐West during
the evening. The highest average wind speed is in the range of 30 kmph,
recorded in July 1965. The highest speed is 80 kmph, recorded in July 1965. The
highest speed is 80 kmph, recorded in December 1966. The wind forces more
than 10 on the Beaufort Scale are not expected.
Mormugao is not situated in a pronounced cyclone zone and the number of
occasions it was visited by cyclones during the past 90 years is less than a dozen.
For the design of the Berth, an operating wind speed of 26 m/sec and the storm
basic wind speed of 39 m /sec shall be considered as per IS:875‐Part 3.
3.4.4 WIND CONDTIONS
The mean wind speed varies from 2 on the Beaufort scale in November to 4 in
July, the annual mean wind speed being 13.6 KMPH. In an average year, there
are 316 days with wind varying from 0 to 3 on the Beaufort scale and 48 days
with winds scaling 4 to 7 on the Beaufort scale, and 1 calm day.
The predominant wind direction changes with the time of the year. During the
period June – September wind blows from the W and SW. During the remaining
period, the wind direction is from NE, ESE.
3.4.5 TIDES
The nature of tides prevailing at Mormugao is mainly semi‐diuranl exhibiting
two high and two low waters in a tidal day. The mean tidal variation is of the
order of 1.6 m at spring tides and around 0.7 m at neap tides.
Based on Indian Naval Hydrographic Chart No. 2020, the tide levels with respect
to chart Datum at Mormugao harbour are as follows:
Higher High Water at Spring Solstices ‐ +2.3 m
Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) ‐ +1.9 m
Mean Lower High Water (MLHW) ‐ +1.8 m
Mean Higher Low Water (MHLW) ‐ +1.0 m
Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) ‐ +0.5 m
Mean Sea Level (MSL) ‐ +1.3 m
Tidal were measured at 15 minute interval for a month during April – May 1998
by installing a tide gauge at Oil Berth No. 8. The maximum tidal range observed
during the spring tide was 2.7 m and the minimum range during neap tide was
0.51 m.
At present, an electronic tide gauge has been installed at Berth no 8 and tide
levels are captured by VTMS at the signal station.
3.4.6 CURRENTS
The currents in the region outside the sheltered harbour have been found to be
generally less than one knot, during fair season and are mainly caused by tidal
ebb and flow. Within the sheltered harbour, indicated currents strengths are of
the order of 30 to 40 cm/sec. During heavy monsoon rains the current pattern is
altered from that during the fair season but the current strengths do not get
appreciably altered.
As part of the field investigations in Vasco Bay, current observation were taken
at two locations (CM1‐15° 26’ 00” N, 73° 48’ 18” E, CM2 ‐ 15° 24’ 21”N, 73° 48’
42” E). A summary of the current measurements is given in Table 2.3.
Table 3‐3 Current Measurement
CM2 (Water
CM1 (Water depth, 7 m)
depth, 3.5 m)
Near Surface Mid depth Near bottom Near bottom
Maximum speed (cm/cc) 68 31 29 57
Minimum Speed (cm/cc) 0 0 0 0
Predominant Direction ESE‐WNW ESE‐WNW ESE‐WNW ESE
Measurements at open location (CM1) indicate that the predominant flow is in
the ESE‐WNW direction, while at the location (CM2) close to the shore, the
predominant direction is ESE. The flow of currents is predominantly due to the
tidal currents. During flood water, flow is towards Zuvari River while during the
ebbing, the reversal of flow takes place.
The maximum current velocity was observed as 68 cm/sec.
Presently current measurements near berth no 8 are captured by VTMS at the
signal station. The current values are printed and sent to MPT twice a day.
3.4.7 WAVE CONDTIONS
A number of wave observations have been made at and around Mormugao
harbour at different times, including both ship observations & those made from
the shore and the measured wave heights by installing a wave rider buoy.
Mormugao harbour on the Southern side where berths are located is protected
by a breakwater and mole and generally it is the waves from directions between
SW and NW that could affect the tranquility in the harbour. The deep water
waves from NW generally have a small % probability exceedence and do not
affect harbour tranquility significantly since their heights get reduced by the time
they reach the harbour.
HOWE during their master plan study constructed the wave rose diagram from
the visually observed wave heights during the period 1949 to 1962, from the area
bounded by Latitude 10° N to 20° N and Longitude 70° E to 80° E. These wave
analyses indicated that the yearly average probability of exceedence of the wave
height of 2 m for the Westerly direction would be
Direction Exc . Hs = 2 m
SW 4.7%
W 4.5%
NW 0.4%
Frederic R Harris (FRH) during their master plan study in 1997 carried out
further additional wave climate analyses based on wave observations made
during the period 1961‐1980 bound by Latitude 13° N to 16° N and Longitude 70°
E to 74°E and arrived at the following results for deep water wave climate and
wave heights at harbour entrance;
Table 3‐4 Deep Water Wave Climate (Probability of exceedence in % of time)
HS= 1.0 m 2.0 m 3.0 m 4.0 m 5.0 m 6.0 m
SW 12.2 8.7 4.7 2.2 0.8 0.3
W 22.0 14.4 8.1 3.6 0.7 ‐
NW 9.6 2.5 0.7 0.3 ‐ ‐
Due to refraction, shoaling and breaking, the wave direction and wave height
will change while traveling from deep water to the harbour entrance. Generally
by refraction the waves from NW turn to WNW. Waves from W and NW reduce
in height. All wave conditions higher than Hs = 4 m are reduce by wave
breaking. The operational wave climate at the harbour entrance in presented here
below;
Table 3‐5 Operational Wave Climate at Harbour
(Probability of exceedence in % of time)
HS= 1.0 m 2.0 m 3.0 m 4.0 m
SW 12.2 8.7 4.7 2.2
W 21.6 13.6 7.4 3.0
NW 8.4 2.0 0.6 0.2
The extreme wave climate at the harbour entrance is as follows:
Frequency of occurrence Hs
10/ Year 4.7 m
1/ Year 5.0 m
1/10 Year 5.4 m
1/100 Year 5.8 m
Extreme wave conditions at harbour entrance will occur mainly during the
monsoon period. The period of the extreme waves varies between T=7S and 13S.
During the last 4‐5 years since the installation of VTMS, MPT is measuring the
wave heights near the approach channel at a water depth of 10 m by installing a
wave rider buoy. The VTMS captures these measured wave heights at the signal
station. Twice a day, the recorded values are sent to MPT for their records.
It is also understood that National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT),
Chennai has installed a wave rider buoy in Mormugao port waters and the
observations are maintained by NIOT.
3.4.8 RELATIVE HUMIDITY
The region is generally humid throughout the year. The morning and evening
relative humidity values are averaged over a thirty year period, as shown in
Table3.6.
Table 3‐6 Average Monthly Relative Humidity
Month Morning (08.30 IST) Evening (17.30 IST)
January 78 54
February 79 59
March 78 63
April 74 65
May 74 67
June 86 81
July 90 86
August 89 84
September 90 81
October 85 74
November 75 62
December 72 56
Source: IMD
June to September is the most humid months of year with consistently high
humidity both in the mornings and in the evenings.

3.4.9 VISIBILITY
The visibility is generally good. Based on the data of 20 years, the yearly average
morning and evening visibility is as given in Table 3.7.
Table 3‐7 Number of Days per Year with Visibility
Upto 1 km 1‐4 km 4‐10 km 10‐20 km Over 20 km
M E M E M E M E M E
3.4 0.1 4.7 4.1 28.1 21.3 323.6 324.7 5.2 14.8
Source: IMD
Legend: M‐0830 HRS and E‐1730 HRS.
3.4.10 SEISMIC CONDITIONS
The area falls in most active seismic zone as per IS 1893 (Zone III). This will be
considered at the time of detailed design.
4 TRAFFIC PROJECTION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The ensuing traffic assessment includes a hinterland analysis to assess the
industrial set up that can provide any demand for coal. Competition assessment
is used to map this demand to Berth 7 and the rest of the competing ports on the
basis of integrated logistics cost analysis. Primary surveys were carried out to
understand the trade dynamics from the perspective of various stakeholders in
the entire supply chain (port authorities, stevedores, barge/truck association, end
users and traders).
4.2 HINTERLAND ASSESSMENT
Based on primary interviews and desktop research it may be concluded that
there are four major plants.
• Coal based thermal power plants
• Cement plants
• Sponge iron plants
• Integrated Steel Plants
4.2.1 COAL BASED THERMAL POWER PLANTS
Currently, the hinterland has thermal power plants with a cumulative installed
capacity of around 2340 MW. This includes a 500 MW power plant owned by
Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) and a 260 MW captive power
plant being operated by JSW. Going forward, close to Rs. 25,000 crore worth of
power plants have been announced to be set up in Maharashtra (Sindhudurg and
Ratnagairi).Based on the development of private ports of Maharashtra (as
outlined in competition analysis) and the choice of building a captive jetty
(expected to be exercised by the big projects), Mormugao Port is not expected to
witness any significant demand from these power projects.
However, as per a recent development, the sponge iron plants are developing
small captive power plants (5‐10 MW each). These players expect to sell off the
surplus power to the state grid for additional profits. With around 75 sponge
iron plants in the proposed hinterland, around 400‐750 MW of captive capacity
may be developed over the next few years. This would contribute to traffic of
35 traffic projection
around 1.2 MTPA (based on 60% blending and 4 million ton for 1000 MW).
However, this has not been included in the traffic projections.
A new project involving NTPC setting up a 4000 MW power plant at Kudigi
(Bijapur District), Karnataka has recently come to light. Due to the lack of
interaction with the concerned authorities on this project, its expected cargo
(1.92‐3.2 million ton of imported thermal coal per annum) has not been included
in the traffic projections yet. It will be duly accounted for post primary survey.
4.2.2 CEMENT PLANTS
As on date, the total cement production capacity of the hinterland is around
15.74 MTPA. ACC, Grasim and Kesoram are the key players in the hinterland.
JSW’s new cement facility has been constructed and is expected to commence
operations within a few months. Further, Kesoram, Jaykaycem, Ittina Cements
and UltraTech are adding around 10.4 MTPA of capacity in the next few years.
The total thermal coal demand from cement players has been pegged at around
0.01 million ton in FY 12 going up to 0.05 million ton by FY 20.
4.2.3 SPONGE IRON PLANTS
Sponge iron is one of the biggest industries (in terms of coal demand) in the
hinterland for Berth 7, Mormugao Port. Currently, the total sponge iron capacity
is around 2.7 million ton per annum. A further 1.8‐2 million ton of capacity has
been announced to be built or being constructed. These players buy imported
coal through traders, evacuate it through road (because of smaller parcel sizes)
and blend it with domestic coal in the ratio of 60‐40. Most of this imported coal is
coming from Chennai, Krishnapatnam and New Mangalore ports due to the
favorable reverse logistics resulting from iron ore movement. As per talks with
Bhatia Trader (Bhatia imports close to 50% of the total coal demand of sponge
iron industry), not much movement of coal can be expected to Bellary unless
iron‐ore trade shifts towards Goa. Our estimates confirm this through a
comparison of the integrated logistics costs. While it costs Rs. 1585.45/ton from
Bellary to Mormugao, Chennai to Bellary costs Rs. 1265.31/ton (both are for
Indonesian coal).
4.2.4 INTEGRATED STEEL PLANTS
Integrated steel plants form the biggest industrial group (in terms of coal
demand) in hinterland of Berth 7, Mormugao Port. The hinterland has a total
installed capacity of 10.34 MTPA of which JSW Steel is the biggest (6.8 MTPA).
Usha Ispat, Apparent Steel, Kirloskar Steel and Kalyani are the other important
players in the industry. Going forward, Essar Group is developing a 6 MTPA
plant at Bagalkot and Aaress Iron & Steel (Baldota Group) is building a 3.2
MTPA plant at Koppal. These are two important clients that can be attracted to
Berth 7. The integrated logistics cost analysis indicates a clear advantage for
Berth 7 (Rs.420 for Essar Steel and Rs. 250 for Baldota Group).
4.3 INTEGRATED LOGISTICS COST ANALYSIS AND TRAFFIC

PROJECTIONS
The Integrated Logistics Costs for all possible OD routes have been calculated
and analyzed to derive on traffic projections. These costs were used in
conjunction with a decision matrix, shown in Table 4‐1, to project traffic at Berth
7, Mormugao Port under both the scenarios.
Table 4‐1 (million ton) Decision Matrix for Traffic Projections
Source: i-maritime analysis
Here the following points about the decision matrix may be noted:
• Primary surveys with potential clients indicated that existing players
will shift traffic to a new port for as low as a Rs. 50‐100 integrated
logistics cost advantage
• Berth 7 will be a late entrant in an extremely competitive environment
and is expected to encounter “stickiness” in shifting logistics networks
to its own advantage. Thus it is not expected to source complete traffic
“conversions” if it is offering an advantage of up to Rs. 30 ‐ 50 against
the next cheapest alternative. 60% traffic shift has been assumed in this
case, which is expected to possible especially if supported by main coal
traders
• For an advantage of Rs. 30 to a disadvantage of Rs. 30, Mormugao Port
is expected to face heavy competition from the three existing ports of
New Mangalore, Chennai/Ennore and Krishnapatnam. All four ports are
importing coal for the identified hinterland and are also exporting iron‐
ore from the same hinterland. The ports are more or less on comparable
footing in terms of infrastructure also. Thus an equal distribution of
traffic has been assumed in this case (25%)
• A 5 % traffic share has been assumed for a disadvantage of up to Rs. 60
to allow for spot purchases and market fluctuations. A case in point is
the recent spurt in thermal coal demand from regional sugar players.
This demand has offset and even surpassed the deficit caused by
declining thermal coal demand from sponge iron players on account of
lower production. On a similar note, such an allowance permits scope
for sudden coal demand due to unforeseen externalities
• For an unfavorable difference of Rs. 60 or more, Berth 7 is not expected
to garner any traffic movement. This is in sync with the assumption that
the end users are willing to shift cargo for a difference of Rs. 50‐60 from
existing port
• Moreover, certain assumption have been made with respect to choice of
road versus rail evacuation
a. For steel plants, it has been assumed that plants with capacity in
excess of 0.15 million ton will use rail evacuation and the rest road
(12,500 coal import ton per month). The same trend has been reflected
during primary surveys also where it was indicated that
Tata Metaliks (0.16million ton) and Apparent Steel (0.14 million ton)
evacuate cargo through road while Mukund Steel (0.30 million ton) and
Kalyani Steel (0.30 million ton) uses rail evacuation
b. Cement plants mostly use road evacuation due to small parcel sizes
c. Sponge iron plants use road evacuation because of small parcel sizes
and weekly shipments
d. Thermal power plants in excess of 50 MW capacity have been
assumed to use rail evacuation as the parcel size is suitably big (approx
17000 ton per month)
e. It may be noted that the choice of road versus rail evacuation is also
dependent on the rake availability which seems to be a major concern in
the hinterland. Further, road evacuation, though relatively costly, allows
door‐to‐door delivery decreasing chances of pilferage/theft in transition.
4.4 TRAFFIC PROJECTION
Two different scenarios of integrated logistics have been highlighted. The first
scenario models the current situation where a majority of the Hospet iron ore is
being routed through Chennai, Krishnapatnam and New Mangalore. The second
scenario takes into account a shift in iron‐ore trade from Hospet‐Chennai to
Hospet‐ Mormugao as the demand for higher grade iron ore increases (currently
high grade Hospet ore is mixed with low grade Goa ore at Mormugao and then
exported). This will create a steady stream of road movement with potential of
carrying coal to Bellary industrial belt at cheaper rates.
4.4.1 SCENARIO 1
Table 4‐2 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenarios 1 (MMT)
Source: i‐maritime analysis
Table 4‐3 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenarios 1 with KPCL’s coal (MMT)
Source: i‐maritime analysis
It is evident that coking coal from steel plants is the biggest set of cargo at Berth
7. Further, these projections include a part of the existing cargo at Berth 10 & 11.
While the coking coal demand from steel plants is completely reflected in these
projections the thermal coal demand from sponge iron players is
underestimated. In reality, currently, close to 0.5 million ton of thermal coal is
being handled for sponge iron plants and 0.2 million ton for sugar refiners. This
underestimation is due to the influence of traders on sponge iron players’ choice
of ports. Since all sponge iron players rely on traders for meeting their thermal
coal requirements, demand accretion happens at the trader’s end leaving them
with a higher bargaining power. These inland freight costs are directly payable
by the receiver (sponge iron unit in this case). The jump in traffic in FY 2013 is
due to the commencement of traffic for Aaress Iron & Steel plant (Baldota Group)
at Koppal. As confirmed during the primary survey Phase I of this plant with a
capacity of 1.25 MTPA is expected to get commissioned in FY 2013. FY 2014
witnesses a further increase in traffic due to commencement of operations of
Essar steel plant at Bagalkot and captive thermal power plants in Karnataka. In
the future, the jump in traffic is again due to capacity addition in Aaress Iron &
Steel plant and Essar Steel. Thus it may be said that the entire traffic projections
hinge on two key players – Essar and Baldota Group. While this increases the
risk sensitivity of Berth 7 cash flows, it may also result in long term cargo
handling agreement resulting in stable cash flows.
4.4.2 SCENARIO 2
Scenario 2 assumes a shift in iron ore movement from Hospet belt to Mormugao
from current focus of operations on Chennai. The basic idea is to ensure
sufficient availability of trucks that can carry coal to Karnataka as return journey.

Table 4‐4 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenario 2 (MMT)
Table 4‐5 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 ‐ Scenario 2 with KPCL coal
(MMT)
Here, as envisaged, the favorable movement of iron ore towards Mormugao
(road evacuation) results in lower integrated logistics costs for Mormugao –
Bellary route. Thus Berth 7 will be able to serve most of the sponge iron belt of
Karnataka. Starting with 1.38 million ton in FY 2012, the berth moves on to
handle 1.86 million ton of thermal coal for sponge iron players. Coking coal for
Essar Steel and Aaress Iron & Steel remains a key cargo for the berth. Due to the
favorable return logistics cost, Berth 7 is also able to serve more captive power
plants in the interior.
4.5 CONCLUSION
Based on the comparison of traffic projections for both the scenarios, the
following conclusion can be surmised:
1) Scenario 1 is more likely to play in the initial few years. After 2‐4 years,
iron‐ore trade movement may prove to be conducive for Scenario 2 to
play
2) This makes it imperative for MPSEZL to
a. Ink a cargo handling contract with at least one of Baldota Group and
Essar Steel for dedicated coal procurement
b. Involve traders like Maheshwari and Bhatia from the commencement
of operations at Berth 7. Maheshwari, being the largest trader in
Mormugao Port, will help in smooth shift of clients from Berths 10, 11 to
berth 7 while Bhatia, by virtue of its strong hold on sponge iron industry
of Bellary can help procure thermal coal for the same
3) Moreover, it may be possible for MPSEZL to initiate its captive trading
operations at Berth 7. This will help it assume responsibility of
delivering coal (thermal and coking) at the doorstep of clients. By doing
so MPSEZL will have a tri pronged advantage:
a. It will essentially control the entire supply chain from load port to end
user’s plant. Thus it can offer coal at better landed prices (margins can
be better at lower price if intermediaries are eliminated.
b. By offering coal at a cheaper landed price, MPSEZL will garner a
bigger traffic share at Berth 7
c. As confirmed during primary interviews, the end users are more
comfortable and hence more likely to do business with players having
larger control on logistics chain. This helps them assume responsibility
of logistics and thus reduces risks based on supply chain disruption due
to external factors
4) As the berth starts handling berth at superior discharge rates and builds
a rapport within the industry, Scenario 2 may be influenced to play out
to MPSEZL’s advantage. Either ways, the berth will attain peak cargo in
a few years and can upgrade its handling capacity as more traffic builds
up in the hinterland.
5) MPSEZL can circumnavigate the reverse logistics movement by setting
up a “stock and sale” point at/near Bellary and transporting coal
(primarily thermal, for sponge iron plants and captive thermal plants)
through rail from Mormugao to the “stock and sale point”. The landed
price of coal for end users would be cheaper for such an arrangement as
compared to the current system where the end user has to source the
coal from ports on East Coast (Chennai/ Krishnapatnam) since rail
would be cheaper than road and Mormugao has a distance advantage
over East coast ports for Bellary.
The detail traffic study carried out by M/s I‐Maritime consultancy pvt.
Ltd., the copy of study report is attached in Annexure ‐ D.
5 SITE INVESTIGATIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) has earmarked the area within the port of
Mormugao, Goa, for the development of a coal terminal facility by constructing
berth no. 7 and its associated back‐up yard.
The proposed development area comprises of marine portion, where the berth
no. 7 and its immediate back‐up yard is proposed (small part of which falls on
already reclaimed land) and the land portion, where the coal stacking yard and
other facilities are planned.
5.2 TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY
In general the Deccan traps occupy the coast and the interior north of Goa. But
over a good part of the coast, they are overlain by tertiary sediments. The coastal
plain in this area consists of different types of depositional land forms which are
the result of the operation of different geomorphic processes.
The geology around the area of investigation basically consists of rocks of
volcanic origin known as Deccan traps, forming a series of step like development
area comprises of marine portion, where the berth no. 7 and its immediate
terraces. The Deccan traps primarily consist of Basalts.
Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) has provided the available general topographical
and contour plan for the area within the port of Mormugao and its surroundings,
which is enclosed in Annexure‐C
The detailed topographical survey of the entire area, for the development of
berth no. 7 and its associated back‐up yard, has already been planned and will be
executed after the removal of existing bulk material stacks from the proposed
coal stacking back‐up yard area.
5.3 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Detailed geotechnical investigation has been carried out to provide the designer
with sufficiently accurate information, both general and specific, about the
substrata profile and relevant soil and rock parameters at the project site on the
basis of which the foundations for various structures and equipments can be
designed rationally.
43 site investigations
5.3.1 AVAILABLE SUB‐SOIL DATA
Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) has provided the available sub‐soil investigation
data for the marine portion and its attached reclaimed land, where the berth no. 7
and its immediate back‐up yard is proposed.
The aforesaid sub‐soil investigation was conducted by M/s. Fugro Geotech Ltd.
(Report No. 215/08 of July, 2008). Two boreholes (MBH‐A3 & MBH‐A4) were
located along the alignment of the proposed berth no. 7 and other two marine
boreholes (MBH‐A1 & MBH‐A2) were explored in the proposed immediate back‐
up yard. One borehole (LBH‐1) was conducted on the associated reclaimed land.
Location and elevation details of the boreholes are tabulated below.
Table 5‐1 Location and Elevation details of Boreholes Available
Sr Borehole Ground / Seabed Termination
Easting Northing
No. No. Level (m, CD) Depth (m, CD)
1 MBH‐A1 370989 1704311 (‐) 5.757 (‐) 45.76
2 MBH‐A2 371091 1704265 (‐) 6.332 (‐) 28.83
3 MBH‐A3 371126 1704292 (‐) 7.040 (‐) 35.04
4 MBH‐A4 371041 1704357 (‐) 6.098 (‐) 34.60
5 LBH‐1 370940 1704243 (+) 4.440 (‐) 33.06
The sub‐soil investigation report submitted by M/s. Fugro Geotech Ltd. (Report
No. 215/08 of July, 2008) is enclosed in Annexure‐E.
However, no sub‐soil data was available for the land portion, where the coal
stacking yard and other facilities are planned.
5.3.2 PRESENT SUB‐SOIL INVESTIGATION
Detailed sub‐soil investigation comprising of 13 boreholes was planned in the
land portion, where no sub‐soil data was available. M/s. Geotech Soil Testing
Laboratory has completed the field works and subsequent laboratory testing for
the same. Location and elevation details of the boreholes are tabulated below.
Table 5‐2 Location and Elevation details of Boreholes Planned
Ground /
Borehole Termination
Sl. No. Easting Northing Seabed Level
No. Depth (m, CD)
(m, CD)
1 M‐01 370979 1704171 (+) 4.45 (‐) 9.05
2 M‐02 370915 1704090 (+) 4.45 (‐) 10.55
3 M‐03 370913 1704017 (+) 4.45 (‐) 32.05
4 M‐04 370963 1703942 (+) 4.45 (‐) 36.00
5 M‐05 371097 1703880 (+) 4.45 (‐) 36.00
6 M‐06 371149 1703808 (+) 4.45 (‐) 36.05
7 M‐07 371228 1703740 (+) 4.45 (‐) 36.00
8 M‐08 371329 1703740 (+) 4.45 (‐) 36.00
9 M‐09 371441 1703648 (+) 4.45 (‐) 36.00
10 M‐10 371011 1703874 (+) 4.45 (‐) 16.00
11 M‐11 371172 1703867 (+) 4.45 (‐) 16.00
12 M‐12 371065 1703953 (+) 4.45 (‐) 16.00
13 M‐13 370932 1703995 (+) 4.45 (‐) 36.00
The sub‐soil investigation report submitted by M/s. Geotech Soil Testing
Laboratory is enclosed in Annexure‐E
In addition to the already available sub‐soil data in marine location, four more
marine boreholes are also planned in the berth no. 7 and immediate back‐up
yard to ascertain the sub‐soil properties form the dredging and reclamation point
of view as well as to accurately identify the bed rock elevations and its variations
along the alignments of the proposed berth no. 7. The field works for these
boreholes are in progress and the report will be submitted to the Mormugao Port
Trust (MPT) upon receipt.
5.3.3 SUB‐SOIL PROFILE
Based on the available sub‐soil data at the marine location provided by MPT and
the present sub‐soil investigation in the land portion, the following generalized
sub‐soil profile is considered for the design of different structural foundations
and other facilities.
ALONG THE ALIGNMENT OF PROPOSED BERTH NO. 7
The present seabed level at this location varies between (‐) 6.0 m to (‐) 7.0 m CD.
The top sub‐soil layer immediately beneath the seabed comprises of very soft to
soft, dark grey to yellowish grey, silty clay with few gravel for thickness ranging
from 4.5 m to 7.5 m with SPT (N) values ranges from 2 to 4. This layer is followed
by a very stiff to very hard, dark grey to yellowish grey, silty clay with some
sand for thickness ranging from 4.5 m to 6.0 m with SPT (N) values ranges from
15 to 34. The next layer comprises of medium dense to very dense, yellowish
brown to reddish brown, fine to coarse sand with few gravel for thickness
ranging from 6.5 m to 9.0 m with SPT (N) values ranging from 54 to refusal. This
layer is followed by a thin layer of hard, dark grey to grey, silty clay with gravel
and weathered rock fragments and subsequently followed by extremely weak to
strong, greenish grey to dark grey, highly to moderately weathered, extremely to
closely spaced basalt with inclined and vertical joint upto the depth of borehole
termination.
IMMEDIATE BACK‐UP YARD BEHIND PROPOSED BERTH NO. 7
The present seabed level at this location varies between (‐) 5.0 m to (‐) 6.0 m CD.
The top sub‐soil layer immediately beneath the seabed comprises of very soft to
FIRM, dark grey silty clay for 7.5 m thickness with SPT (N) values ranging from
2 to 6. This layer is followed by a stiff to hard, yellowish brown to brownish grey,
slightly sandy, silty clay with few gravel for around 6.0 m thickness with SPT (N)
values ranges from 12 to refusal. The next layer comprises of very dense, brown,
silty coarse sand with gravel and weather rock fragments for around 3.0 m
thickness with SPT (N) values ranging from 74 to refusal. This layer is followed
by extremely weak to moderately weak, greenish grey to grey, completely to
moderately weathered, highly fractured, very closely spaced basalt with inclined
and vertical joint upto the depth of borehole termination.
COAL STACKING YARD IN LAND PORTION
The average ground level in this area is at (+) 4.4 m CD. The entire area indicates
old consolidated fill of silty clayey sand mixed with rock pieces and boulders,
which is compact in nature and this layer extends to a depth of about 10 m to 20
m. The soil appears to be a derivative of highly weathered basalt which is
reddish brown to brown in color. It indicates good penetration resistance and
thereby good shear strength. N‐values in these strata ranges between 13 to 80.
Lower N‐values are found only to a depth of about 4 to 6 m depth from ground
surface. The boulders, as mentioned earlier, are of highly weathered
amygdaloidal basalt. The amygdales are filled with zeolite which is nonreactive
to acid. In majority boulders the amygdales are removed leaving cavities. As
such core strength is low and recovery is poor due to highly weathered nature.
The layers below reclaimed strata at variable depth of 15 m to 20 m below
ground surface are formed of very dense silty sand or medium to coarse sand.
These layers extend to a depth of about 21 m to 24 m below present ground
levels. N‐values are almost more than 100.
Except the locations M01 and M02 the strata below sand layers is formed of very
hard coarse medium plastic clayey silt which shows low plasticity index. The N‐
values are more than 70 indicating that the silt has good shear strength.
At the location of bore hole M02 the strata to 11 m depth consist of plastic to
medium plastic coarse silt underlain by greenish grey fine grained porphyritic
basalt.
6 PLANNING CONSIDERATION
6.1 GENERAL
In order to evaluate the conceptual layout plans for the coal terminal, the first
step is to assess the facility requirements in terms of berth length, cargo handling
facilities, navigational and operational parameters etc. The next step is to identify
suitable location for the stock pile requirements, cargo transfer systems from
berth to storage area and wagon loading systems. For working out the facility
requirements and defining the planning considerations, the traffic forecast at
Chapter 4 has been considered.
6.2 NAVIGATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
As a prerequisite for planning the required facilities, it is essential to set the basic
criteria like operational aspects to handle different type of vessels likely to call at
the terminal for loading / unloading operations. These conditions are related to
the marine environment conditions at the location of the terminal. They comprise
the following aspects.
• Vessel type and dimension
• Operational criteria
• Protection against prevailing waves and winds
• Vessel minimum speed and stopping distance
6.2.1 VESSEL TYPE, PARCEL SIZE AND DIMENSIONS
The berth has been designed for receiving cape size vessels of 160,000 DWT.
Cape size vessels of 160,000 DWT typically draw a draft of 16 m. However, at
present vessels of 80,000 DWT to 100,000 DWT will be berthed. Hence the
approach channel needs to be deepened from the existing ‐14.40 m. The
dimensions of bulk carriers are tabulated below.
48 planning consideration
Table 6‐1 Bulk Carrier Dimensions
Dead weight Length Width Heights Fully Laden Draft in
Tonnage Overall In m In m m
4000 100 15.4 7.0 6.3
6000 118 16.6 8.3 6.9
8000 130 17.6 9.5 7.4
10000 140 18.5 10.5 7.9
12000 150 19.4 11.2 8.5
15000 163 20.7 12.0 9.0
20000 180 22.8 13.0 9.7
25000 194 24.7 13.8 10.3
30000 205 26.5 14.3 10.7
40000 223 29.7 15.4 11.1
50000 235 32.5 16.2 11.6
60000 245 35.0 17.1 12.0
80000 259 39.2 18.8 12.6
100000 268 42.5 20.4 13.0
160000 280 45.0 16.0
6.2.2 OPERATIONAL CRITERIA
In planning facilities for handling of cargo, the operational criteria for vessels
handling and ship to shore transfer of cargo need to be taken into account. Vessel
handling and / or ship shore transfer of cargo operations can be interrupted due
to any one of the following reasons.
• Pilots not being able to board vessel due to rough sea conditions.
• Tugs unable to assist in maneuvering the vessels due to rough weather
conditions.
• Motion of moored vessels too high.
However none of these aspects are critical as far Mormugao Port is concerned.
6.2.3 DIMENSIONS OF BERTHING AREA
The size of berthing area and the berth will depend upon the dimensions of the
largest ship and the number of ships to use the terminal. The following aspect
needs to be considered;
• The size of the port basin for maneuvering
• Satisfactory arrival and departure of ships to and from the harbour.
• Whether the ships are equipped with stern and bow thrusters
• Availability of tugs, direction and magnitude of wind, waves and
current.
As per standards, the length of dredged area in front of the berth for ships with
tug assistance should not be less than 1.2 times the length of the largest vessel to
use the berth and that without the tug assistance not less than 1.5 times the
length. The width of the dredged berth should at least be 1.25 times the beam of
the largest vessel to use the berth.
For 80,000 DWT to 100,000 DWT vessels, the LOA will be about 259m to 268m.
This will not creates problem for berthing with tug assistance, as adequate
clearance will be available as far as the length of the berth and width of the
dredged area is concerned.
However, berthing of Cape size vessel could create a problem in case the
adjacent berths are occupied. The port is planning to shift the existing POL to
Berth No.11. In the long run the port is planning to shift the POL berth to Vasco
bay. Cape size vessels are likely to call at berth no.7 only if adequate draft is
available for berthing a fully loaded cape size vessel.
The port is also planning a dedicated iron ore berth at Vasco Bay. In the long run,
the port needs to deepen the channel to ‐18.40 m CD. for cape size vessels. The
deepened channel will serve the existing berths 5A & 6A, proposed berth no. 7
and proposed iron ore berth at Vasco bay. With the proposed berth no.7 and iron
ore berth at Vasco bay becoming operational, coal and iron ore is likely to
constitute more than 95% of the throughput of Mormugao Port. Thus it makes
good economic sense to handle cape size vessels at these berths to take
advantage of the freight benefit.
6.2.4 BERTHING REQUIREMENTS
In order to work out the berthing requirements to meet the projected traffic, it is
necessary to define the following governing parameters.
• Vessel size / parcel size
• Productivity (handling rate of commodity)
• Effective working hours per day
• Available port working hours per day
• Accepted levels of berth occupancy
Productivity is a key element which needs to be worked out very carefully.
Unlike most ports, the proposed berth no.7 is sandwiched between berth no.8 &
9 on one side and berths 5A & 6A on the other side. All the area in the immediate
vicinity has been occupied for stockpile areas for coal and iron ore. So the first
task is identifying suitable stockpile area for the proposed facility. Secondly
proper equipments need to be installed.
The project site consists of following area:
• Water area in front of existing berth no. 7 from edge of berth no 6 to the
edge of first mooring dolphin of berth no 8 on western side is
approximately 27100 m² and marked as “A1” (See Concession
Agreement Appendix 1)
• The land area inclusive of existing berth no 7 is approximately 4200 m²
and marked as “A2” (See Concession Agreement Appendix 1)
• Water area admeasuring 8000 m² marked as “A3” inclusive of 2 no of
mooring dolphins and part of breasting dolphin of berth no 8 on western
side. (See Concession Agreement Appendix 1)
• Corridor consisting of liquid pipelines area of 700 m² and marked as
“A4” (See Concession Agreement Appendix 1)
• The land area of 57,000 m² marked as “C” in Concession Agreement
Appendix 1
• Way leave right for providing overhead conveyors to carry coal from
area A1, A2, A3 and A4 to C through a corridor of 10.0m width is
marked as area “B”, which is approximate 540 m²
• Way leave right for an area of 500 m² for erection of wagon loading silo
and conveyors feeding coal to the silo at appropriate location on any
one of the rail tracks provided in common user rail corridor either on
southern side or on northern side of the area marked as “C” in the
Concession Agreement Appendix 1.
Table 6‐2 Area summary for MPT Goa
Area as Marked Area in m²
A1 27,100
A2 4,200
A3 8,000
A4 700
B 540
C 57,000
Total 97,540
6.2.5 MANOEUVRING AREA
The size of the maneuvering area is a function of the length and maneuverability
of the vessels and the time available for executing the turning maneuver.
The optimum configuration of such basin would be circular. By considering
environmental conditions and the fact that vessels will be assisted by tugs, the
diameter of the turning circle is taken about 480.0m. The depth is taken as 15% of
the fully loaded draft of the design vessel that will use the port facilities.
6.2.6 NAVIGATIONAL AIDS
All navigational facilities will be provided by the Mormugao Port Trust.
6.2.7 MECHNIZED HANDLING SYSTEM
A fully mechanized coal handling system is planned for unloading of coal. It is
proposed to construct one berth, length of 300 m and width 28.1 m. The ships are
unloaded with mechanized handling system which consist of high capacity ship
unloaders connected with conveyor system and back‐up yard equipments i.e.
Stacker/ Reclaimer and tripper of required capacity for mechanized stacking and
subsequent evacuation of coal by rail and road. The system is designed for faster
turnaround of vessel to achieve the required discharge rate and desired terminal
throughput.
6.2.8 MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS
The coal terminal will be designed for thermal coal, for use in multiple user
facilities including bulk use in power plant.
Table 6‐3 Material Specifications
Material Coal
Density Kg/m3 800
Angle of repose 37°
Moisture content % Up to 40
Surcharge angle 20°
Max lump size mm 100 (up to 150)
Abrasive Mildly
*For Throughed belt conveyor
6.2.9 ANNUAL THROUGHPUT
As per the concession agreement the terminal should be design for ultimate
phase with handling capacity of 4.6 MTPA. The cargo will be gradually ramped
up over a period of time. The year wise cargo projection is mention in the chapter
‐ 4. Ever though the initial cargo projection and commitment is very less, the
terminal should be designed for ultimate capacity. The terminal construction is
planned in phases to achieve the required throughput as per cargo projection
and agreed minimum terminal throughput. The detailed engineering has been
carried out with a multi‐phase development considering initially, only the
reclaimed area behind the proposed Berth No. 7 (Zone A) will be available for
operation in Phase I. Subsequently zone B area i.e. area behind the Iron‐ore stock
pile is available for storage in Phase II with this the overall storage capacity of
terminal and annual throughput will be increased. The annual throughput
capability will depend on several factors such as ship unloading performance,
combined storage capacity of zones A and B, number of discrete users, mode of
dispatch and dispatch performance. However, the minimum system capability
required for committed volumes has been considered as 4.6 million MTPA.
It is further assumed that of the volumes considered, not more than 1 MTPA will
be dispatched by road on trucks. Balance imports will be dispatched in full rakes
by rail.


Table 6‐4 Storage capacity & annual throughput of Terminal
Particulars Area Storage No of Terminal Capacity
(m²) capacity (MT) turnarounds (MMTPA)
Zone A 40540 106500 20 2.13
Zone B 57000 170000 20 3.40
Total 276500 5.53
6.2.10 SHIP SIZES AND DIMENSION
All the vessels available between ranges 20000 DWT to 100000 DWT shall be
considered. Details of the vessels available are as below:
Table 6‐5 Details of 20,000 DWT Vessel
Particulars Details
Length Overall 170.00 m
Breadth Moulded 23.40 m
Depth Moulded 12.70
Draught (Full) 9.20 m
Approach Velocity 0.15 m/sec
Angle of Approach 10 deg
Table 6‐6 Details of 1,00,000 DWT Vessel
Particulars Details
6.2.11 DESIGN STANDARDS
The following standards and codes will be used in the planning and design of
the facility. These shall be the latest editions including all applicable official
amendments and revisions. In the event, an IS code referred to herein does not
indicate a specific requirement, then the provisions made under the relevant BS
codes, or any other relevant international standards will be used.
Table 6‐7 Mechanical Engineering Codes
Sr. Codes Descriptions
No.
1 Federation Europeenne de la Rules for the design of Hoisting Appliances
Manutention (FEM)
2 BS‐2573 Specifications for Permissible Stresses in Cranes
and Design Rules
3 Conveyor Equipment Belt Conveyors for Bulk Materials
Manufacturer Association
(CEMA)
4 IS 11592 Selection & Design of Belt Conveyors
5 ASTM‐D‐2234 & ASTM‐D‐ Sampling
2013 and ISO & JIS
6 Fire Protection Manual Fire Fighting system
(Tariff Advisory Committee)
7 Specifications for Idlers & Idler Sets for Belt
IS 8598
Conveyors
8 IS 9295 Steel Tubes for Idlers
9 Steel Wire Ropes for General Engineering
IS 2266
Purposes – Specifications
10 Code of Practice for Electric Overhead Traveling
IS 3177 Cranes and Gantry Cranes other than Steel Work
Cranes
11 IS 1136 Preferred Sizes for Wrought Metal Products
12 IS 3443 Crane Rail Sections
13 IS 9295 Steel Tubes for Idlers for Belt Conveyors
14 Specification for Idlers and Idler Sets for Belt
IS 8598
Conveyors
15 IS 1891 Conveyor and Elevator Textile Belting
16 ISO / Metric Screw Threads & Gearing Profiles
17 IS 210 Grade 20 excepting
Grey Iron Castings – Specification
counter weights
18 IS 2644 Grade 1 High Tensile Steel Castings
19 IS 2664 Grade 4 Specification for Quenching Oil
Sr. Codes Descriptions

No.
20 Carbon Steel Castings for General Engineering
IS 1030
Purpose
21 IS 2707 Grade 23‐45 Carbon Steel Castings for Surface Hardening
22 IS 1570, C40, Cold Drawn
Schedules for Wrought Steel
Specified
23 Carbon Steel Billets, Blooms, Slabs and Bars for
IS 1875
Forgings
24 IS 276 Austenitic – Manganese Steel Castings
25 IS 2062 Hot rolled Low, Medium and High Tensile
(Fusion Welding Quality) Structural Steel
26 IS 961
Structural Steel (High Tensile)
(Fusion Welding Quality)
27 IS 1570, C14 Schedules for Wrought Steels
28 IS 1895 Grade 1 Specification for Cotton New AR
29 Steel Tubes, Tubulars and Other Wrought Steel
IS 1239
Fittings
30 IS 1161 Steel Tubes for Structural Purposes
31 IS 306 Grade 2 Tin Bronze Ingots and Castings
32 IS 28 Phosphor Bronze Ingots and Castings
33 Specification for Aluminum Bronze Ingots and
IS 305 Grade 2
Castings
34 IS 6911 Stainless Steel Plate, Sheet and Strip
35 Design, Erection and Testing (Structural Portion)
IS 807
of Cranes & Hoists
36 Code of Practice for Design Loads for Buildings
IS 875
and Structures
6.2.12 CAPACITY AND PERFORMANCE
The capacity and performance of the coal import terminal receiving coal by sea,
storing in the available back‐up area and dispatches by rail and road will be
determined by:
• Handling Rates
• Storage Capacity
• Evacuation by rail/road
• System and equipment selection and performance
While the maximum ship size will be limited by the berth length and dredged
depth available alongside and the in approach channel, storage capacity will be
constrained by the available area. Given these constraints, the railway
connectivity and load‐out performance will eventually determine the annual
cargo turnover and hence the terminal capacity.
6.2.13 HANDLING RATES & STORAGE CAPACITY
6.2.13.1 OBJECTIVES
It is necessary to ensure minimal ocean freight costs for the material received by
the Terminal, while receiving the specified yearly throughputs. Furthermore the
reclaim and loading out rates from the stockpiles must meet the requirements of
the Terminal’s clients.
The freight costs depend on the ship sizes and their turnaround times at the
Terminal. The turnaround time, the consequently determined guaranteed
unloading rate(s), affect the freight costs and whether demurrage or dispatch
money is paid under a charter party agreement. Even in the case of ships owned
and operated by the Owner, the turnaround time will affect their operating cost
per ton. There is inevitably a trade‐off between the equipment cost and the cost
of the time a ship has to wait in a queue to be unloaded. A ship’s turnaround
time depends not only on the rated unloading capacity of the equipment on the
berth, but on certain “fixed” conditions or services at a port location, which are
independent of the ship unloading equipment employed, such as the availability
of tugs, time required for surveys, etc.
6.2.13.2 SHIP UNLOADING CAPACITY
The berth is planned to be designed for 100,000 DWT bulk carriers. For planning
the facility based on the immediate system requirements, the ship size has been
taken as 80,000 DWT maximum with an average of 55,000 DWT. Since
deadweight tonnage (DWT) and cargo tonnage differ marginally by the bunker,
provisions, crew effects, etc., the parcel size has been taken as equivalent to the
vessel DWT for design purposes.
• The days available for ship unloading will be 360 days per year (Considering
240 days of fair weather and about 50% of the monsoon period)
• A fixed average time of 8 hours is estimated for each average ship size,
including waiting for tugs, approach time to the berth from anchorage,
berthing, un‐berthing and moving away from the berth to allow another ship
to berth.
• The operating time per day is 24 hours.
• A system efficiency factor of 65% (of the rated unloading capacity) provides
for hatch movements, cleanup, draft surveys, equipment availability. This
figure is conservative to allow for imponderables at this stage.
• Poisson distributions are assumed with an Erlang factor of 2. This is
somewhat conservative as it is expected that a large percentage of the coal
will be for power stations and will arrive on regularly scheduled voyages.
• On the basis of past considerations in other ports operated by the group,
AMPTPL would like to use a rail‐mounted slewing type harbour crane with a
hopper discharging at a peak capacity of 1750 TPH of coal.
• Computations have been made with the above considerations to arrive at the
number / rating of the unloaders required for annual throughput cases of 4.6
million tones and 7 million tones.
6.2.13.3 RESULT OF COMPUTATIONS
The results for the two cases are shown on the following Table 6.8:
Table 6‐8 Details of Computations
Average Annual Coal Import (MT)
4,600,000 700,000
Avg. Ship Size DWT 55,000
Avg. No. Ships / Year 84 128
Unloading rate, each unloader 1750 TPH
System Efficiency 65%
Effective Unloader rate /berth /hr
2275 TPH
using 2 discharge time /avg. ship
including 8 hours fixed time. 1.3 days
Berth Occupancy 37 % 56 %
These results indicate that:
• A single berth with two unloaders with rated capacity of 1750 TPH each, will
be adequate to meet the throughput requirements, with acceptable berth
occupancy.
• The average waiting time (in queue at the anchorage) is likely to be higher as
annual traffic increases to the order of 7 mMT as indicated by the ratio of
Waiting Time (Tw) and Service Time (Ts) as shown in the following chart.
The capacity of the conveyors (and stackers) fed by the ship unloaders will be
based on the above results and receiving system design with 3600 TPH (rated)
will be adequate.
In case of captive requirement or other industrial development in near by region,
the coal requirement will be increase. To meet those eventualities we are keeping
provision for the third ship‐unloader and mobile hopper for the faster turn
around of the vessel and to achieve higher terminal throughput also keeping the
conveyor capacity as 5000 TPH (Rated) for stacking system, to avoid the later on
changes.

Figure 6‐1 Relationship between waiting time to service time ratio and berth occupancy
6.2.14 STOCKPILES
The coal stockpiles will serve as a buffer between the diverse parameters of
seaborne arrivals and rail/road dispatches. In a multi‐user terminal, coal is likely
to vary in parcel size as well as characteristics such as moisture content. The
stockpiles are therefore required to adopt a flexible model catering to large bulk
consumers such as a power plant and various smaller trade entities.
• There will be a policy of dynamic flexible allocation of space in the stockyard,
with no areas permanently dedicated to a particular customer.
• Operations will commence in Phase I with space available in the reclaimed
area between Berth No. 7 and the railway corridor (Zone A). Additional space
available in Zone B to the north‐west of the railway corridor will be available
subsequently in Phase II.
• Stockpile capacities are computed as continuous lengths without considering
the space to be left between multiple users. Lower number of users will imply
higher useful stockpile capacity.
• The annual throughput is a function of stockpile capacity and the number of
times the stocks are turned over in view of the dispatch performance
achieved.
• Coal with high moisture content is prone to auto‐ignition requiring
compaction and lower stack heights. Maximum stack height will therefore be
restricted. The stacking equipment will have the capability to stack up to
15/16 m.
Accordingly Table 6.9 shows the stockpile potential in the selected layout:
Table 6‐9 Stockpile Capacity in MT
Area Phase I Phase II
Zone A 106500 106500
Primary Stacking 98750 98750
Secondary Spreading 7750 7750
Zone B 0 170000
Primary Stacking 0 151500
Secondary Spreading 0 18500
Total 106500 276500
6.2.15 RECLAIM RATES
The ratings of the conveyors delivering material from the stockpiles will have to
meet the requirements of railway wagon loading as the dispatches are expected
to be predominantly by rail. The assumptions are:
• 330 days operations /year
• Reclaimer efficiency is 70% on the average
• A surge capacity of 20% is provided for each reclaimer. However, in case of
multiple reclaimers, all are not likely to encounter surges simultaneously
During Phase‐I operations, the stockpile will accommodate about two average
shiploads at a time. With 18 to 20 turnovers this would support less than 2
MTPA and require the average handling rate of about 2 rakes a day. On the other
hand, it can be argued that by increasing the rake loading rate to about 5 a day
on an average, two average ship loads can be handled in twice the mean inter‐
arrival time between 84 average sized ships carrying 4.6 MTPA. However, with
random ship arrivals for multiple users and variation in dispatch operations it
would not be sustainable without higher buffer storage. With the initial buffer
storage it would be sufficient to plan for loading a rake in about 5 hours without
attracting demurrage. The reclaim rate in Zone A is proposed as 1800 TPH to
load a rake in about 2 hours leaving adequate additional time for rake
placement/removal and switching of locomotive and brake van as required.
The stockpiles planned in Zone A do not have adequate length to effectively
utilize linear stacker reclaimers. On the other hand, circular stockpiles would not
be suitable for the scale of operation required and leave the area underutilized.
To achieve the required reclaim rate either three shovels preferably with clamped
bottoms, or “bull clamps” may be used or sufficient numbers of Excavators/
Payloaders of required capacity shall be used for loading the hoppers and down
stream conveyors for evacuation of coal. In this case, payloaders and dozers will
be used in combination to bring material within reach of the reclaim equipment.
The shovel would be typically located close to a hopper straddling the reclaim
conveyor, where it will discharge the material picked up from the stockpile.
Shovel with sufficient capacity of bucket would be able to transfer about 600
TPH (average) with a 30 second cycle. Three such shovels would be deployed to
achieve the rated capacity of the reclaim belt conveyor carrying the coal to a silo
for rapid in‐motion loading.
Zone B has the advantage of adequate length and width for a linear stockpile
served by a rail mounted stacker/reclaimer with higher capacities for storage and
reclaim. Stacker / Reclaimer equipment is considered for Zone B area. The
Stacker/ Reclaimer equipment will be use for stacking the material and also for
reclaiming the material and loading the silo. The stacking rate of equipment
considered is 5000 TPH rated capacity to match with the unloading rate of berth
equipments. The In motion wagon loading system will load the rake of 3600 MT
capacity in about one hour time. For other operation apart from loading i.e.
placement and removal of rake, switching of locomotive and brake van removal
will also takes some additional time. To complete all operations about two and
half to three hours is required. Reclaiming capacity considered as 2500 TPH is
adequate to complete the in motion wagon loading operation in stipulated time
period with out any demurrage.
As the entire area is divided into two parts i.e. zone A and zone B, there is
always flexibility available for simultaneous stacking and reclaiming operation.
In case of captive requirement or other industrial development in near by region,
the coal requirement will be increase. To meet those eventualities we are keeping
provision for second Stacker/ Reclaimer and second yard conveyor on the same
track for the faster evacuation of coal.
6.2.16 LAYOUT
Considering the fact that the back‐up area is available in two discrete zones and
initial operation is contemplated with Zone A only and subsequently in Zone B.
The layout of zone A & zone B along with respective storages capacity and
equipment arrangement are shown in Drawing No. AMPTPL‐DPR‐01‐2010‐R0
(Annexure A)..
The material flow diagram for entire coal handling operation is shown in
Drawing No. AMPTPL‐DPR‐02‐2010‐R0 (Annexure A). The relevant sections of
berth and back‐up yard are also shown in drawing mention below.
• Cross‐section of berth along with ship un‐loader, berth conveyor. – Drawing
No. AMPTPL‐DPR‐03‐2010‐R0 (Annexure A).
• Cross‐section of zone A – Drawing No. AMPTPL‐DPR‐04‐2010‐R0 (Annexure
A)
• Cross‐section of zone B – Drawing No. AMPTPL‐DPR‐05‐2010‐R0 (Annexure
A).
Coal stack Yard has to be designed for a storage capacity 276500 MT. The area of
Zone A (behind of the berth) is 40540 m² and the area behind the Iron ore stack
yard is 57000 m² layout consider a pair of slewing‐luffing rail‐mounted crane
with separate rail‐mounted hoppers based on the lower initial cost, faster
delivery and standardization across
An in‐motion wagon loading arrangement with conveyor connectivity has been
planned at the location indicated in the railway corridor proposed by Mormugao
Port Trust. The limited truck loading capability can be served by using pay
loaders and will require road connectivity to both zones.
Conveyor profiles for the in motion wagon loading sytem in Phase I
development are shown in Drawing No. AMPTPL‐DPR‐06‐2010‐R0 (Annexure
A).
The key conveyor design parameters are summarized in below mention Table.

Table 6‐10 Summary of Key Conveyor Design Parameters
Sr. Conv. Rated Length Lift* Belt Belt Motor*
No. No. capacity (m) (m) Speed Width (kw)
(TPH) (m/s) (mm)
1 CR – 1 5000 250 1.5 4.3 2000 1x350
2 CR ‐ 2 5000 160 27.0 4.3 2000 2x350
3 CR – 3 5000 92 9.5 4.3 2000 1x350
4 CR – 4 5000 155 5.0 4.3 2000 1x300
5 CR – 5 5000 181 5.0 4.3 2000 1x300
6 CR – 6 5000 115 12.6 4.3 2000 1x450
7 CR – 7 5000 60 0 4.3 2000 1x180
8 CRD – 1 5000 405 8.9 4.3 2000 2x300
9 CD – 1 1800 120 7.75 3.4 1400 1x180
10 CD – 2 1800 41 6.5 3.4 1400 1x125
11 CD – 3 1800 120 12.6 3.4 1400 1x180
12 CD – 4 1800 585 26.1 3.4 1400 1x450
13 CD – 5 5000 178 40.6 4.3 2000 2x500
Sr. Conv. Rated Length Lift* Belt Belt Motor*

No. No. capacity (m) (m) Speed Width (kw)
(TPH) (m/s) (mm)
14 CD – 6 5000 75 14.6 4.3 2000 1x400
* Lift & power mention in table are preliminary and will be finalised during
detailed engineering.
6.2.17 FLOW DIAGRAM
The enclosed flow diagram shows material flow in the system. Ocean playing
vessels, carrying the coal arrive at Port.
Coal are being unloaded by rail mounted mobile harbour crane. Berth is
equipped with 2 nos of rail mounted mobile harbour crane of 1750 TPH free
digging capacity each. MHC will unload the material in to rail mounted mobile
hoppers. There is dedicated mobile hopper of about 100 T storage capacity for
each MHC. The Mobile hopper with flow control feeder will transfer the coal on
berth conveyor CR‐1.
Conveyor CR‐1 discharge on to Conveyor CR‐2 in Transfer Tower CT‐1.
Conveyor CR‐2 discharge on to Conveyor CR‐3 in Transfer Tower CT‐2.
Conveyor CR‐3 discharges on to conveyor CR‐4 at Transfer Tower CT‐3 with
fixed tripper and on Conveyor CR‐5 or CR‐6 at Transfer Tower CT‐5 with
movable head arrangement.
Conveyor CR‐4 & CR‐5 are the traveling tripper conveyor and discharge in back‐
up yard behind the berth from Transfer Tower CT‐3 & CT‐5 respectively.
Yard conveyor CD‐1 discharge on to Conveyor CD‐2 in Transfer Tower CT‐4 by
3 nos. of fixed hopper.
Conveyor CD‐2 discharge on to Conveyor CD‐3 in Transfer Tower CT‐5.
In Phase I material will move directly to silo for rail loading. Conveyor CD‐3
discharge on to Conveyor CD‐4 in Transfer Tower CT‐6.
For truck loading system, provision will be kept in Transfer Tower CT‐6.
Conveyor CD‐ 3 will discharge also in silo for truck loading.
Conveyor CD‐4 discharge onto Conveyor CD‐5 in Transfer Tower CT‐9.
Conveyor CD‐6 discharge into Silo for wagon loading.
In Phase II, after developing the Area C (behind Iron ore stack yard), one
additional conveyor CR‐ 6 from CT‐5, discharge on CR‐7 in Transfer Tower CT‐6.
This conveyor will also discharge in second silo for truck loading.

Conveyor CR‐7 will discharge in Conveyor CRD‐1 in Transfer Tower CT‐7.
CRD ‐1 is the receipt and dispatch conveyor. Stacker / Reclaimer is mounted on
the same conveyor and use for the stacking and reclaiming of material.
Conveyor CRD‐1 discharge on to Conveyor CD‐5 at Transfer Tower CT ‐8.
Conveyor CD‐5 will discharge into Conveyor CD‐6 at Transfer Tower CT‐9
which finally discharging into the Silo for wagon loading.
6.2.18 WAGON LOADING SYSTEM
As the majority of the cargo should be dispatch through railway, mechanized in
motion wagon loading system is consider. The loading system consists of buffer
storage silo, pre weigh bin silo along with load sensor and loading spout.
Generally the loading operation of each rake will require about one hour time
with this proposed facility. Considering the all other operation i.e. placement of
rake, detachment of loco, break van operation about three hours is required to
complete the whole operation. During the loading operation the rake is moving
with speed range of 0.6 – 0.9 Km per hour. Generally before the arrival of rake
silo will be filled and kept ready for loading operation. The buffer storage
capacity of silo considered is equivalent to one rake load.
6.2.19 TRUCK LOADING OPERATION
As per the concession agreement maximum 1 MTPA cargo can be dispatch by
trucks. The truck loading operation will be carried out with pay loader and other
earthmoving equipments. Sufficient road corridor is provided all along the coal
storage yard for the movement of trucks.
6.2.20 MECHANICAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT
6.2.20.1 UNLOADER
• Type : Rail mounted grab operated mobile harbour cranes
• Rated Capacity : 1750 TPH
• Quantity : 2 Nos
• Track Center : 13 m
• No. of cycles (max.): 40 Nos
• Rail Size : CR100
6.2.20.2 STACKER/ RECLAIMER & RECLAIMER
• Rated Capacity : 5000/2500 TPH
• Quantity : 1 No
• Track Center : 8 m
• Rail Size : CR80
6.2.20.3 IN MOTION WAGON LOADING SYSTEM
• Rated Capacity : 1 wagon load in 60 second
• Quantity : 1 No
• Rake speed: 0.6 – 0.9 Km/hr
• Silo storage capacity: 1 rake load
• Type of chute : swing chute
• Gate operation : Hydraulic
6.3 FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM
Fire fighting system of the terminal shall be planned, implemented and
maintained as per best industry norms considering the size of the facility. It shall
conform to Tariff Advisory committee’s Guidelines and meet the relevant codal
provision. System would comprise Fire pump house, Hydrants network, water
storage Tank, Pumping stations with standby arrangements. Fire station cum
Pump House shall be located nearer the stack pile in Area C (Behind the Iron Ore
stack Yard) to provide cover to the equipment and ship along side berths. Water
pipe line for berthing face shall preferably be routed through conveyor gallery.
Pipe line shall be supported at regular interval.
The system of fire lines and hydrants will be designed to ensure that adequate
quantity of water is available at all times, at all areas of the facility where a
potential fire hazard exists. Each hydrant connection will be provided with
suitable length of hoses and nozzles to permit effective operation.
The hydrant system will consist of interconnected ring mains to cover the facility.
Adequate ancillary arrangements with jockey pumps, pressure switches, etc. will
be provided to maintain the required pressure in the hydrant system. Jockey
Pump operation will be automatic.
Fire hydrant system shall be design to meet at a time two point fire in the entire
area which can be either at berth and back‐up yard or at back‐up yard. Plain
water fire fighting system is considered for this facility. Critical water storage
facility shall be based on the hydrant system.
6.4 DUST SUPPRESSION SYSTEM
Dust suppression system will be provided at the stockpiles and the head ends of
the conveyors at transfer points to control the dust generated during operations.
Spraying the stockpile will be carried out with spray guns operating at about 9
bar pressure. A ground storage tank of adequate capacity and a dedicated
pumping system shall be exclusive facility to the coal stack yards.
The volume of water sprayed on the stockpile shall have to be assessed on site
based on rate of evaporation. Frequency of spraying would also depend upon
the ambient conditions and moisture content of the coal and also on the
frequency of the operation.
Dust suppression system at back‐up yard is design in such a way that whole
storage area is covered with overlapping of spray area. At about every 45 meter
sprinkler nozzles will be provided. These high capacity nozzles will cover the
entire coal storage area. The stock pile sprinkling operation is automatic and
control from the central control room with manual override facility. Each nozzle
shall be connected with solenoid operated valves.
7 ENGINEERING MARINE CIVIL WORKS
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Marine civil works includes construction of 300.0m long berth along with land
reclamation behind the berth. The proposed berth is an open type structure
consisting of 4 rows of pile and deck slab. Considering the needs of further
deepen the approach channel and harbour basin, the berthing structure will be
design for receiving cape size vessel drawing a draft of 16.0m.
7.2 SCOPE OF WORK
The Scope of Work is as follows:
(a) Design and Construction of the Coal Berth (Berth No. 7) 300.0 m long
comprising a R.C. Deck supported on large diameter R.C. bored cast
in situ piles. The Berth is to be aligned with the existing berths nos.
5A & 6A and 8. Mooring dolphins & breasting dolphin of the
adjoining existing Berth no 8 are integrated with the proposed berth
no 7.
The levels for the proposed berth are as follows:
• Design deck Level ‐ (+) 4.80 m CD
• Design Dredge Level ‐ (‐) 16.50 m CD
Initially dredge level is (‐) 14.5 m CD, however for design dredge
level up to (‐) 16.5 m CD has been considered. The datum levels for
all works are referred with chart datum.
(b) Design and construction of rubble bund on the rear side of the berth
with its sea side slope under the berth which is stable under the
given geotechnical & environmental site conditions shall provide
continuous connectivity to backup yard and also act as a slope
protection.
(c) Design and Construction of Drainage system along with R.C.C.
Chambers at the Junction of the existing underground drain at the
locations of the bends and its proposed extension.
(d) After installation of the Drains area over the drainage trench is to be
filled up.
68 engineering marine civil works
(e) Design and Construction of Bunkering lines and Fire Fighting
system.
(f) Design and Construction of a service trench as per requirements.
7.3 SITE INFORMATION
7.3.1 GENERAL
The following site information is key significance for the basic design which is
based on the data currently available.
7.3.2 OCEANOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
7.3.2.1 WAVES
Mormugao Harbour is sheltered from the waves by the Mormugao Headland
and the existing breakwater. Design operating wave height inside the harbour is
around 0.5 m with wave period varying from 8 to 12 seconds.
7.3.2.2 CURRENTS
Currents in the area of the proposed berth are of the order of 0.3 to 0.4 m/sec.
7.3.2.3 TIDES
Based on the Indian Naval Hydrographic Chart No. 2020, the tide levels with
respect to Chart Datum (CD) at Mormugao harbour are as follows:
• Higher High Water Spring (HHWS) ‐ + 2.30 m CD
• Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) ‐ + 1.90 m CD
• Mean Lower High Water (MLHW) ‐ + 1.80 m CD
• Mean Higher Low Water (MHLW) ‐ + 1.00 m CD
• Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) ‐ + 0.50 m CD
• Mean Sea Level (MSL) ‐ + 1.30 m CD
7.4 GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION
M/s Fugro Geotech Ltd. has carried out Geotechnical Investigations at the
proposed site for the development of Berth No.7 during the period February –
March 2008. The Detail on soil investigation has been given in chapter ‐ 5
7.5 SEISMIC CONDITIONS
Mormugao falls under Zone III as per the seismic map of India shown in IS:
1893‐2002.
7.6 DESIGN LOADING CRITERIA
The basic loads to be considered for the design of the various components of the
berth are as follows:
7.6.1 DEAD LOADS
The following unit weights shall be used in the design to assess dead loads, i.e.,
permanent loads due to self‐weight of the members.
Mass Concrete 24.00 KN/m3
Reinforced Concrete 25.00 KN/m3
Structural Steel 78.50 KN/m3
Seawater Density 10.05 KN/m3
7.6.2 LIVE LOADS
1. Live load ‐ 3 t/m2
2. 50% of the live load is to be considered with seismic load
3. Loading from a 40T capacity crane, pay‐loader
4. Conveyor Loading.
5. Vehicular loading ‐ IRC Class A, AA (Wheeled/Tracked) / 70 R vehicles
shall be considered
6. Ship Unloader Load (Mobile Harbour Crane).
7.6.3 DESIGN VESSEL SIZES FOR BERTHING AND MOORING FORCES
All the vessels available between range 20000 DWT to 1,60,000 DWT shall be
considered. Details of the vessels available are as below:
20,000 DWT Vessel
Depth Moulded 12.70 m
160,000 DWT Vessel
Depth Moulded 20.40 m
7.6.4 BERTHING LOADS
Maximum Berthing Energy for the above range of vessels is 119 TM. The berth

shall be designed for a maximum reaction of 200 T.
7.6.5 MOORING LOADS
Mooring load of 200 T shall be applied as per IS 4651 (Part III) 1974.
7.6.6 EARTHQUAKE LOADS
Earthquake loads shall be adopted as applicable for the site as per IS 1893‐2002
mention in section 6.2.5. Design horizontal seismic coefficient shall be evaluated
as per IS 1893‐2002
Importance Factor I 1.50
Zone Factor Z 0.16
Response reduction factor R 3.00
7.6.7 DYNAMIC LOADS
Dynamic loads and impact factors shall be considered as per IS: 4651 (Part‐Ill).
No impact factor shall be considered for calculating pile loads when unloader is
operating.
7.6.8 LOAD COMBINATION
The above loads with appropriate load combinations, as per IS 4651 (Part 4): 1989
have been applied on the different components of the berths.
7.6.9 MATERIAL PROPERTIES
The following grade of concrete and steel shall be used for various elements of
the berth:
Grade of Concrete
For Substructure M 40
For Superstructure M 35
Grade of Steel Reinforcement
For Substructure Fe 500
For Superstructure Fe 500
7.7 STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION
M/s Adani Mormugao Port Terminal Private Limited (AMPTPL) have been
selected as the developer for a Second Coal Terminal having a minimum capacity
of 4.4 MTPA on a Design, Build, Finance, operate & transfer (DBFOT) basis, in
between South West Port Ltd. (Berth No. 5A & 6A) and Oil Berth (Berth No.8) at
Mormugao.
7.7.1 MAIN BERTH
Coal Terminal has a total berth area of 300.0 m long x 28.0 m wide approximately
comprising a R.C. Deck supported on R.C. bored cast in situ piles of 1300 mm
and 1200 mm diameter as shown in the Drawings. The Berth is to be aligned
with the existing berths nos. 5A & 6A and 8.
Initial dredged level at this berths needs to be (–) 14.5m CD, however the dredge
level (–) 16.5m CD has been considered for design.
Basic engineering of the proposed berthing structure has been carried out based
on the design criteria established above. In view of the required width of the
berth, a number of vertical piles have been provided. It is observed that these
piles would also be adequate to resist the lateral forces and therefore the use of
raker piles is not considered. The marine pile for the berth shall be constructed
using standard cantilever type gantries resting on the constructed pile bents
while executing the next pile bent. The pile shall be designed for combined
vertical and horizontal loads and shall require socketing in hard rock.
For achieving a faster and convenient construction the proposed scheme
envisages a partly precast and partly in situ construction. The precast concrete
forms a shuttering cum structural element while the in situ concrete ensures
monolithic connections at all junction. In this way both the desired aim of a
marine construction – namely to minimize a requirement of shuttering in sea
water and secondly to ensure adequate and safe robust monolithic connections
integrating the structural element as a single unit are achieved.
The bed underneath the deck would be prepared to 1:1.5 slope and pitching
works will be carried out to ensure stability of the same. The conveyor gallery
will be provided in front Grid. Bollards and rubber fenders will be provided @
24m c/c along the berthing face. A provision is to be made for bunkering line,
jetty washing system and power supply trenches. The crane rails are provided at
a spacing of 13m c/c to match the rail span of the ship loaders/unloaders as
shown in the Drawings.
7.7.2 DREDGING AND RECLAMATION
The reclamation behind Berth No.7 will be extended up to the back of Berth No.
7 so that there is a continuous access to the berth. The reclamation shall have a
sloped face below the berth. The sloped embankment shall be protected by rock
armour.
The reclamation in the sea will be carried out by first construction 10M wide
embankment along the existing shore line leaving gaps where required, between
the existing shore embankments and the proposed reclamation embankment.
These gaps will be filled‐up after the construction of diversion work on the
existing drains completed as shown in drawing.
The dredging of the top soft clay will start immediately after the construction of
the embankments will sink as the soft clay is removed. However, the sinking
shall be made good by dumping of the additional fill material from shore. The fill
material will be placed from shore towards the sea, so that it also displaces the
soft soil pushing it towards the sea, thus, helping the dredging operation. It is
important that the fill material is in the form of laterite stone varying 9” to 4” size
so that it will prevents from washing away by tides.
The dredging which will involve about 3 lakhs m³ of soft clay should be
completed prior to start the pilling work of the berth.
The dredged soil will be dumped in MPT’s dumping ground with their prior
permission.
7.7.2.1 DREDGING AND RECLAMATION METHODOLOGY
1) PRESENT SCENARIO
The area A1, A2, A3 and A4 are earmarked by MPT (as shown in Fig. 7.1) for the
development of the berth no. 7 and its immediate back‐up yard.
Area A2 is already on reclaimed land whereas area A4 is meant for diverting and
extending the existing drain outfall up to the sea. Hence, the area concerned
under proposed dredging and reclamation activity is mostly areas A1 and A3.
Figure 7‐1 Location of Proposed Berth No. 7 and Immediate Back‐up Yard

2) SEA BED LEVEL
The average seabed level in most of area A1 and A3 is around (‐) 6.0m CD,
whereas the level gradually reaches to a level of around (‐) 12.0 m CD in front of
the proposed berth no. 7.
3) SUB‐SOIL PROFILE
The available Sub‐Soil Investigation data (Report 215/08 of M/s. Fugro) reveals
that there is a 7.0 to 7.5 m deep very soft marine clay deposit (with SPT values
varying between 2 to 6) immediately beneath the seabed followed by 6.0 m deep
stiff clay (with SPT values varying between 12 to 40). Beyond (‐) 20.0 m CD, a 5.0
to 6.0 m deep hard clay (with SPT refusal) is followed by Basalt bed rock.
4) DREDGING
As per the present condition as indicated in earlier paragraphs, the requirement
of dredging activity is identified and further bifurcated into two parts based on
its ultimate purpose.
• Dredging in front of the proposed berth no. 7 to achieve the desired
design draft level of (‐) 16.5m CD.
• Dredging of 7.0 to 7.5 m deep soft marine clay in the Area A1 to ensure a
stable foundation base for the immediate back‐up yard as well as to
nullify any post construction settlement.
The portion in between the aforesaid two areas will follow a gradual slope as per
the natural angle of repose of the material encountered at that depth.
Dredging will be executed by Orange‐Peal Grab mounted on crane barge of
appropriate capacity. The dredged material will be accumulated in a hopper
barge and will subsequently be transported and dumped at the dumping area in
the open sea designated by the Mormugao Port Trust authority.
5) PROTECTION BUND
As the dredging activity is envisaged in the Area A1 to remove the existing top
soft marine clay deposit, the need is identified to protect the existing
development on three sides of the Area A1 prior to the commencement of the
dredging. As a protection measure, Rubble Mounted Bund made of Lateritic
Stones is proposed with suitable offset from the existing peripheral development.
The size of the stones will be 75 mm to 300 mm with 75% of the material being
more than 200 mm size. The protection bund is proposed with 10.0 m top width
at (+) 4.8 m CD and 1 (H) : 1 (V) side slopes. This bund will also serve as a
primary access to the marine construction front. The higher sizes of lateritic
stones are carefully considered to ensure the displacement of the existing soft
marine clay beneath the protection bund. This well anticipated forced
displacement of soft clay and resulting settlement will be made good by
providing additional lateritic stone at the top and on the slope of the bund.
6) RECLAMATION
The reclamation within the peripheral protection bund of Area A1 is planned in
two phases.
• Reclamation with suitable material from the proposed dredged depth of
around (‐) 13.5 m CD (anticipated bottom of existing soft marine clay
deposit) upto a level of (+) 3.8 m CD.
• Compacted murrum layers at the top from (+) 3.8 m to a final level of (+)
4.8 m CD.
• Two alternative options are proposed for the reclamation within the
protection bund, which will be decided at site during execution to best
suit the construction sequence and overall time schedule.
• EITHER Reclamation with lateritic stones (of size 75 mm to 300 mm with
75% of the material being more than 200 mm size) in sequence with the
progressive dredging from the shore towards the sea.
• OR Completion of the dredging within the protection bund followed by
Construction of a bund with lateritic stones (of size 75 mm to 300 mm)
just behind and parallel to the proposed Berth No. 7 and then
subsequently reclaiming the inside portion with suitable material like
sand, mine waste or any other equivalent.
7) SEQUENCIAL PLANNING
The aforesaid entire dredging and reclamation activity is planned in a sequential
manner to protect the existing facility in the periphery as well as to speed‐up the
construction to suit the project time schedule. The proposed sequence of
activities is as follows.
• Construction of the peripheral protection bund by end‐on‐dumping
method with designed sizes of lateritic stones.
• Dredging of the soft clay from the Area A1 upto the desired level
(bottom of existing soft marine clay deposit) from the shore towards the
sea.
• Rectification of the deformation of the protection bund due to the
displacement (as explained earlier) with additional end‐on‐dumping of
lateritic stones at the top and on the slope of the bund.
• Sequential reclamation with lateritic stone within the peripheral
protection bund of Area A1 as the dredging progresses from the shore
towards the sea. OR reclamation as per the alternative methodology as

elaborated earlier.
• Dredging in front of the proposed berth no. 7 to achieve the desired
design draft level of (‐) 16.5m CD.
8 ENGINEERING OF CIVIL WORKS IN BACK UP AREA
8.1 GENERAL
The design basis for civil engineering work shall be in accordance with this
document. Detailed instructions on such aspects as are not indicated herein shall
be as per the latest Standards, Codes & Recommendations of the Bureau of
Indian Standards Specifications / Indian Road Congress and Specifications
published by Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MORT&H). In the
absence of suitable IS Specification and Codes of Practice, other recognized
International Standards, Codes and Practices may be used.
All structures shall be designed for the most critical combinations of dead loads,
live (imposed) loads, equipment loads, crane loads, wind loads, seismic loads,
forces developed due to differential settlement and any other loading conditions
which can occur during the design life of the facility.
8.2 DESIGN PARAMETERS
8.2.1 DEAD LOADS (DL)
Dead loads on the structure shall include self weight of the structure with
flooring, finishing, fixtures, partitions, wall panels and all equipment supporting
structures, weight of equipment etc. including all likely dead loads to be
experienced by the structure during its life time.
Loads given in IS: 875 (part‐I) shall be made use of for unit weight of materials.
8.2.2 LIVE LOADS (LL)
Imposed loads in different areas shall include live loads, dust loads, minor
equipment loads, cable trays, small pipe racks / hangers, erection loads,
operation/ maintenance loads, etc. The loads considered shall not be less than
that specified in IS:875 (Part II).
Reduction of L.L shall be made in accordance with the provisions of IS:875 and
IS:1893
Note: Higher of erection load and live load for any particular area shall be
considered for design.
78 Engineering of civil works in back up area
8.2.3 IMPACT FACTOR
Impact factor due to moving hoists etc. shall be 1.2 for electrically operated hoist
and 1.1 for hand operated hoists.
For floor beams directly supporting drive machinery like head end / tail end /
drive pulleys, motor, gear boxes etc. an impact factor of 1.5 shall be considered.
8.2.4 WIND LOADS (WL)
The design wind load shall be calculated as per provisions of IS: 875 (Part‐3).The
Basic Wind Speed for the project site = 39 m/sec
8.2.5 SEISMIC LOADS (SL)
Design for seismic loads shall be done in accordance with IS: 1893 – 2002. The
Seismic Zone for the project site is zone‐III
8.2.6 EARTH PRESSURE LOADS
Earth pressure for all underground structures shall be calculated using
coefficients of earth pressure (active/passive). Necessary load combination for
water retaining structure to get worst loading for design shall be considered.
In addition to earth pressure and ground water pressure, a minimum surcharge
load of 2000 kg/m2 at ground level shall be considered for the design of all
underground structures to take into account the vehicular traffic in the vicinity of
the structure.
8.2.7 LOAD COMBINATION
The structure shall be designed for worst combinations of loadings as per IS: 875
(Part – V) / IS: 1893.
8.3 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
All the structures shall be designed as per the provisions indicated above and
relevant I.S. codes. The design of RCC structures shall be done as per IS: 456
using Limit state method and using appropriate design tables. Generally all Plant
buildings shall be of steel structure. Administrative buildings, amenity buildings,
electrical sub stations etc shall be of RCC framed structure.
RCC liquid retaining structure like water storage tanks/ sumps will be made leak
proof and designed as un‐cracked section in accordance with IS : 3370 (Part I to
IV) by using working stress method.
However, the parts of such structures not coming in contact with liquid may be
designed according to IS: 456.
8.4 FOUNDATIONS
8.4.1 TRESTLE / COLUMN FOUNDATIONS
Foundations for structures and equipments shall be proportioned to resist the
worst combination of loads and shall be designed as per the provisions of IS:
1904. As per Soil investigation report, isolated or strip foundations are
considered for light structures. For heavy structures, Pile or Mat foundations
have been envisaged.
8.4.2 STACKER TRACK FOUNDATIONS
The stacker track will be on pile foundation and bed will be hard paved.
However possibility of flexible foundation using pre‐cast concrete sleepers and
metal ballast shall be explored.
The depth of foundation shall be determined based on loadings on foundation,
safe bearing capacity at the founding level. The maximum allowable bearing
pressure for design of foundation shall correspond to values confirmed by result
of detailed soil investigation taking into account limits of allowable settlement
considered for design of structures and equipments.
8.4.3 MACHINE FOUNDATIONS
The design of machine / equipment foundation will be as per IS: 456 and IS: 2974.
Frequency and amplitude criteria shall meet the requirement as laid down by the
relevant codes or machine manufacturers.
Foundations of equipment subjected to dynamic loading shall be isolated from
adjoining floors / foundations to prevent propagation of vibration to adjoining
structures.
8.5 CONCRETE MIX
Minimum grade of concrete for all reinforced concrete work will be M25 or
higher grade if required for specific condition as per codal provision specified
other wise.
8.5.1 REINFORCEMENT
For all RCC works, the reinforcement steel to be adopted shall be as follows: ‐
i) HYSD – TMT Bars (Fe‐500) as per IS: 1786 ‐ 1985
ii) Mild Steel Bar as per IS: 432 (Grade)
Minimum cover to Reinforcement shall be as per IS: 456 – 2000
8.6 BRICK MASONRY
All masonry works will be designed in accordance with relevant IS Code as
applicable. Generally all brick walls shall be non‐load bearing walls of 1 brick
thick, except for minor structures which shall be 1 brick thick load bearing walls.
Partition non‐load bearing walls shall be of half brick thick.
8.7 PLANT ROADS
All main plant roads and approach roads to various structures from the nearest
main roads within the battery limits of the works handling area will be
bituminous roads.
8.8 STEEL STRUCTURES
8.8.1 GENERAL
Structures shall be designed such that they are economical, safe and meet the
functional & service requirements of the technological process for which they are
designed. The architectural planning of the buildings /galleries/ junction houses
shall be based on guidelines and requirements given in the specification /
Drawings.
The structures shall be designed conforming to the relevant safety regulations,
Factory Acts, Electricity Rules and stipulations of statutory bodies as applicable
to the project.
Natural ventilation shall be provided ensuring that it prevents rain water entry
into the building.
8.8.2 DESIGN PARAMETERS
8.8.2.1 CONVEYOR GALLERIES AND SUPPORTING TRESTLES
The effect of inclination of conveyors shall be taken into account for design of
structures. The inclination shall be as per conveyor layout.
End portal of gallery shall be designed to transfer all vertical and lateral loads to
supporting trestles / junction tower.
Loads due to temperature effect, if any, wind loads and effect of gravity take‐up
along with other loads combinations shall be considered for the design.
Conveyor galleries and trestles shall be designed considering both the conveyors
are working simultaneously, in case of twin conveyor system.
Cross‐over, if any, shall be provided only at the location of fixed trestles.
All over ground trestles shall be out of rolled ISMB / plated section.
The lattice girders supporting the conveyor shall be suitably braced at top and
bottom chord levels to transfer the wind load to the end portals connected to
trestles. Roof purlins and walkway runners shall be suitably braced at each end
to take care of effect due to inclination of gallery in case of covered gallery.
In case of conveyor galleries, temperature expansion joints consisting of twin
trestles shall be provided at intervals not exceeding 180m to divide galleries into
blocks. In each block, one/ two four‐legged trestles, as required from design
point of view shall be provided ensuring stability of structures in longitudinal
direction. These four‐legged trestle/trestles shall also take care of all longitudinal
forces to be considered in the given block.
Where conveyor gallery trestles have to be connected to junction towers or other
buildings, such connections shall be detailed such that the gallery trusses are free
to move/rotate in the longitudinal direction and no horizontal forces are
transferred to the building structures by providing either teflon pad bearings
/roller supports / pendulum supports.
For design of conveyor galleries, load due to cables, light fitting and water pipes
shall also be considered as appropriate along with other load combination.
Base plate for trestles shall be designed as gusseted base considering all axial
loads and moments. Shear lugs shall be provided below the base plate to take‐up
all horizontal loads.
Anchor bolts shall be designed for maximum uplift for the worst combination of
loads.
Walkway of conveyor galleries shall be of steel grating construction. No flooring
shall be provided under the conveyors. However, where the conveyors cross the
road/railway line a seal plate of 3.15 mm thickness to cater for a spillage load of
75 kg/m2 will be provided below the conveyor.
Walkway beams shall be adequate to satisfy the strength and deflection
requirements.
Toe guard shall be provided on sides of walkway as a safety measure.
Hand railing shall be provided on one side of walkways.
In case of covered galleries roof and sides shall be covered by GCS sheets. Sides
of conveyor galleries shall have 500 mm gap at the bottom and 250 mm gap at
the top for natural ventilation. 1.1 mm‐thick translucent sheets shall be provided
at sides at 10 m interval in staggered way.
8.8.2.2 JUNCTION HOUSES
Junction Houses shall be designed with structural steel framing satisfying
technological requirement
Design shall consider belt tension at starting condition with working
wind/seismic load in combination with other load cases.
Design shall also be carried out for the case of one belt at starting condition and
the other belt in running condition along with working wind/ seismic load in
combination with other load cases.
Chute loads on floors shall be evaluated duly considering the chutes are fully
plugged with material for its entire height.
Toe guards and hand railings shall be provided around the all clear openings.
All floors shall be of 6 mm o/p chequered plate construction resting over steel
beams. Maintenance platforms for gates and flow divider shall be of structural
steel and chequered plate construction.
Sides and roof shall be cladded with GCS sheeting with 1mm sheet on roof and
0.8mm onsides.
Stair case width will be 1000 mm.
Drive units shall be mounted on concrete pedestals for dampening the vibration.
8.8.2.3 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR CONVEYOR GALLERIES AND
JUNCTION HOUSES
Dynamic analysis shall be carried out for beams supporting screens, vibrating
feeder, rotating equipment, conveyor supporting beams in galleries and bridges.
The above beams shall be designed to avoid resonant frequencies and the ratio of
operating frequency to natural frequency shall not lie from 0.8 to 1.2.
Minimum thickness of gusset plate to be provided for connections shall be 8 mm.
Angle sections shall not be used as flexural members except for roof trusses,
purlins, side girts and walkway runners.
For axially loaded members in framework, minimum angle section to be used
shall be ISA50x50x6.
End connections for rolled beams and built‐up beams shall be designed for a
minimum of 80% of their shear capacity in addition to any axial load.
Moments due to eccentricity of floor beam connections shall be duly considered
for design of columns.
Minimum thickness of chequered plate to be provided shall be 6mm o/p.
Toe guards shall have a minimum depth of 150mm and a minimum thickness of
3.15mm.
8.8.2.4 HAND RAILING
Conveyor galleries shall have only top handrail out of 32 NB pipes of medium
class conforming to grade σst 210 of IS:1161‐1979 with threaded ends and
necessary bends, tees, elbows, sockets etc. and shall be located 1000 mm above
the walkway with supports on the verticals and diagonals of the gallery girder.
Hand railing in Junction Houses shall have two horizontal rails, one at 500 mm
and another at 1000 mm above the base level along with vertical posts spaced at
not more than 1200 mm centers. Top rail and mid rail shall be out of NB 32 and
NB 25 pipes of medium class respectively conforming to grade σst 210 of IS:1161‐
1979 with threaded ends and necessary bends, tees elbows, sockets etc. Vertical
posts shall be made of suitable IS angles.
However hand rail details are subjected to changes.
Where floor beams form part of the vertical bracing system, additional loads
from floor beams transferred to bracing shall be taken into consideration in the
design.
Minimum width of main staircase shall be 1000 mm. Minimum tread without
nosing shall be 250 mm. Maximum riser shall be 200 mm and they shall be
limited to 12 per flight. Staircases shall be provided with hand railing and steps
shall be made out of chequered plate 6mm o/p to carry a live load of 500
kg/m2.Stairs of infrequent use may be unto 700mm wide. Staircase will be made
out of gratings.
For any structural steel member, a minimum of 2 nos. 16 mm dia bolts of grade
ʺCʺ shall be used for permanent bolted connection and site welded connection.
8.8.2.5 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION
All steelwork shall be of shop welded and site construction as far as possible
except the site connections for secondary members like purlins, side girts,
staircase, stringers, walkway runners of conveyor galleries etc. shall be bolted
construction.
8.8.2.6 MATERIALS FOR CONSTRUCTION
All structural steel plates shall conform to IS:2062‐ 1992, Fe 410W, Grade‐A for
thickness up to 20mm. Plates of higher thickness shall confirm to IS2062.F 4100
for grade B.
Structural steel rolled sections shall conform to IS: 2062‐1992, Fe 410, Grade‐A.
Electrodes for mild steel shall conform to IS:814‐1991. The electrodes shall be
chosen according to the welding procedure to be adopted and quality of metal to
be welded. The strength of weld metal and of the parent metal in the heat
affected zone shall not be less than that of parent metal.
Hexagonal head bolts & units shall generally conform to the property class as
specified in IS:1379 (part‐3) – 1991 as per design requirement unless otherwise
noted.
Size of permanent bolts shall not be less than M16.
Minimum size of fillet weld shall be as per recommendation of clause A‐2.1.8 of
IS:9595‐1980 except that the leg size shall not be lower than 6 mm. However, for
nominal fillet weld as required, for example, between chequered plates and their
stiffeners or supporting members, hand railing junction etc. the leg size shall not
less than 4 mm.
Hook bolts for corrugated sheet covering shall conform to IS:730‐1978,
Washers for corrugated sheet covering shall conform to IS:8896‐1978.
8.8.2.7 LOADS
DEAD LOADS
Dead load on the structures shall include self weight, weight of floor/roof
materials including all other likely dead loads to be experienced by the structures
during its lifetime.
LIVE LOADS
The following minimum live loads shall be adopted for design of
buildings/structures.
a) Flat roofs of Junction houses Accessible roof: @ 150 Kg/m²
Non‐accessible roof: @ 75 Kg/m²
b) Sloping roofs of Conveyor galleries As per IS:875 (part‐2)‐1987
c) Walkways of Conveyor galleries 400 Kg/m2 (300 Kg/m² live load + 100
Kg/m² spillage load /dust load) or a
moving load of 300 Kg whichever is
more severe.
d) Floors of Junction @ 500 Kg/m²
e) Equipment loads As per actual
f) Live load on Conveyor belt 1.6 times the design weight of Material
carried over the belt
g) Access platform and stairs @ 500 Kg/m²
h) Cable rack and Water pipe lines As per actual
i) Dust load ‐ Sloping roof of Conveyor galleries: @ 50 Kg/m²
Flat roof of Junction Houses: @ 75 Kg/m²
Floors at Junction house and gallery: @ 100 Kg/m²
Note: For conveyor galleries, either spillage load or dust load has been
considered.
WIND LOADS
Wind loads shall be calculated as per IS: 875 (part‐3)‐1987
SEISMIC LOADS
Seismic loads shall be calculated for Zone III As per IS:1893‐2002(part 1)
In case seismic governs, the design shall be carried out for seismic load in lieu of
wind load.
IMPACT FACTOR
a) Design of Monorails, Hoists etc.: 1.20
b) Design of Floor beams supporting drive machinery like head end/ tail end
drive pulley, motors, gear boxes etc: 1.50
LOAD COMBINATIONS
The worst load combinations due to dead load, live load, equipment load, wind
load/seismic load, belt tension etc. shall be considered as follows:
a) DL + LL
b) DL + LL + WL or DL + 0.5 LL + Sl
c) 0.8 x DL + WL ( for maximum uplift for foundation bolts only )
Note: Equipment load and load due to belt tension shall be considered under LL.
8.8.2.8 DEFLECTIONS
The deflection of various structural members shall not affect the smooth working
of conveyor system, junction Houses and Top housing of Blending silo and rapid
loading structure and shall not exceed the following limits.
a) Conveyor galleries: Span/500
b) Trestle supporting gallery in transverse Direction: Height/1000
c) Gallery cross beams directly supporting: Span/500
Conveyor short posts
d) Floor/roof beams of Junction House and walkway: Span/325
Beams of conveyor galleries
e) Floor beams directly supporting drive machinery: Span/500
Motor and gear boxes
f) Beams supporting brick walls: Span/400
g) Monorail track beams: Span/500
h) End portal of conveyor gallery girder: Height / 325
i) Frames of Junction towers & secondary crusher house: Height / 1000
8.8.2.9 DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURES
The design of steel structures shall be carried out as per IS: 800‐1984 and other
relevant Indian Standards. Where there is no Indian Standard in existence then
only the relevant BS or other recognized standards shall be used with prior
approval of the Purchaser.
8.8.2.10 PAINTING OF STEEL STRUCTURES
REQUIREMENT OF PRIMER PAINTS AND FINISHING PAINTS
Primer shall be compatible for epoxy finish paints. 80% zinc rich primer shall be
given at shop/site after the surfaces are sand blasted followed by second coat of
primer with epoxy polyamide miraculous iron oxide (EPMIO). The thickness of
primer coats together shall be 125 microns minimum (50 microns for every zinc
rich primer + 75 microns for EPMIO).
The first finish paint coat shall be with epoxy polyamide hi‐build paint of
maximum dry film thickness of 90 microns. The second finish paint coat shall be
with epoxy polyurethane paint of minimum dry film thickness of 35 microns.
Overall thickness of primer and finish paints shall be 250 microns minimum.
INSPECTION
All structures shall be offered for inspection at the fabrication shop before
painting. Material certificate for the fabricated structures shall also be provided.
ERECTION
Erection shall be carried out as per applicable standards, drawings,
specifications, and regulations. The erection tolerance shall be within the
standard specified limits.
8.9 DESIGN STANDARDS
The following standards and codes will be used in the planning and design of
the facility. These shall be the latest editions including all applicable official
amendments and revisions. In the event, an IS code referred to herein does not
indicate a specific requirement, then the provisions made under the relevant BS
codes, or any other relevant international standards will be used.
Table 8‐1 CIVIL
Sr. Codes Descriptions “ Code of Practice …”

No
1. IS:456 for plain and reinforced concrete
2. IS:875 of practice for design load (Part 1 to Part 5)
3. IS:1893 Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures (Part 1 to 3)
4. IS:4651 for planning & design of ports & harbours (Part 1 to 5)

5. IS:1343 for pre stressed concrete
6. IS:800‐1984 for general construction in steel
7. IS:806‐1968 for use of steel tubes in general building construction
8. IS:2911 for design & construction of pile foundation
9. IS:2974 for design & construction of machine fdn.
10. IS:4000‐1967 for assembly of structural joints using high tensile friction grip
fasteners
11. IS:7205‐1974 Safety code for erection of structural steel works
12. IS:7215‐1974 Tolerance for fabrication of steel structures
SAFETY AND SECURITY
In the design and construction of the equipment all normal safety provisions will
be observed and the equipment will satisfy in every respect the statutory
requirements of the following:
a) Indian Factories Act
b) Indian Electricity Rules including Gujarat State Electricity Rules
c) Indian Electricity Act
d) Indian Dock Labourer’s Act
e) Tariff Advisory Committee as required
f) International Ship & Port Facility Security Code
Table 8‐2 Geotechnical
Sr.
Codes Descriptions “ Code of Practice”
No.
1 IS:1080 For design and construction of shallow foundations in soils
(other than raft, ring and shell).
2 IS:1498 Classification and identification of soils for general engineering
Sr.
Codes Descriptions “ Code of Practice”
No.
purposes.
3 IS:1888 Method of load test on soils
4 IS:1892 for sub‐surface investigation for foundation
5 IS:1904 for design and construction of foundations in soils: General
Requirements
6 IS:2720 Method of test of soils
7 IS:2911 for design and construction of pile foundation
8 IS:2950 for design and construction of raft foundation
9 IS:2974 for design and construction of machine foundation
10 IS:5121 Safety code of piling and other deep foundation
11 IS:6403 for determination of breaking capacity of shallow foundation
12 IS:8009 for calculation of settlements of foundations
13 ‐‐ Guidelines on soft soils stage construction method – RDSO
(Ministry of Railways).
9 ENVIROMENTAL ASPECTS
9.1 INTRODUCTION
All per the gazette notification Dt. 14th September 2006 of the Ministry of
Environment and Forest (MoEF), all port and harbour projects including the
expansion and modernization of existing projects or activities and change in
product mix, shall require prior environmental clearance from the Central
Government in MoEF on the recommendation of the Expert Appraisal
Committee in case of category ‘A’ and the State / Union Territory Environment
Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) in case of category ‘B’ projects. In the case
of port projects, when the cargo handling capacity is equal or more than 5 million
tons per annum, it is defined as category ‘A’ project and less than 5 million tons
per annum, category ‘B’ project. Development of berth no.7 has been defined as
Category ‘A’ project since the throughput is likely to cross 5 million tons per
annum after the first few years of operation. Hence, clearance will be obtained
from the MoEF.
9.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR OBTAINING CLEARANCES
Application seeking environmental clearance will have to be made in the
prescribed Form‐I including the Detailed Terms of Reference (TOR) addressing
all relevant environment concerns for the preparation of Environment Impact
Assessment (EIA) Report in respect of the project for which prior environmental
clearance is sought. The expert committee shall determine the TOR on the basis
of the information furnished in the prescribed Form I including TOR proposed
by the applicant. The TOR will then be conveyed to the applicant by the Expert
Appraisal Committee.
The EIA studies will cover an area of 10 kms radius within the project site. Major
aspects to be covered in the studies include;
• Physico‐Chemical Aspects
• Topography of the project area
• Major sources of water in the project area
• Ecological Aspects
• Ambient air quality
• Marine Water quality
91 enviromental aspects
• Ambient noise level
• Impacts due to Reclamation
The EIA report will be submitted to the MoEF with a copy to the State Pollution
Control Board. A public consultation may be necessary if so decided by the State
Pollution Control Board. In case any environmental concerns are expressed
during the public consultation, appropriate changes will have to be made in the
draft EIA and EMP and the final report has to be submitted to the Expert
Appraisal Committee.
The Expert Appraisal Committee will appraise the reports and recommend for
granting prior environmental clearance.
EIA Report is attached as Annexure F.
92
10 UTILITIES
10.1 POWER AND LIGHTING
Necessary power for the terminal facility will be purchased from Goa State
Government. The power requirement during the construction stage will be very
less. Port should be able to meet this requirement.
10.1.1 POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
Port will receive 33 kV power supply from supply agency in Substation‐1
through 33 kV (E) XLPE cables, which will be further stepped down to 6.6 kV to
feed coal handling system in Substation‐1.
Unloaders, stackers, reclaimers, conveyors and accessories will be fed from HT
power supply at 6.6 kV. LT power supply at 415V will be required for electrical
installations, Utility purpose, buildings and illumination, etc.
Phase wise power requirement has been described below:
Table 10‐1 LT load data sheet
PHASE ‐1 PHASE ‐II
Sr.
Total load Total load
No. Description Description
(KW) (KW)
1 Dust suppression 75 Dust suppression 75
2 Fire fighting (Dead load) Bat. Charger 10
3 Mobile Hopper (2 nos) 220 Scoop coupling 23
4 Vibrating feeder (2 nos) 50 Hoist 10
5 Movable head pulley 10 Welding socket 24
6 Traveling Tripper (2 nos) 60
7 Fixed hopper (4 nos) 300
8 Belt / Vibrating feeder (4nos) 100
9 Hydraulic gate (2 nos) 10
10 Swing gate (2 nos) 10
11 Magnet (2 nos) 50
12 Bat. Charger 10
13 Press 20
14 Scoop coupling 45
15 ACDB 20
93 utilities
PHASE ‐1 PHASE ‐II
Sr.
Total load Total load
No. Description Description
(KW) (KW)
16 PDB 34
17 MLDB 275
18 Miscellaneous 100
19 IMWLS 100
Total Load 1509 142
Table 10‐2 HT load data sheet
Sr PHASE‐I PHASE‐II PHASE‐III
NO Total Total Total
Description Load Description Load Description load
(KW) (KW) (KW)
1 Conveyor CR1 300 Conveyor CR6 250 Reclaimer 600
2 Conveyor CR2 300 Conveyor CR7 250
5 Conveyor CR5 300 Conveyor CRD 450
6 Conveyor CD1 110 S/R‐1 600
7 Conveyor CD2 75
8 Conveyor CD3 110
9 Conveyor CD5 250
10 Conveyor CD6 500
11 Conveyor CD7 250
12 MHC (2 nos) 1600
Total Load 4345 2250 600
To meet the above load requirement Substation No‐1 will be required to be
installed. This Substation will have the provision to cater the load requirement of
all phases. In Phase‐1 following provisions will be made in Substation‐1
i) 33KV HT Panel Board ‐ This panel will be designed to meet load requirement of
all phases in this phase itself.
ii) 33/6.6KV Transformer ‐ In this phase two number Transformers will be
installed to meet load requirement of phase‐I loads, load
94 utilities
of phase‐II and phase‐ III loads.
iii) 6.6/0.433KV Transformers – In this phase two transformers can be installed to
meet LT load requirement of Phase –I, & Phase.‐II loads.
iv) LT Panel and Associated Capacitor Panel‐ LT Panel will be designed to meet
the load requirement of phase‐I and phase‐ II.
v) Cabling and Bus ducts ‐ Cables and Bus ducts will be provided as per
requirement of Phase –I & Phase ‐II.
10.1.2 SUBSTATION‐1
Substation‐1 will feed load requirement of coal handling system, Except lighting
loads, all other major loads will operate on 6.6 kV power supply. Power
distribution system for coal handling system will be as per enclosed single line
diagram. Provision for future loads of 3rd phase is like one number Re‐claimer
has been considered.
10.1.3 CSS‐1
One CSS has been located near in‐motion wagon loading station to feed power to
equipment, lighting load of IMWLS and other miscellaneous LT load near the in‐
motion wagon loading station. Incoming power for CSS is coming from 6.6 KV
HT panel board of Sub‐station ‐1 through 6.6 KV (E) XLPE Cable.
10.2 LT POWER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM:
LT power will be distributed by installing LT panels in substations and
distribution boards/sub‐distribution boards/ feeder pillars near load centers. LT
panel will be provided with Air Circuit Breaker (ACB) and moulded case circuit
breaker (MCCB) with suitable breaking capacities (50 KA/ 35 KA required as
fault level calculation). The rupturing capacity of miniature circuit breaker
(MCB) used in DB’s/SB’s/FP’s for further distribution will not be less than 10 KA.
10.3 STANDBY LT POWER SUPPLY
To meet the emergency power requirement DG sets with suitable capacity will be
installed in substations. 100% power backup will be considered for all
Emergency LT services of port during main power failure. The change over from
normal supply to DG supply will be automatic to ensure minimum interruption
of supply during power failure. UPS will be installed for backup supply for
computer system.
95 utilities
10.4 ILLUMINATION
The illumination level in various areas will be maintained as mentioned below
and for other areas will be based on National Electric Code.
Area Lux Level
Administrative Office 300
Control Buildings 300
Transit sheds 150
Substation, pump houses, fire houses gate House and canteen 200
Work shops 200‐300
External illumination 20‐25
Stock pile Areas 10‐15
Conveyor galleries 10‐15
For internal illumination of office areas ceiling/wall mounted type fluorescent
fittings will be installed. For transit sheds high pressure sodium vapour fixtures
will be used. For illumination of street/road and conveyor galleries poles of
suitable height with HPSV fittings will be installed. Power supply will be made
available from suitably located feeder pillars.
10.5 CABLES
Power distribution at 33 kV will be done through 33 kV (E) XLPE aluminum
armoured cable directly buried in ground. To meet 6.6 kV load requirement 6.6
KV (E) XLPE aluminum armoured cables will be used. Cables will be laid on
cable trays, ducts, directly buried in ground and in trenches, etc. as per site
requirement.
LT power distribution to various services such as illumination, fire fighting, air
conditioning water supply etc. will be done through 1.1 kV grade PVC insulated
aluminum armoured power cables. Laying of cables will be done as per site
requirement.
10.6 EARTHING & LIGHTNING PROTECTION
Suitable lightning protection system will be installed as per the guide lines of the
IS: 2309.
An efficient earthing and lightning protection system will be designed to ensure
protection of men & material in worst of the weather conditions.
96 utilities
All the equipments of substation and various other services will be earthed at
two points. There will be one earth grid formation using 50 x 6 mm GI strip and
all the equipment earthing will be connected to this earth grid. This grid will be
connected with number of GI plate electrodes. However, the neutrals of
transformers and DG sets will be earthed separately. Each neutral will be
connected to 2 nos. separate CU plate earth electrodes. Earthing system will be
designed as per IS: 3043.
For lightning protection separate earth pits will be provided.
10.7 POWER FACTOR IMPROVEMENT
Suitable rating HT capacitors with automated power factor correction

arrangement will be installed to maintain the overall power factor to 0.98.
10.8 DRIVES & PLC SYSTEM
PLC system will be installed to ensure safe and reliable operation of conveyors

and other facilities of port. PLC system will read the input, perform all system
logic, conduct online diagnostics, sequencing control and control the outputs.
All components of PLC will be designed for use in industrial environments
of high temperature, dust, vibration, humidity, electrical noise or other harsh
conditions.
PLC will be with self diagnostic capability and any fault detected will be
clearly and promptly annunciated by audio alarm and visual display.
For various motors of cranes and conveyors, suitable AC/DC drives will be used.
Drives will be able to signal the PLC if any of the parameters are gone off‐limit or
if there is any fault. The drives will be able to perform self diagnostic and retain
diagnostic information for future interrogation. The operation, basic diagnostic,
sequencing and interlocking functions for drives, except emergency protection
functions will be performed by programmable logic controller (PLC). The PLCs
will be able to inter communicate with each other.
PLC system will provide fault diagnosis with suggested remedial actions,
record of maintenance and information of preventive maintenance, etc.
Communication system comprising of fax machine, wireless sets, computers and
PA system with suitable capacities will be installed to suit the port requirement.
97 utilities
10.9 WATER
Water is required at the port for the following activities:
• Supply to ships
• Supply to port staff and port users
• Pollution control and fire fighting purposes
• Environmental conservation and maintenance of greenery in the port
• Miscellaneous.
10.9.1 WATER DEMAND
Daily water demand of the port at peak demand is estimated to be 1138 m³. Out
of this the water for drinking and maintenance is about 33 m³ and balance 1105
m³ is for dust suppression system (1000 m³) and fire fighting system (105).
Summery of water requirement is tabulated below:
Table 10‐3 HT load data sheet
Sr Item Total Water Requirement
No (m³ / day)
1 Water requirement for Coal Stack yard 1000
Dust Suppression
2 Firefighting demand in stack yard area 75*
(Fire water tank capacity 500 Cum)
3 Potable Water Demand (400 persons @ 45 18
LPCD)
4 Fire water Demand for buildings 30
5 Water demand for washing and servicing 15
Total 1138
Total in MLD 1.138
* ‐ Water for firefighting is required only during the fire breakout and as per the
norms the required water will be available in fire water tank all the time,
therefore for calculation of daily water requirement of port 75 cum water is
considered towards daily fire water demand.
Jetty cleaning will be done with sea water.
10.9.2 SOURCE OF WATER AND WATER
MPT agreed to provide 0.50 MLD of recycled water which can be used for DSS.
The remaining raw water for port and back up use will be brought from Public
98 utilities
Works Department; the water will be stored in underground sump of 1150 cum
capacity with partition for storage of fire and dust suppression system. Water for
potable and other purposes will be stored in reservoir of 50 cum capacity and
will be transferred to the over head tank of all the buildings.
10.9.3 WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
The material and size of pipe will be finalized after detailed engineering.
However tentatively 150 dia conveyance main for supply of water to the DSS and
FF storage tank and 80 mm dia water main envisaged for supply of water to tank
for other use. Similarly 200 mm, 150 mm and 80 mm dia pipe envisaged for fire
fighting, dust suppression and potable water distribution main.
10.10 SEWERAGE SYSTEM
Office building, canteens and other operational buildings are proposed to be in a
cluster, and the number of users is limited. Therefore, there is no necessity of
sewerage collection and treatment at one point. It is proposed to construct septic
tank with soak pit for each building of different size depending upon the
anticipated number of users. The tanks will be cleaned periodically with help of
browsers and the sewage will be disposed off.
10.11 STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM
Drainage system is for disposal of precipitation inside the demarcated backup
and port area. However, the drainage system should also take care of the natural
drainage courses passing through the area either barring the outside water from
entering the premises and drain out the same through some other path or the
internal drainage shall be designed so as to take cars of the discharge of external
drain passing through the area.
The area drain can either be rectangular or trapezoidal surface drain or
underground drain with manholes at suitable interval of entry of storm water.
Present practice of MPT is underground drain. However, it may be beneficial to
have combination of surface and subsurface drain to optimize the land use and
effectively drain out the storm water. The details of drain with invert level etc
can only be worked out after detailed study of topography of the nearby area,
rainfall runoff analysis etc.
Primarily, it has been proposed to provide subsurface perforated drains with
inverted filter along the periphery of stockpiles to accumulate and transport the
99 utilities
storm runoff and discharge the same to the dump pond, further on settlement of
the coal particles, the outlet from dump pond is connected to the primary drain
of the area. Secondary drains from different areas running along the road/
boundary will be connected to the primary drain at different locations depending
on the invert level. However, finally the primary drain will be discharged to the
sea. The primary drain may be combination of open/ covered/ subsurface drain.
The drainage system has to be further reviewed at the detailed engineering stage
once the exact runoff details available.
10.12 COMMUNICATIONS
Provisions will be made in the civil works for the installation of fiber optic data
and telephone cables by the installation of ducts and draw pits to allow
connection between the quay cranes, the operations building, the gate house,
Customs, and all other major installations. In general duct runs for data cables
will follow the main service routes.
10.13 FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM
Fire fighting system of the port will be planned, implemented and maintained as
per best industry norms considering the size of the facility. It will conform to
Tariff Advisory Committee’s Guidelines and meet the relevant codal provisions.
System would comprise Fire stations, Hydrants net work, Fire Tanks, Pumping
stations with standby arrangements and requisite number of Fire Tenders. Fire
Alarm arrangements will be built in the design. One Fire Station cum Pump
House will be located on the Approach Bridge nearer the Berths to provide cover
to the Equipment and Ships along side Berths. One station will be located at a
suitable location in the proximity of the Storage areas. The firefighting system
will be detailed with overall fire fighting system of area.
The system of fire lines and hydrants will be designed to ensure that adequate
quantity of water is available at all times, at all areas of the facility where a
potential fire hazard exists. Each hydrant connection will be provided with
suitable length of hoses and nozzles to permit effective operation.
The hydrant system will consist of two or more interconnected ring mains to
cover the facility, each with its individual pump, located in a common pump
house. Adequate ancillary arrangements with jockey pumps, pressure switches,
etc. will be provided to maintain the required pressure in the hydrant system.
Jockey Pump operation will be automatic.
100 utilities
The water supply to the hydrant system will be from an underground reservoir,
exclusively for the hydrant system. The capacity of the reservoir for the system
will be equivalent to the aggregate installed pumping capacity and for specific
duration of time applicable to the hazard classification.
In addition to the above hydrant system using fresh water, independent hydrant
systems with saline water will be provided at the berths to cater to any
emergency situation such as fire in ships. The fire fighting pump units in this
case will be diesel engine driven.
10.14 DUST SUPPRESSION SYSTEM
Dust suppression system will be provided at the stockpiles and the head ends of
the conveyors at transfer points to control the dust generated during operations.
Spraying the stockpile will be carried out with spray guns operating at 9 bar
pressure. A Ground storage tank of adequate capacity and a dedicated pumping
system will be exclusive facility to the Coal Stack Yards. Spray water will be
recycled by collection in peripheral trenches alongside the stockpiles leading into
a lined pond of designed capacity. After decanting and filtration the water will
be returned to the system. It is anticipated that recovery can be to the extent of 50
%.
10.15 MAJOR BUILDINGS IN THE PORT
Various buildings envisaged in the port complex are as follows:
• Administrative buildings including administrative office, officer’s amenities,
port operational buildings / offices and office space for major port users.
• Maintenance buildings, workshops, functional work stations in different port
operational areas and central fire station.
• Substations for power distribution of.
All operational and necessary back up staff will be located close to the port
terminals.
10.16 INTERNAL ROADS, PAVED AREAS, FENCING ETC
Internal road net work is planned on the periphery of the terminal area as well as
for interconnectivity between the Gate and Operational areas and port amenities
Buildings.
101 utilities
10.17 ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION MEASURES
Environment protection measures, as recommended in the Environment

Management Plan which is part of EIA will be implemented in addition to Dust
Prevention and Control measures, Green belt development around the periphery
of the port area, Controlling the contaminated surface run off, entrapment of
contaminants in the Spray water run off, treatment of Domestic and municipal
sewage, safe disposal of municipal waste, noise control by proper traffic
management, security and safety measures, protection of local ecology etc.
10.18 GREEN BELT
A green belt will be developed around the periphery of the port terminal by
dense plantation of suitable trees and bushes as per Forest Plan. Open area
pockets inside the port not required for hard core operations will be landscaped
and greened. Avenue plantation will be undertaken by planting ornamental trees
and bushes along side internal roads.
102 utilities
11 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

Project Schedule has been prepared as per the requirement of Appendix 5 of the
Concession Agreement. However, in the mutual benefits of both the parties, it
has been agreed between both the parties, all efforts will be put up by everybody
concern to reduce duration/prepone start of each and every activity which will
probable might lead to the early completion of the project.
Tentative Implementation Schedule is attached at Annexure G.
103 Implementation schedule
12 COST ESTIMATION
Cost Estimate for entire developments is as shown below. These are on basis of
current market prices & very approximate.
Table 12‐1 Statement of Project Cost

Statement of Project Cost
Sr.No. Particulars Description Amt. (Rs. Crs.)
Land & Site
1 Devlpmnt. Dredging & area develpt. Behind berth 32.92
2 Civil Works (Berths) Berth Construction 53.76
Civil Works (Bldgs. &
3 Utilities) Bldgs, roads, other utilities 16.10
2 Ship Unloader, 2.7 km conveyor,1
4 Plant & Equipment stacker reclaimer 207.04
5 Base Const. Cost 309.83
6 Service Tax at 10.3% 7.76
7 Contingency at 10% 31.76
8 Sub‐Total 349.35
9 Engg. & Consultancy Independent Engr., Howe etc. 9.66
Total PMC (Salary Salary and admin costs, incl. Overhead
10 +admin) costs 11.73
11 Total Base Cost 370.74
12 Lease Rent Rent to Mormugoa port trust 9.40
13 Finance costs Co. formation, Debt syndication & IDC 24.83
Grand Total Project
14 Cost 404.97
Means of Finance
Debt / Equity 70:30
Debt 283.48
Equity 121.49

104 Cost estimation
13 PROFITABILITY PROJECTION & FINANCIALS
13.1 PROJECT COST AND MEANS OF FINANCE:
The project Cost of developing the berth No. 7 at Mormugao Port Trust is as
under:
Table 13‐1 Project Cost of developing the berth
Sr. Particulars Amount
No. (in Crs.)
1 Land & Site Development 34.0
2 Civil works (Berths, Building & Utilities) 72.2
3 Plant & Machinery 211.3
4 Preliminary & Preoperative Expenses (includes engineering, 87.4
consultancy, Financial Cost & contingency)
Total 404.9
Means of Finance
1 Debt 283.4
2 Equity 121.5
D/E Ratio 2.33:1
The project is proposed to be funded with a Debt Equity Ratio of 70: 30, the debt
component works out to be Rs. 283.4 Crores and the Equity works out to be Rs.
121.5 Crores.

The profitability projections for the company has been worked out on the
following assumptions:
13.2 ASSUMPTIONS
13.2.1 CARGO ASSUMPTIONS:
• Commodity: Coal
• Projected Cargo: (escalated 12% p.a. subject to maximum 7.5 Million Tons
p.a.)
Table 13‐2 Cargo Assumption year wise

Particulars FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19
Cargo (MMT 4.5 5.0 5.6 6.3 7.1 7.5 7.5
P.A.)
105 PROFITABILITY PROJECTION & Financials
13.2.2 REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS:
• Terminal Handling charges‐
• Rs. 183 / MT (Base Year 2008‐09); As per the Rates in the Concession
Agreement. Factoring the escalation the rate works out to be Rs. 207/MT for
the first year of operation i.e. FY 2012‐13.
• Escalation : 60% of the Wholesale Price Index (assumed to be 6%); effectively
working out as 3.6% p.a.
• Berth Hire charges‐ Rs. 0.49/GRT/ Hr.
• Each ship is assumed to stay for 2 days for the port call.
• Storage charges‐ Rs. 2.5/MT
• Escalation : 60% of the Wholesale Price Index (assumed to be 6%); effectively
working out as 3.6% p.a.

13.2.3 EXPENSE ASSUMPTIONS:
• Revenue share with MPT – 20% of total revenue as per concession agreement
• License fees – For the allotted land:
o Rs. 4.30 Crores p.a. – calculated on the aggregate land area of the port
based on scale of rates of Mormugao Port Trust.
o Escalation : 2% p.a. as mentioned in the Concession Agreement
• Cargo handling cost
o Rs. 18 / MT (Base Year 2011‐12); Factoring the escalation the rate works
out to be Rs. 18.648/MT for the first year of operation i.e. FY 2012‐13.
o Escalation : 60% of the Wholesale Price Index (assumed to be 6%);
effectively working out as 3.6% p.a.
• Manpower – Rs. 1.1 Crores p.a.
o Escalation : 6% p.a.
• Power Cost
o Variable : 2.35 Unit/MT @ Rs. 5 per Unit
o Fixed : 15 MVA Rated load is factored.
o Escalation (For Variable Component): 60% of the Wholesale Price
Index (assumed to be 6%); effectively working out as 3.6% p.a.
• Insurance – 0.25% of Gross block of the assets of the first year of Operation.
• Repair & maintenance Cost on Gross Block of the assets of the first year of
Operation.
Civil Work – 0.3%
Equipment – 0.5%
Electrical Equipment – 0.5%
o Escalation : 6% p.a.
• Other Administration expenses – 0.35% of sales revenue.

13.2.4 FINANCIAL COST ASSUMPTIONS:
• Construction period of 2 years starts from 1st April, 2010 to 31st March, 2012.
• Debt Equity ratio is 2.33:1 with the upfront equity of 35%.
• Interest rate for debt is 10% p.a. during the construction period and
thereafter.
• The moratorium period for debt is 2 years after the end of construction period
and repayment of debt will be done within 8 years from the end of
moratorium period.
• Corporate Tax, MAT and Service Tax are 33.22%, 19.93% and 10.30%
respectively (As per latest Budget for Assessment year 2010‐11).

The projected profitability and the balance sheet are attached herewith.

Table 13‐3 Profit & Loss account

Profit & Loss Account ( Adani Mormugao Port Terminal Private Ltd) for the year ended on…………. (Amount Rs. in Crores)
Particulars 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 2016‐17 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22
Throughput (in
MMTPA) 4.5 5.0 5.6 6.3 7.1 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
Revenue Realization
(Rs/MT) 223 230 238 246 255 263 273 282 292 302
Total Revenue 100.3 116.2 134.5 155.8 180.4 197.6 204.4 211.4 218.6 226.1
Total expenses 42.8 48.5 55.1 62.7 71.4 77.7 80.4 83.2 86.0 89.0
EBIDTA 57.5 67.7 79.5 93.1 109.0 119.9 124.0 128.2 132.6 137.1
EBIDTA margin (%) 57.4% 58.2% 59.0% 60.4% 60.7% 60.7% 60.7% 60.6% 60.6% 60.6%
Depreciation 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1
Interest on RTL 28.3 28.3 26.6 23.1 19.5 16.0 12.4 8.9 5.3 1.8
Preliminary expenses 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
PBT 10.9 21.1 34.6 51.8 71.2 86.9 94.5 102.3 110.2 118.3
Tax 2.2 4.2 6.9 10.3 14.2 17.3 18.8 20.4 22.0 23.6
Deferred Tax
Provision ‐ 6.2 11.5 17.2 17.8 2.2 0.6 (0.6) (1.6) (2.3)
PAT 8.8 10.7 16.2 24.3 39.3 67.4 75.1 82.5 89.8 97.0


Table 13‐4 Balance Sheet
Balance Sheet ( Adani Mormugao Port Terminal Private Ltd) as on………….(Amount Rs. in Crores)
Particulars 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 2016‐17 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22
Liabilities
Shareholders Fund
Equity share capital 121.5 121.5 121.5 121.5 121.5 121.5 121.5 121.5 121.5 121.5
Reserves & Surplus 8.8 19.4 35.7 59.9 99.2 166.6 241.7 324.2 414.0 511.0
Total Shareholderʹs Funds 130.3 140.9 157.2 181.4 220.7 288.1 363.2 445.7 535.5 632.5
Rupee Term Loans 283.5 283.5 248.1 212.6 177.2 141.7 106.3 70.9 35.4 ‐
Deferred Tax Liabilities ‐ 6.2 17.7 34.9 52.6 54.8 55.4 54.8 53.3 51.0
Total Liabilities 413.7 430.6 422.9 428.9 450.5 484.7 525.0 571.4 624.2 683.5
Assets
Gross Block 399.0 399.0 399.0 399.0 399.0 399.0 399.0 399.0 399.0 399.0
Less: Accumulated
Depriciation 17.1 34.1 51.2 68.2 85.3 102.4 119.4 136.5 153.5 170.6
Net Block 381.9 364.9 347.8 330.7 313.7 296.6 279.6 262.5 245.4 228.4
Cash and Bank Balance 27.0 62.1 72.7 97.0 136.8 188.1 245.4 308.9 378.8 455.1
Preliminary Expenses to
the extent not written off 4.8 3.6 2.4 1.2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Total Assets 413.7 430.6 422.9 428.9 450.5 484.7 525.0 571.4 624.2 683.5


ANNEXURE - A

AMPTPL

ANNEXURE - B

AMPTPL

ANNEXURE - C

AMPTPL

ANNEXURE - D
AMPTPL
Final Report
Mundra Port and Special Economic Zone Limited

(MPSEZL)
Traffic Assessment for Mormugao Port

– Berth No 7 (Coal Terminal)
Final Report
November 2009
i-maritime Consultancy Private Limited

206 Hermes Atrium,
Sector 11, CBD Belapur
Navi Mumbai- 400 614.
+91-22-2757 7834 / 9611
+91-22-27579612 (Fax)
consult@imaritime.com
1
MPSEZL Final Report
Table of Contents
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 10
1.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 10
1.2. Hinterland Assessment ................................................................................................ 10
1.2.1. Coal based thermal power plants ............................................................................. 10
1.2.2. Cement Plants .......................................................................................................... 11
1.2.3. Sponge Iron Plants ................................................................................................... 11
1.2.4. Integrated Steel plants ............................................................................................. 12
1.3. Competition Analysis ................................................................................................... 12
1.3.1. Internal competition .................................................................................................. 12
1.3.2. External Competition ................................................................................................ 13
1.4. Integrated Logistics Cost Analysis and Traffic Projections .......................................... 17
1.5. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 18
2. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 20
2.1. Mundra Port and Special Economic Zone Ltd. (MPSEZL) .......................................... 20
2.2. Mormugao Port ............................................................................................................ 20
2.3. Project Background ...................................................................................................... 20
2.4. Scope of Work.............................................................................................................. 20
2.4.1. Macro Analysis (with focus on traffic risks) .............................................................. 20
2.4.2. Analysis of Site and Connectivity ............................................................................. 21
2.4.3. Hinterland and Commodity Analysis ........................................................................ 21
2.4.4. Competition mapping for hinterland traffic ............................................................... 21
3. MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS – GLOBAL ................................................................... 22
3.1. Coal Reserves, Production & Consumption ................................................................ 22
3.2. Coal Trade Movement ................................................................................................. 23
3.2.1. Thermal Coal ............................................................................................................ 23
3.2.2. Coking Coal .............................................................................................................. 26
3.3. Coal Trade Outlook ...................................................................................................... 28
4. MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS – DOMESTIC ............................................................... 29
4.1. Coal Scenario – India ................................................................................................... 29
4.2. Thermal Coal................................................................................................................ 30
4.3. Coking Coal.................................................................................................................. 31
4.4. Domestic Coal Trade Outlook – Port Infrastructure Perspective ................................. 32
5. SITE LOCATION AND CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS ........................................................ 33
5.1. Site Location ................................................................................................................ 33
5.2. Connectivity – Road ..................................................................................................... 34
5.3. Road Capacity Analysis ............................................................................................... 34
5.4. Connectivity – Rail ....................................................................................................... 36
5.5. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 37
6. HINTERLAND IDENTIFICATION & ASSESSMENT ......................................................... 38
6.1. Hinterland Definition ..................................................................................................... 38
6.1.1. Primary hinterland .................................................................................................... 38
6.1.2. Secondary hinterland ............................................................................................... 38
6.1.3. Tertiary Hinterland .................................................................................................... 38
6.2. Hinterland Identification ............................................................................................... 38
6.2.1. Primary Hinterland .................................................................................................... 38
6.2.2. Secondary Hinterland ............................................................................................... 39
6.2.3. Tertiary Hinterland .................................................................................................... 39
i-maritime Consultancy
2
MPSEZL Final Report
6.3. Hinterland Assessment ................................................................................................ 40

6.4. Thermal Power Plants .................................................................................................. 40
6.4.1. Maharashtra ............................................................................................................. 40
6.4.2. Karnataka ................................................................................................................. 40
6.5. Cement Plants.............................................................................................................. 43
6.6. Sponge Iron Plants ...................................................................................................... 45
6.7. Integrated Steel Plants ................................................................................................. 49
6.8. Hinterland Capacity Projections ................................................................................... 52
7. COMPETITION ANALYSIS ................................................................................................ 53
7.1. Internal competition ...................................................................................................... 53
7.1.1. Berth 5A, 6A ............................................................................................................. 53
7.1.2. Berth 10, 11 .............................................................................................................. 53
7.2. External Competition .................................................................................................... 54
7.2.1. Panjim ....................................................................................................................... 55
7.2.2. JSW Jaigarh Port...................................................................................................... 55
7.2.3. Redi Port ................................................................................................................... 55
7.2.4. Karwar & Belekeri ..................................................................................................... 56
7.2.5. New Mangalore, Chennai & Krishnapatnam ............................................................ 56
7.3. SWOT Analysis of Berth 7, Mormugao Port ................................................................ 56
7.4. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 57
8. SCENARIOS INFLUENCING TRADE PATTERN .............................................................. 58
8.1. Integrated Steel Industry .............................................................................................. 58
8.2. Sponge Iron Industry .................................................................................................... 59
8.2.1. Iron Ore Movement in Karnataka ............................................................................. 59
8.3. Scenario 1 .................................................................................................................... 61
8.4. Scenario 2 .................................................................................................................... 61
9. INTEGRATED LOGISTICS COST ANALYSIS .................................................................. 62
9.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 62
9.2. Inland Logistics Cost calculation: Assumptions & Facts .............................................. 62
9.2.1. Inland Cost Assumptions .......................................................................................... 62
9.3. Port and Vessel related Charges ................................................................................. 64
9.3.1. Port Charges for Coking Coal .................................................................................. 67
9.3.2. Port Charges for Thermal Coal ................................................................................ 72
9.4. Voyage Charges .......................................................................................................... 77
9.4.1. Voyage Charges for Coking Coal ............................................................................. 78
9.4.2. Voyage Charges for Thermal Coal ........................................................................... 83
9.5. Integrated Logistics Cost ............................................................................................. 89
10. TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS .................................................................................................. 99
10.1. Scenario 1 .................................................................................................................. 100
10.2. Scenario 2 .................................................................................................................. 105
10.3. Comparison of Scenarios ........................................................................................... 111
11. RISK ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION ............................................................................... 112
11.1. Trade Pattern Risk ..................................................................................................... 112
11.1.1. Supply Trade Risk .................................................................................................. 112
11.1.2. Demand Trade Risk ............................................................................................... 112
11.2. Inland logistics bottlenecks ........................................................................................ 113
11.3. Internal Competition ................................................................................................... 114
11.4. Infrastructure Mismatch ............................................................................................. 114
11.5. Environment ............................................................................................................... 114
12. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ................................................................................................. 116
3
MPSEZL Final Report
12.1. Sensitivity due to mismatch in Hinterland Capacity Accretion ................................... 116

12.2. Sensitivity due to Variation in Decision Matrix Variables for Cargo Distribution ........ 118
13. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 119
14. MACRO OVERVIEW OF COAL – GLOBAL (APPENDIX) .............................................. 120
15. MACRO OVER VIEW – DOMESTIC (APPENDIX) .......................................................... 122
16. PRIMARY INTERVIEWS (APPENDIX) ............................................................................ 123
17. SCENARIOS INFLUENCING TRADE PATTERN (APPENDIX) ...................................... 142
18. INTEGRATED LOGISTICS COST ANALYSIS (APPENDIX) .......................................... 143
4
MPSEZL Final Report
LIST OF TABLES
5
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 1-1 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 1 (million ton) ............................................. 17
Table 1-2 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 1 (with KPCL) (million ton) ......................... 17
Table 1-3 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 2 (million ton) ............................................. 18
Table 1-4 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 1 (with KPCL) (million ton) ......................... 18
Table 3-1 Region-wise Breakup of Thermal Coal Imports (million ton) ...................................................... 24
Table 3-2 Region-wise Breakup of Thermal Coal Exports (million ton) ...................................................... 24
Table 3-3 Region-wise breakup of Coking Coal Imports and Exports (million ton) .................................... 26
Table 4-1 Coal Reserves in India ................................................................................................................ 29
Table 4-2 Domestic v/s Imported Coal ........................................................................................................ 30
Table 4-3 Coal Production, Consumption, Import Projections (million ton) ................................................ 32
Table 6-1 Thermal Power Plants in Hinterland ........................................................................................... 42
Table 6-2 Thermal Power Plant Capacity in Hinterland .............................................................................. 42
Table 6-3 Cement Plants in Hinterland ....................................................................................................... 44
Table 6-4 Hinterland Cement Capacity (million ton) ................................................................................... 44
Table 6-5 Port Wise Origin of Coal ............................................................................................................. 46
Table 6-6 Sponge Iron Capacity in Hinterland of Berth 7 (million ton) ....................................................... 46
Table 6-7 Sponge Iron Plants in Hinterland ................................................................................................ 47
Table 6-8 Sponge Iron Plants in Hinterland (contd.) ................................................................................... 48
Table 6-9 Integrated Steel Capacity in Hinterland of Berth 7 (million ton) .................................................. 50
Table 6-10 Integrated Steel Plants in Hinterland ........................................................................................ 51
Table 6-11 Decision Matrix for CMIE Classification of Project Status ........................................................ 52
Table 8-1 Comparison of Sponge Iron and Integrated Steel Industries ..................................................... 58
Table 9-1 Vessel Assumptions for Port and Voyage Charge Estimation ................................................... 65
Table 9-2 Port Charges Assumption for Coking Coal ................................................................................. 66
Table 9-3 Port Charges Assumption for Thermal Coal ............................................................................... 66
Table 9-4 Mormugao Port Charges - Coking Coal ..................................................................................... 67
Table 9-5 Panjim Port Charges - Coking Coal ............................................................................................ 67
Table 9-6 Karwar Port Charges - Coking Coal ........................................................................................... 68
Table 9-7 Belekeri Port Charges - Coking Coal .......................................................................................... 68
Table 9-8 New Mangalore Port Charges - Coking Coal ............................................................................. 69
Table 9-9 Chennai Port Charges - Coking Coal ......................................................................................... 69
Table 9-10 Ennore Port Charges - Coking Coal ......................................................................................... 70
Table 9-11 Krishnapatnam Port Charges - Coking Coal ............................................................................ 70
Table 9-12 Machilipatnam Port Charges - Coking Coal ............................................................................. 71
Table 9-13 Kakinada Port Charges - Coking Coal ...................................................................................... 71
Table 9-14 Vizag/Gangavaram Port Charges - Coking Coal ...................................................................... 72
Table 9-15 Mormugao Port Charges - Thermal Coal ................................................................................. 72
Table 9-16 Panjim Port Charges - Thermal Coal ........................................................................................ 73
Table 9-17 Karwar Port Charges - Thermal Coal ....................................................................................... 73
Table 9-18 Belekeri Port Charges - Thermal Coal ...................................................................................... 74
Table 9-19 New Mangalore Port Charges - Thermal Coal ......................................................................... 74
Table 9-20 Chennai Port Charges - Thermal Coal ..................................................................................... 75
Table 9-21 Ennore Port Charges - Thermal Coal ....................................................................................... 75
Table 9-22 Krishnapatnam Port Charges - Thermal Coal .......................................................................... 76
Table 9-23 Machilipatnam Port Charges - Thermal Coal ........................................................................... 76
Table 9-24 Kakinada Port Charges - Thermal Coal .................................................................................... 77
Table 9-25 Vizag / Gangavaram Port Charges - Thermal Coal .................................................................. 77
Table 9-26 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Mormugao Port (Rs/ton) ........................................................ 78
Table 9-27 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Panjim Port (Rs/ton) .............................................................. 78
Table 9-28 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Karwar Port (Rs/ton) .............................................................. 79
Table 9-29 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Belekeri Port (Rs/ton)............................................................. 79
Table 9-30 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - New Mangalore Port (Rs/ton) ................................................ 80
Table 9-31 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Chennai Port (Rs/ton) ............................................................ 80
Table 9-32 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Ennore Port (Rs/ton) .............................................................. 81
Table 9-33 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Krishnapatnam Port (Rs/ton) ................................................. 81
Table 9-34 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Machilipatnam Port (Rs/ton) .................................................. 82
6
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-35 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Kakinada Port (Rs/ton) .......................................................... 82
Table 9-36 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Vizag/Gangavaram Port (Rs/ton)........................................... 83
Table 9-37 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Mormugao Port (Rs/ton) ...................................................... 83
Table 9-38 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Panjim Port (Rs/ton)............................................................. 84
Table 9-39 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Karwar Port (Rs/ton) ............................................................ 84
Table 9-40 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Belekeri Port (Rs/ton) .......................................................... 85
Table 9-41 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - New Mangalore Port (Rs/ton) .............................................. 85
Table 9-42 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Chennai Port (Rs/ton) .......................................................... 86
Table 9-43 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Ennore Port (Rs/ton) ............................................................ 86
Table 9-44 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Krishnapatnam Port (Rs/ton) ............................................... 87
Table 9-45 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Machilipatnam Port (Rs/ton) ................................................ 87
Table 9-46 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Kakinada Port (Rs/ton) ........................................................ 88
Table 9-47 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Vizag/Gangavaram Port (Rs/ton)......................................... 88
Table 9-48 Comparison of Port & Voyage Charges for Coking Coal (Rs/ton)............................................ 89
Table 9-49 Comparison of Port & Voyage Charges for Thermal Coal (Rs/ton).......................................... 89
Table 9-50 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton) .............. 90
Table 9-51 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton) ................. 91
Table 9-52 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton) ................ 92
Table 9-53 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton) ................... 94
Table 9-54 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton) .............. 95
Table 9-55 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton) ................. 96
Table 9-56 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton) ................ 97
Table 9-57 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton) ................... 98
Table 10-1 Decision Matrix for Traffic Projections ...................................................................................... 99
Table 10-2 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Cement Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton) ..................... 101
Table 10-3 Berth 7 Share of Coking Coal from Steel Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton) ........................... 102
Table 10-4 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Sponge Iron Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton) .............. 103
Table 10-5 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Thermal Power Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton) ......... 104
Table 10-6 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenarios 1 (million ton) ............................................. 105
Table 10-7 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenarios 1 with KPCL’s coal (million ton) ................ 105
Table 10-8 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Cement Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton) ..................... 106
Table 10-9 Berth 7 Share of Coking Coal from Steel Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton) ........................... 107
Table 10-10 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Sponge Iron Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton) ............ 108
Table 10-11 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Thermal Power Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton) ....... 109
Table 10-12 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenario 2 (million ton) ............................................ 110
Table 10-13 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenario 2 with KPCL coal (million ton) ................... 110
Table 10-14 Comparison of Scenario 1 & 2 .............................................................................................. 111
Table 12-1 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from “Completed” Projects - Scenario 1 (million ton) ......................... 116
Table 12-2 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from "Under Implementation" Projects - Scenario 1 (million ton) ....... 116
Table 12-3 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from “Completed” & "Under Implementation" Projects - Scenario 1 (% of
total projected traffic)................................................................................................................................. 117
Table 12-4 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from “Completed” Projects - Scenario 2 (million ton) ......................... 117
Table 12-5 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from "Under Implementation" Projects - Scenario 2 (million ton) ....... 117
total projected traffic)................................................................................................................................. 117
Table 12-7 100% cargo movement from Berth 7, Mormugao Port – Scenario 1 (million ton) .................. 118
Table 12-8 100% cargo movement from Berth 7, Mormugao Port – Scenario 2 (million ton) .................. 118
Table 14-1 Global Coal Reserve Distribution (million ton) ........................................................................ 120
Table 14-2 Commodity-wise breakup of Dry Bulk Trade (million ton) ...................................................... 121
Table 14-3 Region wise breakup of Global Steel Production (million ton) ............................................... 121
Table 14-4 % Change in Industrial Production ......................................................................................... 121
Table 15-1 Domestic Coking and Thermal Coal Production (million ton) ................................................. 122
Table 16-1 Break-up of Coal/Coke handled at Berth 10 & 11 .................................................................. 126
Table 16-2 Past 3 Year Breakup of Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port ......................................................... 130
Table 17-1 Breakup of Indian Iron-Ore Exports to Various Countries ...................................................... 142
Table 18-1 Inland Road Distances (km) ................................................................................................... 143
7
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-2 Inland Rail Distances (km) ...................................................................................................... 144

Table 18-3 Inland Road Freight Costs - Normal (Rs./ton) ........................................................................ 145
Table 18-4 Inland Rail Freight Costs (Rs. per ton) ................................................................................... 146
Table 18-5 % Reduction in Inland Freight Cost due to Reverse Cargo Availability (Scenario 1) ............. 147
Table 18-6 Reduced Inland Freight Cost via Road - Scenario 1 (Rs./ton) ............................................... 148
Table 18-7 Advantage of Mormugao over Competing Ports in Reduced Inland Road Costs-Scenario 1
(Rs. /ton).................................................................................................................................................... 149
Table 18-8 % Reduction in Inland Freight Cost due to Reverse Cargo Availability - Scenario 2 ............. 150
Table 18-9 Reduced Inland Freight Cost via Road - Scenario 2 (Rs./ton) ............................................... 151
(Rs. /ton).................................................................................................................................................... 152
8
MPSEZL Final Report
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Chief Competing Ports and Hinterland Cargo centres .............................................................. 13
Figure 1-2 Existing Coal and Iron Ore Movement....................................................................................... 16
Figure 3-1 Global Coal Reserve Distribution .............................................................................................. 22
Figure 3-2 Global Dry Bulk Trade v/s Global Coal Trade (million ton)........................................................ 23
Figure 3-3 Global Thermal Coal Trade Flow............................................................................................... 25
Figure 3-4 Region-wise Breakup of Global Crude Steel Production .......................................................... 26
Figure 3-5 Global Coking Coal Trade Flow................................................................................................. 27
Figure 3-6 % Change in Industrial Production ............................................................................................ 28
Figure 4-1 Indian Coal Production (million ton, CY) ................................................................................... 29
Figure 4-2 Coal Reserve Distribution in India ............................................................................................. 30
Figure 4-3 Boiler Efficiency and Ash Content ............................................................................................. 31
Figure 5-1 Proposed Berth 7 Location ........................................................................................................ 33
Figure 5-2 Roads in Goa ............................................................................................................................. 35
Figure 5-3 Railway Network in Goa ............................................................................................................ 36
Figure 6-1 Hinterland for Mormugao Port - Coal......................................................................................... 39
Figure 6-2 Important Power Plants in Maharashtra (Existing & Upcoming) ............................................... 41
Figure 6-3 Karnataka Existing & upcoming Cement Capacities ................................................................. 43
Figure 6-4 Karnataka Steel Manufacturing Hubs ........................................................................................ 49
Figure 7-1 Chief Competing Ports and Hinterland Cargo centres .............................................................. 55
Figure 7-2 SWOT Analysis of Berth 7, Mormugao Port .............................................................................. 57
Figure 8-1 Iron Ore and Coal Movement in Bellary - Hospet Belt .............................................................. 60
Figure 11-1 Pollution from Existing Coal Operations at Berth 10 & 11 ..................................................... 115
Figure 15-1 Domestic Coking and Thermal Coal Production (million ton) ................................................ 122
9
MPSEZL Final Report
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1. Introduction
Mundra Port & Special Economic Zone Limited (MPSEZL), India’s largest private port and integrated
SEZ, is operating a state-of–the-art, SEZ based port terminal at Mundra, Gujarat. In addition to the mega
coal terminal being built at Mundra Port, MPSEZL is planning to develop and operate berth 7 at
Mormugao Port on PPP (DBFOT) basis. i-maritime consultancy Private Limited (i-maritime) has been
given the mandate of assessing the traffic for Berth 7.
Mormugao is one of the 13 major ports of India. Located on the west coast, it is the foremost iron-ore
exporting ports in India. It handled more than 27 million ton FY 2008, primarily to China. Coal (thermal
and coke) is the second most important commodity handled at the port (4.2 million ton FY 2008).
The ensuing traffic assessment includes a hinterland analysis to assess the industrial set up that can
provide any demand for coal. Competition assessment is used to map this demand to Berth 7 and the
rest of the competing ports on the basis of integrated logistics cost analysis. Primary surveys were carried
out to understand the trade dynamics from the perspective of various stakeholders in the entire supply
chain (port authorities, stevedores, barge/truck association, end users and traders). A collective
assessment of all these factors was later used to prepare the final traffic projections with two scenarios.
1.2. Hinterland Assessment
Based on primary interviews and desktop research it may be concluded that there are four major
industries that are expected to contribute to the coal cargo at Mormugao Port
1. Coal based thermal power plants
2. Cement plants
3. Sponge iron plants
4. Integrated Steel Plants
Apart from these, there is a small amount of demand from paper mills, alloy workshops, sugar refineries,
etc. However, this demand fluctuates and is extremely seasonal in nature.
1.2.1. Coal based thermal power plants

Currently, the hinterland has thermal power plants with a cumulative installed capacity of around 2340
MW. This includes a 500 MW power plant owned by Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) and a
260 MW captive power plant being operated by JSW. Going forward, close to Rs. 25,000 crore worth of
power plants have been announced to be set up in Maharashtra (Sindhudurg and Ratnagairi).Based on
the development of private ports of Maharashtra (as outlined in competition analysis) and the choice of
building a captive jetty (expected to be exercised by the big projects), Mormugao Port is not expected to
witness any significant demand from these power projects. KPCL has been expected to shift to 100%
10
MPSEZL Final Report
domestic coal as confirmed during a primary survey. The feasibility of this potential shift remains to be
seen in light of domestic coal availability. Thus only a handful of Karnataka based power project may
contribute to the coal traffic at Berth 7. Based on our forecast, power plants will contribute 0.06 million ton
in FY 14 to around 0.2 million ton in FY 20.
However, as per a recent development, the sponge iron plants are developing small captive power plants
(5-10 MW each). These players expect to sell off the surplus power to the state grid for additional profits.
With around 75 sponge iron plants in the proposed hinterland, around 400-750 MW of captive capacity
may be developed over the next few years. This would contribute to traffic of around 1.2 MTPA (based on
60% blending and 4 million ton for 1000 MW). However, this has not been included in the traffic
projections.
A new project involving NTPC setting up a 4000 MW power plant at Kudigi (Bijapur District), Karnataka
has recently come to light. Due to the lack of interaction with the concerned authorities on this project, its
expected cargo (1.92-3.2 million ton of imported thermal coal per annum) has not been included in the
traffic projections yet. It will be duly accounted for post primary survey.
1.2.2. Cement Plants

As on date, the total cement production capacity of the hinterland is around 15.74 MTPA. ACC, Grasim
and Kesoram are the key players in the hinterland. JSW’s new cement facility has been constructed and
is expected to commence operations within a few months. Further, Kesoram, Jaykaycem, Ittina Cements
and UltraTech are adding around 10.4 MTPA of capacity in the next few years. The total thermal coal
demand from cement players has been pegged at around 0.01 million ton in FY 12 going up to 0.05
million ton by FY 20. The reason for low demand despite the high capacity is the low coal requirement
(0.2 ton) per ton of cement produced and low ratio of blending (6%).
1.2.3. Sponge Iron Plants

Sponge iron is one of the biggest industries (in terms of coal demand) in the hinterland for Berth 7,
Mormugao Port. Currently, the total sponge iron capacity is around 2.7 million ton per annum. A further
1.8-2 million ton of capacity has been announced to be built or being constructed. These players buy
imported coal through traders, evacuate it through road (because of smaller parcel sizes) and blend it
with domestic coal in the ratio of 60-40. Most of this imported coal is coming from Chennai,
Krishnapatnam and New Mangalore ports due to the favorable reverse logistics resulting from iron ore
movement. As per talks with Bhatia Trader (Bhatia imports close to 50% of the total coal demand of
sponge iron industry), not much movement of coal can be expected to Bellary unless iron-ore trade shifts
towards Goa. Our estimates confirm this through a comparison of the integrated logistics costs. While it
costs Rs. 1585.45/ton from Bellary to Mormugao, Chennai to Bellary costs Rs. 1265.31/ton (both are for
Indonesian coal). This cost difference is primarily because of the reduced inland cost for Chennai-Bellary
11
MPSEZL Final Report
route. With a cumulative capacity of 2.5 million ton per annum, the total coal requirement is close to 3
million ton.
1.2.4. Integrated Steel plants

Integrated steel plants form the biggest industrial group (in terms of coal demand) in hinterland of Berth 7,
Mormugao Port. The hinterland has a total installed capacity of 10.34 MTPA of which JSW Steel is the
biggest (6.8 MTPA). Usha Ispat, Apparent Steel, Kirloskar Steel and Kalyani are the other important
players in the industry. Going forward, Essar Group is developing a 6 MTPA plant at Bagalkot and Aaress
Iron & Steel (Baldota Group) is building a 3.2 MTPA plant at Koppal. These are two important clients that
can be attracted to Berth 7. The integrated logistics cost analysis indicates a clear advantage for Berth 7
(Rs.420 for Essar Steel and Rs. 250 for Baldota Group). The cargo estimate for the same has been
included in the ensuing traffic projections.
1.3. Competition Analysis
1.3.1. Internal competition

Currently, the port is handling coal at 4 berths – 5A, 6A, 10 & 11. Of these, Berths 5A and 6A are being
operated by South West Public Limited (JSW Group subsidiary) for coal requirements of JSW Steel (close
to 3 million ton) while 10 & 11 are operated by the port trust itself (handles close to 1.2 million ton of coal).
Going forward, 5A & 6A are expected to handle the thermal coal requirements for upcoming JSW Cement
plant and power plant as well. As per interaction with SWPL, JSW has signed an agreement to handle up
to 5million ton of coal at Krishnapatnam Port. This will help decongest Berths 5A and 6A as the power
and cement plant become operational, leading to a larger demand for coal, and simultaneously de-risk
the logistics set up.
Further, primary surveys indicate that JSW is not interested in handling third party coal at their berths. In
the past, the port authority offered JSW to handle third party cargo at their berth but SWPL quoted
discouragingly high rates. Moreover, Berths 5A &6A do not offer road evacuation.
Berth 10 & 11 are located close to the village of Vasco. Here, coal is handled through manual operations
creating excess pollution for the local population. This has caused a huge furore between these villagers
and port trust leading to the port trust planning to shift this cargo to Berth 7 (mechanised handling and far
from the concerned village). Amongst others, truck association consensus and port trust approval are the
key factors affecting the decision about this shift. Almost 80% of the Berth 10 & 11 cargo is evacuated by
road, thus accounting for the involvement of truckers. Moreover, as the new storage & demurrage
charges (recently brought into action by the Port Trust, awaits formal approval from TAMP) get levied, the
low yard side evacuation rate will ramp up the storage charges for such traders and independent
importers. Berth 7, with far superior handling rates and storage space, will be in an excellent position to
12
MPSEZL Final Report
attract these customers. There is a further potential internal competition from the development of new
berths at Mormugao Port in the future. The development of Vasco Bay and/or East of Breakwater terminal
is two potential projects that can compete with Berth 7 at Mormugao Port.
Thus it may be concluded that currently Berth 7 has limited internal competition which should further
minimise as existing Berth 10-11 cargo is shifted to Berth 7. It would further enjoy a clear first mover
advantage for 4-6 years over any future coal handling project in Mormugao POrt.
1.3.2. External Competition

On the Western Coast, Panjim (Goa), Jaigarh, Dabhol, Redi, Dighi (Maharashtra), Karwar, Belekeri and
New Mangalore (Karnataka) are the main competitors to Berth 7 at Mormugao Port. On the Eastern
Coast, Krishnapatnam, Chennai and Ennore are the chief competitors.
Figure 1-1 Chief Competing Ports and Hinterland Cargo centres
Source: i-maritime analysis, www.wikimapia.com

Panjim is a fair weather port that is mostly used between the months of September-February for loading
iron ore. It handled more than 12 million ton of iron ore in FY 2008. It does not pose any competition to
Berth 7 as the latter is being built only for coal handling. Moreover, the all-weather mechanised
infrastructure at Mormugao Port is bound to appeal to the potential clients more than Panjim.
nd
JSW has recently (22 August 2009) inaugurated its all-weather, multi-commodity deep water port in
Jaigarh, Maharashtra. Built to handle the coal requirement of its 1200MW power plant in Jaigarh, the port
13
MPSEZL Final Report
has a capacity of 10 million ton in Phase I with a provision for increasing it to 20 million ton in Phase II.
Apart from coal, the port is also expected to handle bauxite, raw sugar, ash, cement, iron ore, fertilizers,
edible oil and molasses on its 2 berths of 550 m length and 14 m draft. This port will offer considerable
competition to Mormugao Port, especially for the Ratnagairi and Sindhudurg hinterlands (primary
hinterland for JSW Jaigarh Port).
Redi Port is being developed by Earnest Shipping in association with Maharashtra Maritime Board in
Sindhudurg district of Maharashtra. The final approval to construct and operate the port was received
from Government in February 2009 and the work is expected to commence in October 2009. Once
complete, this will be the closest Maharashtrian port for Goa thereby adding to the competition. The
Sindhudurg industrial hinterland may gravitate towards Redi Port on completion, depending on the
infrastructure at the port.
Karwar and Belekeri are important minor ports in Karnataka. Situated within close proximity of each other,
these ports mainly handle iron ore exports from Hospet region. These ports handled cumulative volumes
of 8 million ton of iron ore (majority at Belekeri) in FY 2008. While the integrated logistics costs indicate
the favourable location of these ports with respect to the biggest industrial centres of Karnataka (Bellary,
Hospet, Koppal, Raichur, etc.), infrastructure remains to be created so as to successfully exploit this
location advantage. Karnataka Government was planning to develop the port into a mechanised all-
weather port in association with New Mangalore Port Trust and private participants but the project has not
taken off till date. Belekeri is a fair weather lighterage port that is open to cargo shipments for around 8
months in a year. Overall, these ports enjoy location advantage for the Bellary/Koppal/Raichur hinterland
but lag behind in terms of infrastructure. A private party can develop these ports at a later stage thereby
posing competition to Mormugao Port.
New Mangalore, Chennai and Krishnapatnam are the chief competitors for Berth 7 at Mormugao Port for
the industrial hinterland of Central and Northern Karnataka. Currently, Hospet exports its iron ore from
these three ports through both road and rail. These ore laden trucks carry coal on the return journey for
the industrial belt (specifically the sponge iron industry) of Central and Northern Karnataka. Because of
this synchronised two-way movement of cargo, the inland freight for Chennai-Bellary turns out to be quite
economical at around Rs. 600/ton as compared to Rs. 950-1000/ton for Mormugao-Bellary. This is
despite the fact that Mormugao is closer to Bellary as compared to Chennai/Ennore/New Mangalore.
Conclusively, Krishnapatnam, Ennore/Chennai and New Mangalore are the chief competing ports for
Berth 7, Mormugao Port. With upcoming mechanised bulk handling terminals at Ennore and New
Mangalore, the competition is expected to further increase. Iron ore movement will remain one of the key
decision influencing factors (currently in favour of three competing ports). Mormugao Port’s inland
14
MPSEZL Final Report
distance advantage offers a strong counter to this factor and can help attract cargo subject to adequate
infrastructure availability.
15
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 1-2 Existing Coal and Iron Ore Movement
Source: i-maritime analysis, Primary surveys
MPSEZL Final Report
1.4. Integrated Logistics Cost Analysis and Traffic Projections
Two different scenarios of integrated logistics have been highlighted. The first scenario models the
current situation where a majority of the Hospet iron ore is being routed through Chennai, Krishnapatnam
and New Mangalore. It has been assumed that this trade pattern does not change indicating an
economically favourable inland freight cost for Bellary-Chennai as compared to Bellary-Mormugao (Berth
7). Based on this, the steel plants would be the biggest source of coal demand (coke) and a large part of
this demand would be evacuated through rail.
Table 1-1 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 1 (million ton)
FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20
Power Plants 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.44 1.44 1.92 2.40 2.40 2.40
Sponge Iron Plants 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
Cement Plants 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04
Total Thermal Coal 0.07 0.07 0.08 1.52 1.52 2.01 2.50 2.50 2.50
Steel Plants 1.44 2.44 4.63 4.63 4.63 6.82 8.62 10.88 10.88
Total Coal 1.51 2.51 4.70 6.15 6.15 8.83 11.12 13.38 13.38
Table 1-2 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 1 (with KPCL) (million ton)
Power Plants 1.18 1.18 1.24 2.68 2.83 3.37 3.85 3.91 3.91
Cement Plants 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04
Steel Plants 1.44 2.44 4.63 4.63 4.63 6.82 8.62 10.88 10.88
Total Coal 2.69 3.69 5.95 7.39 7.54 10.28 12.57 14.89 14.89
The second scenario takes into account a shift in iron-ore trade from Hospet-Chennai to Hospet-
Mormugao as the demand for higher grade iron ore increases (currently high grade Hospet ore is mixed
with low grade Goa ore at Mormugao and then exported). This will create a steady stream of road
movement with potential of carrying coal to Bellary industrial belt at cheaper rates. This would render
sponge iron plants in Bellary-Raichur-Bagalkot belt as one of the key sources of demand for coal (thermal
coal). Evacuation would be higher for road in this scenario. The estimated traffic figures for both the
scenarios are highlighted below.
17
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 1-3 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 2 (million ton)
Power Plants 0.23 0.23 0.31 1.78 1.78 2.33 2.85 2.92 2.92
Cement Plants 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.34
Steel Plants 1.45 2.45 4.65 4.67 4.67 6.87 8.69 10.96 10.96
Total Coal 3.24 4.24 6.60 8.28 8.28 11.12 13.65 16.08 16.08
Table 1-4 Projected Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port Scenario 1 (with KPCL) (million ton)
Power Plants 1.42 1.42 1.49 2.96 3.11 3.66 4.18 4.25 4.25
Cement Plants 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.34
Steel Plants 1.45 2.45 4.65 4.67 4.67 6.87 8.69 10.96 10.96
Total Coal 4.42 5.42 7.78 9.47 9.62 12.45 14.99 17.41 17.41
Here it may be noted that the above ILC analysis reflects the total coal cargo that can be sourced at
Mormugao Port for the given timeframe. This includes the cargo that is being currently handled at Berths
10 & 11 and does not include any JSW cargo (assumed to be handled at its own berth 5A/6A).
Considering the fact that Berth 10 & 11 cargo is expected to be shifted to Berth 7 (for reasons cited
previously) the entire cargo projected in Table 1-1 and Table 1-3 is expected to be handled at Berth 7
only.
Moreover, both the scenarios consider a case where domestic coal is unavailable to meet 100% coal
requirements for KPCL’s power plants at Raichur and Bellary (currently 1970 MW, being ramped up to
2220 MW). Thus both scenarios consider a case where KPCL imports 15% of its coal requirements
through Mormugao Port. Adani Enterprises has been supplying imported coal in the past and is expected
to do so in the future also. Mormugao Port has an ILC advantage in thermal coal trade for Bellary through
rail (such high volumes will not be transported through road).
1.5. Conclusion
Based on the study, the following points can be surmised

• Scenario 2 projects a better coal traffic at Berth 7 as compared to Scenario 1. The major
difference is in the diversion of a majority of Bellary sponge iron industry’s thermal coal demand
through Berth 7
• Scenario 1 is more likely to play out in the beginning. Trade conditions may favour Scenario2
after 2-4 years depending on Mormugao Port Trust’s efforts in sourcing iron ore traffic
18
MPSEZL Final Report
• The Scenario 1 projections (lower than Scenario 2 projections) easily exceed the “Minimum
Guaranteed Cargo” requirements specified by Mormugao Port Trust in Draft Concession
Agreement
• Adani Group’s coal trading operations can support the coal trade movement by offering end-to-
end logistic solutions for sponge iron players and cement plants. This may be significant in light of
traders like Bhatia International showing reluctance in diverting cargo operations through
Mormugao from Chennai
• Baldota Group, Essar Steel, Kudigi Power Plant and sponge iron players of Bellary are expected
to be the key accounts for Berth 7
• The traffic may range from 1.51 million ton (Scenario 1) in FY 12 to 17.41 million ton in FY 20
(Scenario 2).
19
MPSEZL Final Report
2. INTRODUCTION
This section provides a brief over view of the Berth 7 project awarded to Mundra Port & Special Economic
Zone Limited by Mormugao Port Trust.
2.1. Mundra Port and Special Economic Zone Ltd. (MPSEZL)
MPSEZL, India’s largest private port and integrated SEZ, is operating a state-of–the-art, SEZ based port
terminal at Mundra, Gujarat. The port has witnessed healthy growth in traffic at CAGR of
2.2. Mormugao Port
Mormugao Port is one of the 13 Major Ports in India and is located in the state of Goa. It is essentially a
bulk handling port with iron ore being one of its most important commodities. Located at the mouth of
River Zuari, the port uses inland waterways and trans-shipment to load the large ore carriers. Coking coal
and POL are the other important commodities being handled at Mormugao Port.
2.3. Project Background
The coal import terminal project would include designing and constructing the new berth number 7 of 300
m length for handling Cape-size vessels, reclaiming waterfront area (approx 35,225 sq m), developing
stack-yard (approx 56,000 sq m), designing and setting up the coal handling plant and machinery,
necessary railway tracks, and rapid-in motion wagon and truck loading equipment to handle a minimum of
4.41 million tons per annum. The total area for Berth 7 is expected to be in range of 98,125 sq m.
The coal terminal is envisaged to be a common user facility. MPT envisages large number of users based
in the nearby hinterland of Goa to be served by road. The operator will have the flexibility to enter into
appropriate agreements with Indian Railways and/or Konkan Railway Corporation for evacuation by rail.
2.4. Scope of Work
The scope of work can be broadly divided into 6 categories as discussed within the sub sections.
2.4.1. Macro Analysis (with focus on traffic risks)

i. Various factors like National GDP growth, trade scenario, development of regional trade blocks,
prevailing ocean freight, development of port infrastructure and other external factors, which
could have significant impact on traffic.
ii. Current scenario – slowdown and corresponding risk analysis
iii. Local issues
iv. Major issues if any regarding environmental concerns to be addressed and its impact on the
traffic in medium and long term – if so macro level mitigation measures
Risk assessment to be done from macro angle with respect to the economic growth, changes in trade
patterns, shifting shipping patterns in terms of trade lane changes and ship sizes modification will be
considered. Development of deficit/excess capacity build-up due to mismatch between demand/supply at
20
MPSEZL Final Report
the port would be examined. The bottlenecks arising out of rail and road connectivity constraints and risk
arising thereafter would be taken up. The completion status of the projects affecting the ports sector will
be critically assessed to study its impact on the traffic projections. The competing ports and other coal
handling terminals would be considered in assessing the impact of these facilities on the traffic
projections for the proposed berth
2.4.2. Analysis of Site and Connectivity

i. Project Area and details
ii. Port Limits
iii. Evacuation requirements and challenges
o Road capacity analysis
o Rail connectivity and capacity analysis
o Split of cargo evacuation by rail and road
2.4.3. Hinterland and Commodity Analysis

i. Commodity profiling
a. Coking Coal
b. Thermal Coal, etc.
ii. Primary, secondary and tertiary hinterland and connectivity analysis
iii. Analysis of steel plant capacity coming up in the Bellary Hospet region of Karnataka and likely
ports of call
The study should also involve a detailed Origin – Destination analysis for the cargo that can potentially
come to berth 7. The OD study would look at both the hinterland as well as the ocean distances. Analysis
of the network of the modes of transport connecting the port to its hinterland, along with the traffic
volumes would help in identifying the bottlenecks. Ana analysis of these bottlenecks would help in
determining the capacity of the port and also in planning the port infrastructure. The modal split of traffic
between road, rail and inland waterways will be analyzed to identify specific connectivity bottlenecks.
Parameters related to logistics efficiency and inter-modal transfer of cargoes will be analyzed to examine
port capacity issues.
2.4.4. Competition mapping for hinterland traffic

i. Competition from Berth 5A/6A and Berth 10 & 11
ii. Comparison of Mormugao with west coast ports and competing facilities (Ennore,
Krishnapatnam)
iii. SWOT analysis with competing facilities
iv. USPs of Mormugao vis-à-vis New Mangalore and Chennai/Mormugao
21
MPSEZL Final Report
3. MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS – GLOBAL
Coal is amongst the most widely used fossil fuel in the world. The most significant use of coal is in power
(electricity) generation. Iron & steel manufacturing, cement manufacturing, liquid fuel are of the other
important uses of coal. Since 2000, coal has witnessed the fastest consumption across all fuel fossils.
Currently, the five largest users – China, USA, India, Japan & Russia, account for more than 72% of
global consumption (Source: World Coal Institute).
Coal is primarily classified into two categories based on its use: thermal/steam coal, used in iron, cement,
power industry (as a fuel); and coking/met coke, used in steel making (as a reducing agent as well as a
fuel).
3.1. Coal Reserves, Production & Consumption
Estimates indicate proven coal reserves close to 826 billion ton (refer Table 14-1), which translates into
122 year reserves at current rate of production. In contrast, proven oil and gas reserves are estimated to
last for 42 and 60 years at current production levels.
Figure 3-1 Global Coal Reserve Distribution
Total Asia Total North

Pacific America
31% 30%
Total Europe
& Eurasia
33% Total S. &
Total Middle
East & Africa Cent. America
4% 2%
Source: BP Statistical Review 2009

94.1% of these reserves are located in Asia Pacific (China, Australia, India & Indonesia), North America
(US) and Eurasia (Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan). Due to the wide geographical spread of reserves
across regions, the coal trade has not been subject to cartelization/monopoly unlike oil where OPEC
controls a majority of the oil trade and thus influences the global prices.
The Reserves to Production (R/P) ratio provides a critical insight in the coal production and
consumption/trade pattern. Indonesia, one of the largest exporters of thermal coal in the world, has a low
R/P of 19 years. Thus, going forward, Indonesia is expected to be replaced by Australia, South Africa and
Russia (R/P in excess of 100 years) as the chief exporters of coal.
22
MPSEZL Final Report
50% of the world coal reserves today are of bituminous coal (411 billion ton), which can be further
classified into Thermal and Metallurgical coal, depending on the energy content and industrial application.
The remaining 50% of the world coal reserves, sub-bituminous and lignite have high moisture content and
are largely used for power generation. The world trade in coal however happens mainly for bituminous
category for the relatively high energy value and ease of transportation because of low moisture content.
3.2. Coal Trade Movement
The total coal trade movement in 2008 is estimated to be around 795 million ton out of a total dry bulk
trade of 3062 million ton (26% of total). The global trade movement is primarily divided into two parts:
Asia - Pacific and Atlantic movement. The Pacific Movement comprises of coal movement from Australia,
Indonesia and Russia to Eurasia, India, China and Japan. The Atlantic movement comprises of coal
movement from Colombia, Venezuela, South Africa to EU and North America.
Figure 3-2 Global Dry Bulk Trade v/s Global Coal Trade (million ton)
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Coal Total Dry Bulk
Source: Clarksons Research

While the percentage share of coal trade of total bulk trade has almost remained constant over the past 9
years, the share of thermal coal has consistently increased from 15% to 19%. Cumulative coal trade has
grown by a CAGR of 6.34% over the last 10 years (1999-2008).
Of the total coal trade, Japan, India, South Korea, Germany, UK, Taiwan, US and China are the major
contributors on the demand side (imports) while Australia, Indonesia and South Africa account for a third
of the trade movement on the supply side (exports).
3.2.1. Thermal Coal

Figure 3-1 indicates the general trade pattern of thermal coal with 2002 volumes and 2030 projections.
The significance of Indonesia and Australia as exporters and China, India, Japan, US and EU as
importers is evident.
23
MPSEZL Final Report
The 2030 projections indicate a perceptible shift in global supply side trade. The emergence of South
American nations and South Africa as major exporters of thermal coal can be inferred. This is expected to
be more significant as the growth of Indonesian exports is unable to keep up with the remaining reserves
with current Reserves to Production ratio of 19 years. Australia may also emerge as the biggest exporter
of thermal coal to India with South Africa and Indonesia in next spot. Another noteworthy point is that the
demand side of trade is not expected to undergo any significant geographical shift other than the
emergence of South American manufacturing capabilities as local mines are developed and cheap semi-
skilled labour is made available.
Table 3-1 Region-wise Breakup of Thermal Coal Imports (million ton)

Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Demand
Europe 126 33% 125 31% 140 32% 151 31% 150 30% 163 30% 155 27% 147 26%
Asia 211 55% 231 58% 248 56% 277 58% 293 58% 310 57% 343 61% 367 64%
Rest of the World 44 11% 46 11% 53 12% 53 11% 62 12% 66 12% 67 12% 62 11%
Total Imports 381 402 441 481 504 539 565 576
Germany 23.6 6% 22.6 6% 21.7 5% 25.9 5% 24.2 5% 28.7 5% 32.2 6% 31.4 5%
UK 27.8 7% 22.4 6% 25.4 6% 29.8 6% 37.4 7% 44.4 8% 35.1 6% 36.5 6%
Japan 91.5 24% 96.8 24% 107.1 24% 117.8 24% 119.8 24% 119 22% 126.4 22% 131 23%
India 9.4 2% 10.3 3% 8.8 2% 11.4 2% 19.4 4% 23.4 4% 29.1 5% 35.6 6%
South Korea 47.1 12% 50.1 12% 51.4 12% 57.2 12% 56.1 11% 59.6 11% 62.1 11% 73.4 13%
Taiwan 40.3 11% 41.9 10% 45.4 10% 53 11% 56.8 11% 57.5 11% 60.5 11% 60.5 11%
US 15.6 4% 13.7 3% 20.6 5% 21.9 5% 25.7 5% 30.5 6% 30.7 5% 29 5%
Table 3-2 Region-wise Breakup of Thermal Coal Exports (million ton)

Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Growth
Australia 88 23% 100 25% 101 23% 107 22% 110 22% 114 21% 115 20% 125 22%
Indonesia 67 18% 74 18% 90 20% 106 22% 128 25% 175 32% 188 33% 200 35%
South Africa 67 18% 67 17% 70 16% 64 13% 72 14% 68 13% 67 12% 62 11%
China 72 19% 64 16% 73 17% 75 15% 61 12% 54 10% 45 8% 36 6%
Russia 21 6% 27 7% 27 6% 41 8% 45 9% 50 9% 59 10% 60 10%
Colombia 39 10% 35 9% 46 10% 51 11% 55 11% 60 11% 65 11% 69 12%
Total Exports 381 402 441 481 504 539 565 576
Table 3-2 indicates the region wise distribution of exports. China, owing to the rapid growth in its own
steel making and power generation capacity, has drastically cut back on exports despite an increase in
production. This is expected to further decrease or remains steady at the current levels. Indonesia, while
having increased its exports, may temporarily halt any further growth in volumes so as to conserve its fast
depleting reserves. Australia, having maintained a growth in sync with the global export growth, is
expected to lead thermal coal exports in near future. South Africa and Russia, with sizeable reserves,
may look at expanding in the Eurasian demand markets due to location advantage.
24
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 3-3 Global Thermal Coal Trade Flow
Source: World Coal Institute, IEA 2004
MPSEZL Final Report
3.2.2. Coking Coal

Coking coal’s primary use is manufacturing coke. Coke is amongst the key ingredients for manufacturing
steel, where it acts as a reducing agent as well as a fuel. Thus the coking coal demand is almost entirely
tied up with global steel manufacturing and trade capacities.
Figure 3-4 Region-wise Breakup of Global Crude Steel Production
Others
Italy
22%
2% China
38%
Brazil
3%
Ukraine
3%
Germany
3%
South Korea Japan
US 9%
4% India 7%
Russia
5% 4%
Source: IISI (World Steel in Figures 2009)

China, with a 500 million ton annual steel capacity is the biggest producer in world (refer Table 14-3).
Thus it is also the biggest consumer of coking coal. However, with its large domestic reserves, Chinese
imports are not significant and ends up exporting a few million ton. Japan, the second largest producer at
119 million ton of crude steel, is the biggest importer of coking coal. Its imports are mostly met by
Australia and partly by USA/Canada, as indicated in Figure 3-5.
Table 3-3 Region-wise breakup of Coking Coal Imports and Exports (million ton)
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Growth
Europe 47 28% 42 24% 42 24% 46 26% 46 25% 45 24% 50 24% 50 23%
Japan 64 38% 67 39% 68 38% 61 34% 63 34% 73 38% 74 36% 76 35%
India 13 8% 13 7% 14 8% 16 9% 20 11% 19 10% 23 11% 29 13%
South Korea 18 11% 20 12% 20 11% 22 12% 21 11% 20 11% 21 10% 23 10%
Brazil 12 7% 9.3 5% 12.7 7% 10 6% 11 6% 12 6% 14.4 7% 16.8 8%
Total Imports 169 171 178 179 184 190 207 219
Australia 106.1 63% 104.4 61% 107.8 61% 111.7 62% 124.9 68% 120.5 63% 137.6 66% 136.8 62%
Canada 25.2 15% 21.8 13% 22.6 13% 22.1 12% 25.1 14% 23.2 12% 26.6 13% 25.4 12%
USA 19.5 12% 15.3 9% 16.8 9% 20.9 12% 22 12% 20.8 11% 25.9 13% 34.7 16%
China 11.5 7% 13.8 8% 15.3 9% 6.4 4% 6.1 3% 4.4 2% 2.5 1% 3.5 2%
Total Exports 169 171 178 179 184 190 207 219 S
As inferred from Table 3-3, Australia is expected to continue the coking coal market from the supply side.
Japan, while being the biggest importer, is expected to witness a slide in its steel demand will thus import
less amount of coking coal in the near future. Indian demand, on the other hand, is expected to grow
consistently as the country adds steel manufacturing capacity to the tune of 150 million ton in the next 15
years.
26
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 3-5 Global Coking Coal Trade Flow
Source: World Coal Institute, IEA 2004
MPSEZL Final Report
3.3. Coal Trade Outlook
The coal trade volumes may have decreased/stagnated as the ongoing recessionary conditions continue
to affect the overall demand of infrastructure (housing and office projects), automobiles, consumer
durable goods and electricity. These effects are more pronounced in developed economies of Japan,
Germany, USA, Canada, France, Italy and Taiwan as evident in Figure 3-6 (refer Table 14-4).
Figure 3-6 % Change in Industrial Production
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
-10.0%
-20.0%
-30.0%
-40.0%
Germany OECD Europe USA

Japan OECD Total China

Japan is clearly amongst the worst hit economies with USA and Germany not faring much better either. In
fact, Japanese crude steel production in 2009 is down by 41% over 2008. Electricity production in OECD
nations is down by 9.2% in 2009 over 2008. Such indicators clearly suggest a decrease in coal demand.
Moreover, it may take a few quarters of robust growth to bring back such economies on track thereby
lending a medium time frame to recession.
On the other hand, emerging markets, especially China and India, though not averse to slowdown, have
shown remarkable resilience in nurturing and sustaining domestic consumption. China’s coking coal
imports reached 12.9 million ton this year to date. 69.3% of these imports have been provided by
Australia. In India, SAIL is expected to be negotiating for extra Australian coking coal.
On a similar note, China’s thermal coal imports in FY 2009 till date (18 million ton) have already
surpassed its FY 2008 imports (14.6 million ton). Australian imports accounted for 49.1% of these and
Indonesian accounted for 32.5%.
Conclusively, these countries will continue to influence the global coal trade (both steam and coking) in
the coming years.
28
MPSEZL Final Report
4. MACRO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS – DOMESTIC
India is one of the largest importers of thermal and coking coal in the world. In 2008 (CY), India imported
1
a total of 65 million ton of coal – 35.6 million ton thermal coal and 29 million ton coking coal. With its ever
growing needs of steel, power and cement to sustain the socio-economic momentum, these imports are
only expected to grow.
4.1. Coal Scenario – India
The Planning Commission of India had assessed the demand of raw coal for FY 2009 at 550 million ton.
The actual supply of indigenous coal for the same fiscal year was at 489.85 million ton. About 59 million
ton of coal was imported in the same year. This included 24 million ton of coking and 35 million ton of
non-coking coal (the aforementioned figure of 65 million ton is for CY 2008).
Table 4-1 Coal Reserves in India

Proven Indicated Inferred Total
Type of Coal
Reserve reserve Reserve Reserve
Coking 17.5 13.8 2.1 33.4
Non - Coking 88.3 109.7 35.8 233.8
Total (billion ton) 105.8 123.5 37.9 267.2
Source: Provisional Coal Statistics (2008-09), Ministry of Coal

st
The total coal reserves of India are estimated at around 267.2 billion ton (as on 1 April 2009, Coal India
limited). Of these proven reserves are estimated at 105.8 billion ton. At a current rate of production (512.3
2
million ton for CY 2008 ), the reserves are sufficient to power the Indian economy for more than the next
100 years.
Figure 4-1 Indian Coal Production (million ton, CY)
600.0
500.0
400.0
300.0
200.0
100.0
0.0
India Coal Production
Source: BP Statistical Review 2009
1
Clarksons Research
2
BP Statistical Review 2008
29
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 4-2 shows the geographical distribution of coal in India. The Jharkhand-Chhattisgarh-Orissa belt is
the richest coal region in India with close to 70% of total Indian reserves. Madhya Pradesh, Andhra
Pradesh and West Bengal are the other important coal producing states in the country.
Figure 4-2 Coal Reserve Distribution in India
Source: World Coal (September 2006)
4.2. Thermal Coal
Thermal power generation is the single biggest user of domestic and imported coal in India. Sponge iron
plants and cement plants are the other key users of thermal coal. In FY 2007, thermal power plants
consumed around 342 million ton of thermal coal, sponge iron units consumed 50.5 million ton of coal
and cement plants consumed 25 million ton (around 3 million ton imports).
Low calorific value and shortage of domestic coal are the two key reasons for importing coal in India.
Indian coal is typically characterised with high ash content and low calorific value as shown below.
Table 4-2 Domestic v/s Imported Coal

Domestic
Australian South Indonesian
Parameters Indian
Coal African Coal Coal
(Grade F)
Ash Content (%) 40 12 15 5
Sulphur Content (%) 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5
Gross Calorific Value 4100 6800 6600 5800
Source: i-maritime analysis; IEA Conference – New Delhi (2003)
30
MPSEZL Final Report
As evident in Table 4-2, the calorific value of Indian Coal is marginally lower than imported coal.
Moreover, it has 40% ash content as compared to 5-12% for imported coal. Thus, Indian coal may be
cheaper in terms of landed price for a power plant producer but proves costly in terms of boiler efficiency.
Imported coal enables the boilers to work at higher efficiencies thereby saving on fuel costs.
Figure 4-3 Boiler Efficiency and Ash Content
Keeping in mind the higher landed price of imported coal and inferior quality of the relatively cheaper
domestic coal, most of the users prefer to blend both varieties for optimal results. The mix of the blend
varies considerably based on the location of the industrial plant (with respect to a feasible port) to the
nature of industry (cement, power plant, etc.).
Indonesia is the single biggest supplier of thermal coal to India currently. Australia and South Africa are
the other important suppliers. Paradip, Ennore, Tuticorin and Mumbai are the key ports where thermal
coal is unloaded.
Going forward, the Working Group Committee on Coal & Lignite (Ministry of Coal) has estimated a
demand of 662.60 million ton of thermal coal in India. Of this, thermal power plants would contribute to a
demand of 540 million ton (81.5% of total). At current production levels of 459 million ton, with a FY 2000
- 2009 CAGR of 6%, the FY 2012 production is not expected to cross 548 million ton. Thus close to 114
million ton of thermal may be imported.
4.3. Coking Coal

3
India is the fifth largest manufacturer of crude steel in the world with a 55 million ton output in 2008 .
Coking coal forms a key ingredient for manufacturing steel and thus its demand is closely tied up with the
production of the latter. Finished steel producers, ferrous-alloy plants and certain chemical industries are
other secondary consumers of coking coal/coke.
3
IISI (World Steel in Figures – 2009)
31
MPSEZL Final Report
FY 2009 saw a production of 33.31 million ton of coking coal in India. With a requirement of
approximately 1 ton of coking coal per ton of steel produced, the deficit was met through imports. SAIL
was the biggest importer of coking coal at around 11-12 million ton. JSW Steel, Tata Steel and RINL are
the other key manufacturers that import huge quantities of coking coal.
As per the National Steel Policy, Indian steel capapcity is set to be ramped up to 200 million ton by 2020.
As per the Working Group Projections (compiled from various sources including Expert Committee on
th
Coal Reform, National Steel Policy, Coal Vision-2025) , the total demand for coking coal at the end of XI
Five Year Plan (FY 2012) 68.50 million ton. Assuming current domestic production figures of 33.31 million
ton, 35 million ton of coking coal will have to be imported in FY 2012.
4.4. Domestic Coal Trade Outlook – Port Infrastructure Perspective
Based on the coking coal and thermal coal production, consumption and import projections enclosed in
Table 4-3, it has been estimated that around 150 million ton of coal will be imported in FY 2012.
Table 4-3 Coal Production, Consumption, Import Projections (million ton)

Consumtpion Production Imports
Industry
FY 2007 FY 2012 FY 2012 FY 2012
Power 342 540
Cement 25 32
Sponge Iron 51 91
Total Thermal Coal 417 663 548 115
Total Coking Coal 43 69 33 35
Total Coal 460 731 581 150
Source: Working Group Committee on Coal & Lignite (Ministry of Coal), i-maritime analysis
Now considering the temporary slowdown in economy, especially towards implementation of

infrastructure projects, is expected to delay the consumption pattern by 2-3 years. Thus it is estimated
that the above projections would be realisable by FY 2015-16. Thus a port capacity of 160-180 million ton
would be required to handle this 150 million ton of imports by FY 2015-16. With the current coal handling
capacity, further 60-80 million ton of capacity will have to be added to the Indian coastlines within the next
3-4 years.
32
MPSEZL Final Report
5. SITE LOCATION AND CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS
Goa, the smallest state of India, is situated on the Western Coast (Konkan Coast). It shares its border
with Maharashtra and Karnataka on the land side and Arabian Sea towards the sea. It has one Major Port
– Mormugao and 5 Minor ports – Panjim, Chapora, Betul, Talpona and Tiracol. The total traffic handled at
Goa was 47.07 million ton in FY 2008. Of this around 72.75% of traffic was handled at the major port of
Mormugao. The remaining was primarily handled at the port of Panjim.
Iron ore remains an anchor commodity for Goa, representing 85% (40 million ton) of total cargo handled
in Goa. Iron ore is mined in Goa and exported to other locations in India as well as to international
destinations (China, etc.)
5.1. Site Location
Figure 5-1 Proposed Berth 7 Location

The current project area is situated on the right side of South West Port Limited coal handling terminal.
This area is served by the existing channel (14.1 m). The project (Berth No 7) broadly includes
33
MPSEZL Final Report
• To design and to construct of a berth of 300 m length for handling capesize vessels
• To reclaim the waterfront area (approx 35,225 sq m)
• To develop a stackyard for coal storage (approx 56,000 sq m)
To design and to set up coal handling plant & Machinery, necessary railway track, rapid-in-motion wagon
and truck loading equipment to handle a minimum of 4.41 million tonnes per annum
5.2. Connectivity – Road
Goa, in general has good road infrastructure. The state has a network of 224 Km of National Highways
and 232 Km of State Highways. Two major National highways connect Goa with the rest of the country.
NH-17 enters in state from Maharashtra and provides North-South connectivity with neighbouring states
of Maharashtra and Karnataka, while NH-4A enters the state from Karnataka and provides East-West
connectivity. NH-4A gets further connected to NH-17 at Panjim. NH-17A connects Mormugao to NH-17
at Kortalim.
The national highways are currently two-lane, single carriageways.
5.3. Road Capacity Analysis
The traffic on any road is the sum total of the passenger, goods, industrial, and port-induced traffic. Also,
any road is rated for some standard capacity. The capacity has been analysed for an average speed of
40 km/hr and for a distance between cars of 25 metres (these are standard parameters). This gives a
road capacity of 1600 PCU/hr/lane for a double carriageway system. For a single carriageway system, the
capacity for each lane is lower at 1500 PCU/hr/day. Capacity of a 2 lane, Single Carriageway road is
3000 PCU/hour (72,000 PCU/day), while for 4 lane Double Carriageway is 6400 PCU/hour (153,600
PCU/day.
The currently developed NH -17A, which connects Mormugao is two laned, single carriageways, with a
total capacity of 3000 PCU/ hour.
The total traffic of about a million tonnes would comprise of an evacuation of 5000 tonnes per day
(assuming working of only 200 days). Typically a dumper/ truck is expected to carry around 10 tonnes of
coal (assuming that rail evacuation is not there) then the total dumpers/ trucks traffic would be 500 trucks/
dumpers a day or 25 dumpers/ trucks an hour. This would mean that port driven traffic would form 0.83%
of the available road capacity. Even with 4-5 million tonnes there seems to be no capacity constraints on
the road evacuation front.
34
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 5-2 Roads in Goa
Source: i-maritime research, Maps of India
35
MPSEZL Final Report
5.4. Connectivity – Rail
Goa is connected with neighboring states via South Central Railways and Konkan Railways. Railway
station at Vasco in Goa is situated a few kilometers away from Mormugao Port and is linked by a Broad
Gauge line. Konkan Railways network passes through the states of Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra
with a 105 km stretch in Goa. Konkan railway joins the South Central Railways at Majorda & leaves it at
Madgaon (Margao Railway Station).
Konkan Railway provides north-south connectivity, while South-Western railway provides connectivity to
the interiors towards the East.
Figure 5-3 Railway Network in Goa
Source: i-maritime research, Maps of India
90% of cargo handled at this Port is bulk cargo consisting of iron ore and coal. Almost entire coal traffic is
moved by rail. It may be noted that both Konkan railways as well as South Central railway till Bellary is
mostly single line with some sections as double in between.
36
MPSEZL Final Report
In addition to existing rail infrastructure, there are various projects by the railways at various stages of
development which are listed as under
Construction of a new railway line from Calem to Gunji to doubling of track at Ghat Section at an
estimated cost of Rs. 600 crore.
Doubling of Londa-Dharwar route of 70 km at an approx. cost of Rs. 175 crore.
Doubling of Hubli Gadaj route of 58 km at a cost of around Rs.145 cr.
Doubling of balance sections line capacity which mainly includes doubling of Gadak- Hospet
section line of 85 km at a cost of around Rs. 210 crore.
Increase in train holding capacity in Vasco Hospet section by increasing the number of stations
with adequate number of loop at a cost of around Rs. 230 crore.
5.5. Conclusion
Currently road and rail evacuation are bottlenecks in the port setup. However, with the proposed four lane
highway’s construction, road evacuation should ease out. Rail evacuation is expected to continue to be a
problem more so because of the lack availability of adequate number of rakes. Moreover, the port suffers
from limitations on expansion of Konkan Railway capacity. However the setting up of 8 lines (2 dedicated
for Berth 7) in place of current 2 lines inside the port is expected to alleviate the existing congestion to a
great extent.
37
MPSEZL Final Report
6. HINTERLAND IDENTIFICATION & ASSESSMENT
This section first identifies the relevant hinterland for Berth 7 - Mormugao Port and thereafter provides a
detailed assessment of the various industries in the identified hinterland
6.1. Hinterland Definition
A hinterland for a port refers to the catchment area providing the demand for cargo. It refers to a set of
industries/mines/consumption or distribution centers that influence the demand/supply of cargo from a
particular port(s). Hinterland is usually categorized into three parts:
6.1.1. Primary hinterland

This refers to that hinterland which can flow to/from a single port. This hinterland thus behaves as a
captive unit for that port. The level of competition for cargo from/to this hinterland is virtually negligible.
6.1.2. Secondary hinterland

This refers to that hinterland which can flow to/from more than one port on same coastline. This
hinterland witnesses healthy competition between the ports for bagging the cargo. The integrated logistics
cost for different combinations of supply chain are crucial in predicting the outcome of such competition.
6.1.3. Tertiary Hinterland

This refers to that hinterland which can flow to/from more than one port on multiple coastlines. This
hinterland may witness excessive competition between the ports for bagging the cargo. The integrated
logistics cost for different combinations of supply chain are crucial in predicting the outcome of such
competition. Moreover, there are additional forces that influence the choice of the port such as
infrastructure facilities provided, connectivity, presence of other nearby industries, existing trade routes
(both offshore and inland), choice of intermediate traders etc.
6.2. Hinterland Identification
Currently coal is being handled at 4 berths at Mormugao Port – 5A, 6A, 10 & 11. When Berth 7 comes up
in the future it will have to compete for the hinterland with these berths as well. Thus hinterland has been
discussed for Mormugao Port in general. Later on, the factors affecting internal competition at Mormugao
Port have been outlined. The only primary hinterland possible for Berth 7 would be a captive industry of
MPSEZL that uses coal/coke as raw material.
6.2.1. Primary Hinterland

In regards to the Mormugao Port the cargo generated by Apparant Iron and Steel Ltd, Goa Carbon and
Mormugao Steel Ltd located in South Goa district is considered to be the only primary hinterland cargo.
Further to this list 6-7 sponge iron plants located in and around Goa can be added, which use thermal
coal imported from Mormugao Port.
38
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 6-1 Hinterland for Mormugao Port - Coal
6.2.2. Secondary Hinterland

Maharashtra, Western and North West Karnataka form the secondary hinterland for Mormugao port. The
major industries contributing to the coal traffic are thermal power plants, sponge iron industry, cement
plants and integrated steel plants. The key competing ports for this hinterland are Mumbai, Jaigarh, Redi,
Dighi and New Mangalore. Karwar and Belekeri will be strong competitors, if and when they come up as
commercial ports.
6.2.3. Tertiary Hinterland

Rest of Karnataka (North, South and East) forms the tertiary hinterland for Mormugao Port. The major
industries contributing to the coal traffic from this hinterland are thermal power plants, sponge iron
39
MPSEZL Final Report
industry, cement plants and integrated steel plants. The key competing ports for this hinterland are
Mumbai, Jaigarh, Redi, Dighi and New Mangalore on West Coast and Krishnapatnam, Chennai and
Ennore on East Coast.
6.3. Hinterland Assessment
Based on primary interviews and desktop research it can be surmised that there are four major industries
that are expected to contribute to the coal cargo at Mormugao Port
5. Coal based thermal power plants
6. Cement plants
7. Sponge iron plants
8. Integrated Steel Plants
Apart from these, there is a small amount of demand from paper mills, alloy workshops, sugar refineries,
etc. However, this demand fluctuates and is extremely seasonal in nature. These industries have been
detailed in the ensuing sections.
6.4. Thermal Power Plants
6.4.1. Maharashtra
4
Of the total installed capacity of 12,871.80 MW in Maharashtra, the total thermal capacity is 9792 MW .
The current state deficit is close to 19% creating a strong demand for new power projects in the state.
The long coastline of Maharashtra is being looked at to set up mega power plants based on imported
coal. A total of 6893 MW of coal based thermal power capacity is under various stages of development in
the Maharashtrian hinterland of Berth 7, Mormugao Port. A majority of this capacity is coming up in the
district of Ratnagiri. Of this at least 6800 MW of power plants (2 power plants, one at Munge and the
other at Dhopave) are planning to build their captive jetties. That leaves 93 MW worth of capacity to be
targeted. This capacity is being set up as captive power for Finolex Industries in Ratnagiri. Based on the
location of this plant (and its proximity to the upcoming private ports in Maharashtra), the probability of its
coal demand coming to Berth 7, Mormugao Port seems limited.
6.4.2. Karnataka
The total installed capapcity of thermal power plants in Karnataka is 2684.42 MW. Of this, more than
2292.7 MW of projects exist in the hinterland of Berth 7, Mormugao Port. JSW’s captive power plant at
Thorangallu (260 MW) and Karnataka Power Corporation Limited’s (KPCL) plants at Bellary and Raichur
(500 MW + 1470MW respectively) provide a chunk of this thermal power. While, JSW’s captive power
plant imports coal through its jetty in Mormugao Port, KPCL is shifting to 100% domestic coal (as
4
CMIE
40
MPSEZL Final Report
confirmed in primary interview). Thus 62.7 MW of captive power remain to be targeted by Berth 7. These
are the captive power plants of Tata Power and Kesoram Industries (both in Gulbarga district).
Figure 6-2 Important Power Plants in Maharashtra (Existing & Upcoming)
Source: i-maritime analysis, wikimapia, Google Earth, Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB)
A further 2332.5 MW of power plants are under construction in the identified hinterland. This includes a
600 MW expansion project for JSW at Thorangallu and Udupi Power Corporation’s 1200 MW plant at
Padubidri, near New Mangalore Port.
A new project involving NTPC setting up a 4000 MW power plant at Kudigi (Bijapur District), Karnataka
has recently come to light. The location suggests an integrated logistics cost advantage for Mormugao
Port (rail evacuation). Based on primary interviews with the concerned officials at NTPC, the power plant
is expected to come up in phases of 2400 MW by FY 2015 and remaining by FY 2018. The plants is
expected to use around 15% blended coal and the corresponding volumes have been considered in the
ensuing traffic projections.
41
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 6-1 Thermal Power Plants in Hinterland
Company Name Project Status Capapcity Units Location District State
Reliance Salgaocaor Power Corporation Completed 48 Mw South Goa Goa Goa

Chalais Holding Ltd. Abandoned 300 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka
Ecocoke & Power Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 20 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka
Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 70 Mw Mogla Gulbarga Karnataka
Mukand Ltd. Announcement 15 Mw Ginigera Raichur Karnataka
Steel Authority Of India Ltd. Announcement 15 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka
J S W Energy Ltd. Completed 260 Mw Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. Completed 840 Mw Raichur Raichur Karnataka
Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. Completed 630 Mw Raichur Raichur Karnataka
Kesoram Industries Ltd. Completed 15 Mw Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka
Tata Power Co. Ltd. Completed 37.5 Mw Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka
Coastal Karnataka Power Ltd. Shelved 4000 Mw Tadri Uttara Kannada Karnataka
Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 15 Mw Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka
J S W Energy (Vijayanagar) Ltd. Under Implementation 600 Mw Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. Under Implementation 500 Mw Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. Under Implementation 250 Mw Raichur Raichur Karnataka
Mangalore Power Co. Ltd. Under Implementation 250 Mw Mangalore Dakshina Kannada Karnataka
Udupi Power Corpn. Ltd. Under Implementation 600 Mw Padubidri Dakshina Kannada Karnataka
Coastal Maharashtra Mega Power Ltd. Announcement 4000 Mw Munge Sindhudurg Maharashtra
Finolex Cables Ltd. Announcement 50 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra
Dhopave Coastal Power Co. Ltd. Under Implementation 1600 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra
Finolex Industries Ltd. Under Implementation 22 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra
Finolex Industries Ltd. Under Implementation 21 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra
J S W Energy (Ratnagiri) Ltd. Under Implementation 1200 Mw Jaigad Ratnagiri Maharashtra
Table 6-2 Thermal Power Plant Capacity in Hinterland

State District FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20
Goa Goa 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48
Goa Total 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48
Karnataka Bellary 760 760 958 958 958 958 1,156 1,156 1,156 1,360 1,360 1,360
Dakshina Kannada 0 0 479 479 479 479 957 957 957 1,450 1,450 1,450
Dharwad 0 0 0 0 0 12 12 12 23 23 35 35
Gulbarga 63 63 73 73 73 97 107 107 130 141 165 165
Raichur 1,470 1,470 1,553 1,553 1,553 1,557 1,640 1,640 1,645 1,730 1,735 1,735
Uttara Kannada 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Karnataka Total 2,293 2,293 3,062 3,062 3,062 3,102 3,872 3,872 3,911 4,704 4,745 4,745
Maharashtra Ratnagiri 0 0 938 938 938 955 1,893 1,893 1,909 2,876 2,893 2,893
Sindhudurg 0 0 0 0 0 1,320 1,320 1,320 2,640 2,640 4,000 4,000
Maharashtra Total 0 0 938 938 938 2,275 3,213 3,213 4,549 5,516 6,893 6,893
Grand Total 2,341 2,341 4,049 4,049 4,049 5,425 7,133 7,133 8,509 10,268 11,686 11,686
Source: CMIE, Projects Today, Primary Surveys
MPSEZL Final Report
6.5. Cement Plants
In the selected hinterland, Karnataka is a major producer of Cement, with existing and upcoming plants
located primarily Sedam, Wadi and Malkhed locations in Gulbarga District. The total installed capacity of
cement plants is 15.74 million ton per annum. Of this 13 million ton of capacity exists in the district of
Gulbarga itself. Kesoram industries, ACC and Grasim are some of the key players.
Figure 6-3 Karnataka Existing & upcoming Cement Capacities
Source: CMA India, i-maritime analysis
The Table 6-3 tabulates the existing and upcoming cement plants in the hinterland. As indicated in Table
6-4, the total hinterland capacity is expected to increase to 33.93 million ton per annum by FY 19-20. A
majority of this additional capacity will be established in the district of Gulbarga itself.
43
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 6-3 Cement Plants in Hinterland

Project Cost (Rs.
Company Name Project Status Capapcity Units Location District State
Crore)
A C C Ltd. Announcement 30 0.5000 Million tonnes Raichur Raichur Karnataka
A C C Ltd. Shelved 120 0.6000 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
A C C Ltd. Announcement 1500 3.0000 Million tonnes Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka
A C C Ltd. Completed 550 2.6000 Million tonnes Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka
A C C Ltd. Completed 2.4650 Million tonnes Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka
Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. Completed 78 0.1800 Million tonnes Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka
Grasim Industries Ltd. Completed 3.0150 Million tonnes Malkhed Gulbarga Karnataka
Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 225 0.4950 Million tonnes Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka
Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 0 3.3000 Million tonnes Mogla Gulbarga Karnataka
J S W Cement Ltd. Under Implementation 422 0.5900 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
Jaykaycem Ltd. Under Implementation 1000 3.0000 Million tonnes Mudgal Bagalkot Karnataka
Karnataka Instrade Corpn. Ltd. Completed 0.0900 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka
Kesoram Industries Ltd. Under Implementation 450 5.0000 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka
Kesoram Industries Ltd. Completed 4.2520 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka
Lakshmi Cement & Ceramics Inds. Ltd. Completed 0.0720 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka
Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Under Implementation 300 1.0000 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
Madras Cements Ltd. Completed 385 1.0000 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka
Madras Cements Ltd. Completed 40 0.0800 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka
Madras Cements Ltd. Completed 0.3995 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka
Mysore Cements Ltd. Completed 0.6983 Million tonnes Ammasandara Tumkur Karnataka
Nirani Cements Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 13 1.0000 Million tonnes Mudhol Bagalkot Karnataka
Ratna Cements (Yadwad) Ltd. Completed 0 0.1650 Million tonnes Yadwad Belgaum Karnataka
Raymond Ltd. Shelved 700 2.6000 Million tonnes Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka
South India Cements Ltd. Completed 0.1089 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka
Ultratech Cement Ltd. Under Implementation 150 0.3000 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka
Table 6-4 Hinterland Cement Capacity (million ton)

Bagalkot 0.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.32 2.31 2.31 2.64 3.66 4.00 4.00
Belgaum 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17
Bellary 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.59 1.59 1.59
Chitradurga 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64
Karnataka
Dharwad 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18
Gulbarga 13.06 13.06 14.87 14.87 14.87 16.95 18.76 18.76 20.84 22.71 24.85 24.85
Raichur 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.26 0.36 0.36 0.53 0.63 0.80 0.80
Tumkur 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70
Karnataka Total 15.74 15.74 19.17 19.17 19.17 21.74 25.17 25.17 27.75 31.28 33.93 33.93
Grand Total - Hinterland 15.74 15.74 19.17 19.17 19.17 21.74 25.17 25.17 27.75 31.28 33.93 33.93
MPSEZL Final Report
6.6. Sponge Iron Plants
Sponge iron is one of the biggest industries (in terms of coal demand) in the hinterland for Berth 7,
Mormugao Port. There are close to 75 sponge iron units producing an average of 50-200 TPD. Currently,
the total sponge iron capacity is around 2.7 million ton per annum. A further 1.8-2 million ton of capacity
has been announced to be built or being constructed. These players buy imported coal through traders,
evacuate it through road (because of smaller parcel sizes) and blend it with domestic coal in the ratio of
80-20 to 40-60.
Most of this imported coal is coming for Chennai, Krishnapatnam and New Mangalore ports due to the
favorable reverse logistics resulting from iron ore movement. As per talks with Bhatia Trader (Bhatia
imports close to 50% of the total coal demand of sponge iron industry), not much movement of coal can
be expected to move from Mormugao to Bellary unless iron-ore trade shifts towards Goa. Our estimates
confirm this through a comparison of the integrated logistics costs (discussed in later sections). While it
costs Rs. 1585.45/ton from Mormugao to Bellary, Chennai to Bellary costs Rs. 1265.31/ton (both are for
Indonesian coal). This cost difference is primarily because of the reduced inland cost for Chennai-Bellary
route (Mormugao Bellary road distance is 395 km while Chennai-Bellary is 512 km). In the eventuality of
iron ore trade shifting to Mormugao in larger volumes, the integrated cost for coal reduces to Rs.
1091.70/ton (thermal coal from Mormugao to Bellary by road).
Based on the primary survey, following facts have been revealed regarding the coal import
requirements of sponge iron industries:
1. Part of this coal requirement is met by “Singareni Plant” located in Andhra-Pradesh on an “e-
auction” basis. Since the installed capacity generates more demand, most of the demand is
met by imported coal. The ratio between imported and existing coal usage is estimated
to be 80:20 based on primary survey findings.
2. As most of these players require relatively small volumes of coal on a daily basis, direct
importing of coal by them is not a feasible option. They deal with few big coal importers
operating in region and have their daily demands met by these operators. Few of the major
coal importers operating in this hinterland are listed below:
a. Bhatia International Ltd.

b. Maheshwari
c. Gupta
d. Agarwal
e. Coastal Energy
45
MPSEZL Final Report
Among these players, Bhatia captures a market share of approximately 50%, while the rest is
distributed among other players.
3. Most of the imported coal comes from Indonesia or South Africa and a majority of it is imported
through Chennai and Mangalore Ports by these coal importers. These importers have
arrangements at these ports with major stevedoring firms for Stevedoring/ staking purposes.
For example, Kinship/ Sical perform stacking and stevedoring for Bhatia at Chennai &
Mangalore ports. The current location/port wise breakup of coal supply/import is as follows:
Table 6-5 Port Wise Origin of Coal

Coal Source Share
Singareni ( Andhra Pradesh) 20-25%
Chennai Port 50%
New Mangalore Port 20-22%
Mormugao Port 2-3%
Source: Primary Surveys
4. As most of the sponge iron producers are small, transporting imported coal by rake is not a
feasible option for them, as the rake capacity is around 3500 tonnes compared to the demand
of 250-300 tonnes generated by most of the players.
5. The importer (sponge iron unit) pays directly for the transportation cost of coal from port to its
plant. The traders task is to get the required quantity and grade of coal to the port at the
required time
6. Further, coal rakes can be unloaded at two places – Bellary Junction and Hagari. In both
cases, multiple handling of coal adds to the cost of transportation and is feasible only for large
parcel sizes
Due to the above reasons, almost all of the coal is imported by road based on daily demand-supply
assessment. The sponge iron players in the hinterland are tabulated in Table 6-7.
Table 6-6 Sponge Iron Capacity in Hinterland of Berth 7 (million ton)

Belgaum 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07
Bellary 2.42 2.42 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.83 3.15 3.15 3.23 3.56 3.65 3.65
Dakshina Kannada 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03
Dharwad 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Karnataka Hassan 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.20
Kolar 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Koppal 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.16
Raichur 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Tumkur 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.19 0.23 0.29 0.29
Karnataka Total 2.72 2.72 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.32 3.70 3.70 3.92 4.31 4.54 4.54
Grand Total 2.72 2.72 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.32 3.70 3.70 3.92 4.31 4.54 4.54
Source: CMIE, Projects Today, i-maritime analysis
46
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 6-7 Sponge Iron Plants in Hinterland

Project Cost
Com pany Nam e Project Status Capapcity Units Location District State
(Rs. Crore)
4 6 7 11 12 13 14 15
A P S M Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Completed 30 0.1000 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Agarw al Sponge & Energy Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0763 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Anagha Steels Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 6 0.0165 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Balajisw amy Premium Steels Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0730 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Banashankari Steels & Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0183 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Basai Steels Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 42 0.1460 Million Tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka
Bellary Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0763 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd. Completed 0.0730 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Benaka Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. Completed 50 0.0730 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Bharat Mines & Minerals Under Implementation 120 0.0300 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Black Smith India Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 0 0.0330 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Caroma Steels Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 40 0.1650 Million Tonnes Kibbanahalli Tumkur Karnataka
Chakkilam Pow ertek Ltd. Under Implementation 14.62 0.0330 Million Tonnes Belagallu Bellary Karnataka
Dhruvdesh Meta Steel Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0 0.0330 Million Tonnes Hirebaganal Koppal Karnataka
Divyajoti Steels Ltd. Completed 0.0365 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Embitee Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0763 Million Tonnes Veniveerapura Bellary Karnataka
Gayathri Metals Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 4.7 0.0165 Million Tonnes Belagallu Bellary Karnataka
Gayathri Metals Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0438 Million Tonnes Belagallu Bellary Karnataka
Guru Mehar Construction Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 45 0.0003 Million Tonnes Dharw ad Dharw ad Karnataka
H K T Mining Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 48.51 0.0330 Million Tonnes Dhanapur Bellary Karnataka
Hindusthan Calcined Metals Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0763 Million Tonnes Janikunta Tanda Bellary Karnataka
Hothur Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 34.02 0.0990 Million Tonnes Veniveerapura Bellary Karnataka
Hothur Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 50 0.0600 Million Tonnes Veniveerapura Bellary Karnataka
Hothur Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.1095 Million Tonnes Veniveerapura Bellary Karnataka
Hothur Steels Completed 0.1095 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Jai Raj Ispat Ltd. Under Implementation 50 0.0660 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Jai Raj Ispat Ltd. Completed 0.0639 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Janki Corp Ltd. Under Implementation 46 0.0660 Million Tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka
Kakatiya Sponge & Pow er Pvt. Ltd. Completed 20 0.0990 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Kalyani Steels Ltd. Completed 40 0.1000 Million Tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka
Kundil Ispat Ltd. Completed 110 0.0660 Million Tonnes Kumry Belgaum Karnataka
Lakshmi Venkateshw ara Steels Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 14 0.0330 Million Tonnes Chikkanthapura Bellary Karnataka
Laxminarasimha Iron & Steels Ltd. Shelved 24.5 0.0330 Million Tonnes Belagallu Bellary Karnataka
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 6-8 Sponge Iron Plants in Hinterland (contd.)

Project Cost
Com pany Nam e Project Status Capapcity Units Location District State
(Rs. Crore)
4 6 7 11 12 13 14 15
Mahamanav Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0183 Million Tonnes Belagallu Bellary Karnataka
Marmagoa Steel Ltd. Announcement 400 0.0330 Million Tonnes Mangalore Dakshina Kannada Karnataka
Maruti Fertochem Ltd. Shelved 50 0.0660 Million Tonnes Hirebangir Koppal Karnataka
Mastek Steels Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0183 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Noble Distilleries & Pow ers Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 25.65 0.0730 Million Tonnes Siriw ar Bellary Karnataka
others bellary completed 0.8 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
P M Exports Under Implementation 37.32 0.0900 Million Tonnes Sira Tumkur Karnataka
Parw az Sponge Iron Under Implementation 25 0.0660 Million Tonnes Varadapura Bellary Karnataka
Popuri Steels Ltd. Completed 9 0.0548 Million Tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
Popuri Steels Ltd. Announcement 0 0.17 Million Tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
Pragati Steels Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 15 0.0730 Million Tonnes Haruvanahalli Bellary Karnataka
Rangineni Steel Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0310 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Rasasri Steels Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 22.54 0.0300 Million Tonnes Asundi Bellary Karnataka
Rayen Steel Pvt. Ltd. Completed 15 0.1000 Million Tonnes Janikunta Tanda Bellary Karnataka
Rosvar Iron & Pow er Ltd. Under Implementation 45 0.0990 Million Tonnes Haruvanahalli Bellary Karnataka
Sajjala Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. Completed 14.04 0.0730 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Shirdi Sai Steels Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0183 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Shree Ram Electrocast Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 44.55 0.0600 Million Tonnes Honnarahalli Bellary Karnataka
Shree Venkateshw ara Sponge & Iron Pow er
Completed
Pvt. Ltd. 0.0548 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Shri Raghavendra Steels Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0183 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Sigma Solid Strips Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0456 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
South India Iron Pvt. Ltd. Completed 14 0.0330 Million Tonnes Koppathimmanahalli Kolar Karnataka
Sree Giri Tej Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 12.23 0.0033 Million Tonnes Belagallu Bellary Karnataka
Sri Balaji Steel & Pow er Completed 3.26 0.0083 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Sri Subramanya Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0183 Million Tonnes Veniveerapura Bellary Karnataka
Sujatha Narayana & Associates Announcement 0 0.0990 Million Tonnes Kasabahobli Hassan Karnataka
Sunvik Steels Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 10.5 0.0330 Million Tonnes Jodidevarahalli Tumkur Karnataka
Supra Steel & Pow er Pvt. Ltd. Completed 8 0.0183 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
Trivista Steel & Pow er Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 46.53 0.06 Million Tonnes Hirebaganal Koppal Karnataka
Trivista Steel & Pow er Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0365 Million Tonnes Hirebaganal Koppal Karnataka
Ubenaka Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 49.34 0.0300 Million Tonnes Belagallu Bellary Karnataka
Vanya Steels Pvt. Ltd. Completed 20 0.0330 Million Tonnes Hirebaganal Koppal Karnataka
Vir Sponge & Pow er Ltd. Announcement 35.45 0.1000 Million Tonnes Hassan Hassan Karnataka
Yeshashvi Steels & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.0365 Million Tonnes Halkundi Bellary Karnataka
MPSEZL Final Report
6.7. Integrated Steel Plants
Integrated steel plants form the biggest industrial group (in terms of coal demand) in hinterland of Berth 7,
Mormugao Port. The hinterland has a total installed capacity of 10.34 MTPA of which JSW Steel is the
biggest (6.8 MTPA). Usha Ispat, Apparent Steel, Kirloskar Steel and Kalyani are the other important
players in the industry. Going forward, Essar Group is developing a 6 MTPA plant at Bagalkot and Aaress
Iron & Steel (Baldota Group) is building a 3.2 MTPA plant at Koppal. These are two important clients that
can be attracted to Berth 7. The integrated logistics cost analysis indicates a clear advantage for Berth 7
(Rs.420 for Essar Steel and Rs. 250 for Baldota Group). The cargo estimate for the same has been
included in the ensuing traffic projections.
Figure 6-4 Karnataka Steel Manufacturing Hubs
The Table 6-10 lists the existing and upcoming steel plants in the hinterland. As is evident in Table 6-9,
Bagalkot, Bellary and Koppal are the chief districts for steel manufacturing hinterland. The Goa steel
plants, though small in size, serve as primary hinterland for Mormugao Port.
49
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 6-9 Integrated Steel Capacity in Hinterland of Berth 7 (million ton)

Goa South Goa 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27
Goa Total 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27
Bagalkot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.98 1.98 1.98 3.96 3.96 6.00 6.00
Bangalore 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Bellary 6.80 6.80 8.11 8.11 8.11 9.81 11.12 11.12 12.82 14.17 15.92 15.92
Chitradurga 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Koppal 0.24 0.24 0.34 0.34 1.59 1.59 1.69 1.69 1.69 4.04 4.04 4.04
Raichur 1.21 1.21 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.29 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.46 1.46 1.46
Shimoga 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41
Tumkur 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09
Karnataka Total 9.34 9.34 10.83 10.83 12.08 15.76 17.26 17.26 20.94 24.72 28.51 28.51
Satara 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.30
Maharashtra
Sindhudurg 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73
Maharashtra Total 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.93 0.93 1.03 1.03
Grand Total 10.34 10.34 11.83 11.83 13.08 16.86 18.35 18.35 22.13 25.92 29.81 29.81
Source: CMIE, Projects Today, i-maritime analysis
The upcoming plants of Essar Steel and Baldota Group represent a large majority of the total steel
capacity in the hinterland (close to 33% in FY 19-20).
50
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 6-10 Integrated Steel Plants in Hinterland

Com pany Nam e Project Status Project Cost (Rs. Crore) (prd_cap) (prd_units) Location District State
4 6 7 11 12 13 14 15
Aaress Iron & Steel Ltd. Under Implementation 4700 3.70 Million tonnes Koppal Koppal Karnataka
Aparant Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. Completed 100 0.16 Million tonnes South Goa South Goa Goa
B M M Ispat Ltd. Announcement 6151 2.00 Million tonnes Hospet Bellary Karnataka
Basai Steels Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 98 0.13 Million tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka
Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd. Under Implementation 2000 0.50 Million tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd. Under Implementation 0.10 Million Tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Bhushan Steel Ltd. Shelved 6000 2.80 Million tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka
Brindavan Alloys Ltd. Completed 0.05 Million Tonnes Peenya Bangalore Karnataka
Canara Steel Ltd. Completed 0.02 Million Tonnes Baikampady Dakshina Kannada Karnataka
Canara Steel Ltd. Shelved 850 0.50 Million tonnes Mangalore Dakshina Kannada Karnataka
Essar Steel Ltd. Announcement 17760 6.00 Million tonnes Bagalkot Bagalkot Karnataka
Hospet Steels Ltd. Under Implementation 200 0.30 Million tonnes Koppal Koppal Karnataka
Ispat Industries Ltd. Announcement 7144 3.00 Million tonnes Hospet Bellary Karnataka
J S W Steel Ltd. Completed 1500 6.80 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
J S W Steel Ltd. Under Implementation 5300 3.20 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka
Janki Corp Ltd. Announcement 0 0.15 Million tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka
K A P Steel Ltd. Completed 0.12 Million Tonnes Mahadevpura Bangalore Karnataka
K B Steel Ltd. Under Implementation 5 0.04 Million tonnes Haruvanahalli Bellary Karnataka
Kalyani Ferrous Inds. Ltd. [Merged] Completed 0.24 Million Tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka
Kalyani Steels Ltd. Completed 0.67 Million Tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka
Kalyani Steels Ltd. Shelved 450 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka
Kirloskar Ferrous Inds. Ltd. Completed 0.24 Million Tonnes Bevinahalli Koppal Karnataka
Kudremukh Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Completed 328 0.23 Million tonnes Mangalore Dakshina Kannada Karnataka
Marmagoa Steel Ltd. Completed 0.11 Million Tonnes Salcette South Goa Goa
Mukand Ltd. Completed 400 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka
Nava Karnataka Steels Pvt. Ltd. Completed 0.03 Million Tonnes Bangalore Bangalore Karnataka
S L R Steels Ltd. Completed 0.15 Million tonnes Paramenahalli Chitradurga Karnataka
Sona Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 338 0.30 Million tonnes Lonand Satara Maharashtra
Steel Authority Of India Ltd. Completed 75 0.20 Million tonnes Bhadravati Shimoga Karnataka
Surana Industries Ltd. Under Implementation 473.27 0.25 Million tonnes Raichur Raichur Karnataka
Tata Metaliks Ltd. Completed 32 0.14 Million Tonnes Sindhudurg Sindhudurg Maharashtra
Usha Iron & Ferro Metals Corpn. Ltd. Shelved 4800 1.20 Million tonnes Brahmavar Dakshina Kannada Karnataka
Usha Ispat Ltd. Completed 431.52 0.59 Million Tonnes Sindhudurg Sindhudurg Maharashtra
Vijaya Steels Ltd. Completed 30 0.09 Million tonnes Kunigal Tumkur Karnataka
'Visvesvaraya Iron & Steel Ltd. [Merged] Completed 0.21 Million Tonnes Bhadravati Shimoga Karnataka
MPSEZL Final Report
6.8. Hinterland Capacity Projections
For the industries outlined in previous sections, the capacity projections have been prepared as per Table
6-11.
Table 6-11 Decision Matrix for CMIE Classification of Project Status

Project Status FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 26 FY 27 FY 28
Abandoned 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Announcement 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 66% 66% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Completed 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Shelved 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Under Implementation 33% 33% 33% 66% 66% 66% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
While in reality, the individual projects may not be developed in three stages (as assumed in above
projections), the overall capacity accretion is expected to turn out in accordance with our projections. This
is because on a collective basis, certain projects may get delayed to unforeseen circumstances and
certain other projects may get expedited. Moreover, the section of sensitivity analysis proves that the
timelines of capacity accretion have a limited impact on the final traffic projections.
52
MPSEZL Final Report
7. COMPETITION ANALYSIS
Currently there are 13 Major Ports and close to 200 Non-Major Ports spread out along the 7517 km
coastline of India. Gujarat has the maximum number of ports amongst all coastal states. Overall, the
number of ports on Western coast is considerably higher than on the Eastern side. Moreover, the West
Coast ports handle a diverse mix of containers, bulk (dry and liquid) and general cargo, while the East
Coast ports are primarily handling bulk cargo (coal, iron ore, crude oil).
Iron ore is the chief commodity handled at Mormugao Port (accounts for almost 80% of traffic at the port).
New Mangalore is the only other Major port on West Coast that handles iron ore exports. Amongst the
Non-Major ports, Panjim handles the largest quantities (more than 12 million ton in last fiscal)
7.1. Internal competition
Currently, the port is handling coal at 4 berths – 5A, 6A, 10 & 11. Of these, Berths 5A and 6A are being
operated by South West Public Limited (JSW Group subsidiary) for coal requirements of JSW Steel (close
to 3 million ton) while 10 & 11 are operated by the port trust itself (handles close to 1.2 million ton of coal).
7.1.1. Berth 5A, 6A

Going forward, 5A & 6A are expected to handle the thermal coal requirements for upcoming JSW Cement
plant and power plant as well. As per interaction with SWPL, JSW has signed an agreement to handle up
to 5million ton of coal at Krishnapatnam Port. This will help decongest Berths 5A and 6A as the power
and cement plant become operational, leading to a larger demand for coal, and simultaneously de-risk
the logistics set up.
Further, primary surveys indicate that JSW is not interested in handling third party coal at their berths. In
the past, the port authority offered JSW to handle third party cargo at their berth but SWPL quoted
discouragingly high rates. Moreover, Berths 5A &6A do not offer road evacuation.
7.1.2. Berth 10, 11

Berth 10 & 11 are located close to the village of Vasco. Here, coal is handled through manual operations
creating excess pollution for the local population. This has caused a huge furore amongst these villagers
and port trust leading to the port trust planning to shift this cargo to Berth 7 (mechanised handling and far
from the concerned village). Amongst others truck association consensus and port trust approval are the
key factors affecting the decision about this shift. Almost 80% of the Berth 10 & 11 cargo is evacuated by
road, thus accounting for the involvement of truckers.
Moreover, as the new storage & demurrage charges (recently brought into action by the Port Trust,
awaits formal approval from TAMP) get levied, the low stockyard side evacuation rate will hike the storage
53
MPSEZL Final Report
charges for such traders and independent importers on Berth 10 & 11. Berth 7, with far superior handling
rates and storage space, will be in an excellent position to attract these customers.
Moreover, latest news suggests that

“To minimise dust pollution, Goa State Pollution Control Board has asked the Port authorities to shift coal
Handling Ops from B.10/B.11 to privately operated B.5A/6A which--are fully mechanized. Therefore
handling coal vsls at B.10/11 hereafter will depend on further extension being granted from time to time .
Hence it is advisable that Owners/Chrtrs take an assurance from Receivers at the time of Fixture itself
that vsls bringing in coal cargo will not have difficulty in discharging-it at Goa either at B.10/11 or at
B.5A/6A because whereas B.10/B.11 can discharge cgo either Road or Rail Bound, Berth 5A/6A can
accept only Railbound cargo” as mentioned at
http://mjunction.in/coal/download/coalvslmormugao0909.htm
There is a further potential internal competition from the development of new berths at Mormugao Port in
the future. The development of Vasco Bay and/or East of Breakwater terminal is two potential projects
that can compete with Berth 7 at Mormugao Port. Here, it may be noted that Berth 7 would have a clear
first mover advantage over any such project.
7.2. External Competition
On the Western Coast, Panjim (Goa), Jaigarh, Dabhol, Redi, Dighi (Maharashtra), Karwar, Belekeri and
New Mangalore (Karnataka) are the main competitors to Berth 7 at Mormugao Port. On the Eastern
Coast, Krishnapatnam, Chennai and Ennore are the chief competitors.
54
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 7-1 Chief Competing Ports and Hinterland Cargo centres
Source: i-maritime analysis, www.wikimapia.com
7.2.1. Panjim
Panjim is a fair weather port that is mostly used between the months of September-February for loading
iron ore. It handled more than 12 million ton of iron ore in FY 2008. It does not pose any competition to
Berth 7 as the latter is being built only for coal handling. Moreover, the all-weather mechanised
infrastructure at Mormugao Port is bound to appeal to the potential clients more than Panjim.
7.2.2. JSW Jaigarh Port

nd
JSW has recently (22 August 2009) inaugurated its all-weather, multi-commodity deep water port in
Jaigarh, Maharashtra. Built to handle the coal requirement of its 1200MW power plant in Jaigarh, the port
has a capacity of 10 million ton in Phase I with a provision for increasing it to 20 million ton in Phase II.
Apart from coal, the port is also expected to handle bauxite, raw sugar, ash, cement, iron ore, fertilizers,
edible oil and molasses on its 2 berths of 550 m length and 14 m draft. This port will offer considerable
competition to Mormugao Port, especially for the Ratnagairi and Sindhudurg hinterlands (primary
hinterland for JSW Jaigarh Port).
7.2.3. Redi Port

Redi Port is being developed by Earnest Shipping in association with Maharashtra Maritime Board in
Sindhudurg district of Maharashtra. The final approval to construct and operate the port was received
from Government in February 2009 and the work is expected to commence in October 2009. Once
complete, this will be the closest Maharashtrian port for Goa thereby adding to the competition. The
55
MPSEZL Final Report
Sindhudurg industrial hinterland may gravitate towards Redi Port on completion, depending on the
infrastructure at the port.
7.2.4. Karwar & Belekeri

Karwar and Belekeri are important minor ports in Karnataka. Situated within close proximity of each other,
these ports mainly handle iron ore exports from Hospet region. These ports handled cumulative volumes
of 8 million ton of iron ore (majority at Belekeri) in FY 2008. While the integrated logistics costs indicate
the favourable location of these ports with respect to the biggest industrial centres of Karnataka (Bellary,
Hospet, Koppal, Raichur, etc.), infrastructure remains to be created so as to successfully exploit this
location advantage. Karnataka Government was planning to develop the port into a mechanised all-
weather port in association with New Mangalore Port Trust and private participants but the project has not
taken off till date. Belekeri is a fair weather lighterage port that is open to cargo shipments for around 8
months in a year. Overall, these ports enjoy location advantage for the Bellary/Koppal/Raichur hinterland
but lag behind in terms of infrastructure. A private party can develop these ports at a later stage thereby
posing competition to Mormugao Port.
7.2.5. New Mangalore, Chennai & Krishnapatnam

New Mangalore, Chennai and Krishnapatnam are the chief competitors for Berth 7 at Mormugao Port for
the industrial hinterland of Central and Northern Karnataka. Currently, Hospet exports its iron ore from
these three ports through both road and rail. These ore laden trucks carry coal on the return journey for
the industrial belt (specifically the sponge iron industry) of Central and Northern Karnataka. Because of
this synchronised two-way movement of cargo, the inland freight for Chennai-Bellary turns out to be quite
economical at around Rs. 600/ton as compared to Rs. 950-1000/ton for Mormugao-Bellary. This is
despite the fact that Mormugao is closer to Bellary as compared to Chennai/Ennore/New Mangalore.
7.3. SWOT Analysis of Berth 7, Mormugao Port
Based on the above analysis, SWOT analysis has been prepared for Berth 7, Mormugao Port. It may be
concluded that New Mangalore, Chennai/Ennore and Krishnapatnam are the key competitors to Berth 7.
Moreover, these 3 competitors have a well established trader – transporter network. While Mormugao has
its own share of traders and clients, their scope will have to be increased by a suitable margin to enable
the berth to handle cargo in excess of 4 million ton.
56
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 7-2 SWOT Analysis of Berth 7, Mormugao Port
Strengths Weakness
• Comparative inland distance advantage for • Lack of adequate storage space can be a
sponge iron belt of Bellary – Hospet district problem for the imported coal
• Comparative sea voyage distance advantage • Cargo evacuation may be slow due to lack of
for South African Imports over East Coast Ports availability of rakes
• Sound financial and operational support of • Chennai, Krishnapatnam and New Mangalore
Adani Group enjoy reduced road freight costs due to existing
• Insignificant existing internal competition from iron ore movement
Berth 10/11 or 5A/6A
Opportunities
SWOT Threats
• Port Trust is planning to shift Berth 10/11 cargo • Upcoming private jetties for coastal power plant
to Berth 7 in future due to pollution concerns and projects in Maharashtra (Achare and Dhopave)
non-mechanized handling system at the former • Krishnapatnam port, JSW Jaigarh Port and
• Steel capapcity is coming up in the hinterland in upcoming bulk terminals at Ennore port are
a big way. Essar and Baldota group are two key expected to offer stiff competition to Mormugao
examples Port
• Sponge iron units are planning to set up small • Future bulk handling projects at Mormugao Port
captive power units in next few years adding to may cannibalize Berth 7 cargo
demand of thermal coal
7.4. Conclusion
The following conclusions may be drawn from competition analysis:

• Berth 7 will encounter limited internal competition within the Port.
• Krishnapatnam, Ennore/Chennai and New Mangalore are the chief competing ports for Berth 7,
Mormugao Port. Krishnapatnam is a relatively new port (around an year of operations) and has
rapidly gathered a market share from the iron ore trade thereby bagging reverse coal traffic as
well. Ennore is developing mechanised bulk terminals to handle iron ore and coal and will pose
strong competition to Mormugao as it comes up as a substitute to Chennai Port. New Mangalore
is developing a 6.65 MTPA mechanised ore handling berth (Berth 14) in partnership with Sical
Logistics which will provide favourable return logistics for coal movement to Bellary – Hospet
industrial belt
• Iron ore movement is one of the key decision influencing factors currently in favour of the 3
competitors. However, Mormugao Port’s inland distance advantage offers a strong counter to this
factor to attract cargo
57
MPSEZL Final Report
8. SCENARIOS INFLUENCING TRADE PATTERN
Based on the hinterland assessment and competition analysis, it can be said that the iron ore movement
is a key influencing factor in the entire trade dynamics of Karnataka – Goa. The hinterland assessment
shows that thermal power plants and cement plants are not expected to contribute much to the coal traffic
at Berth 7. This is primarily because of the relative location disadvantage of Berth 7 with respect to the
competing ports of New Mangalore, JSW Jaigarh, Redi Port and plant based captive jetties (East Coast
Ports cannot compete for this traffic). Cement plants may provide some coal demand but the volumes are
not expected to be significant because of the inherently low consumption of coal (and low ratio of
imported coal to total coal consumption). Thus sponge iron plants and integrated steel plants remain the
key industrial groups that can be tapped by Berth 7.
Now, both the industrial groups have absolutely diverse characteristics as shown in Table 8-1.
Table 8-1 Comparison of Sponge Iron and Integrated Steel Industries
Parameters Sponge Iron Industry Integrated Steel Industry
Raw Material Thermal Coal Coking Coal

Demand (FY 20) 2-4 million ton >10 million ton
Highly Fragmented. Concentrated. 5-6 players

Players
Close to 75 players. control the entire industry.
Mostly by rail. Certain

Evacuation Almost entirely by road plants use road evacuation
also
Big players are
Procurement of Almost entirely by independent importers
coal traders while smaller ones use
traders
Choice of Port Influenced by traders Mostly self choice
Important Price of landed coal and

Price of landed coal
decision factors risk of operations

The risk sensitivity to both the industries is quite high. This is because of the presence of a handful of
large players in the integrated steel manufacturing industry and the more or less uniform behavior of
fragmented sponge iron industry (traders are a key influence).
8.1. Integrated Steel Industry
Currently, there are two important upcoming steel plants in the hinterland of Berth 7. One of these is the
Essar Steel plant (6MTPA) at Bagalkot while the other is the Baldota Group’s Aaress Iron & Steel plant
(3.7 MTPA) at Koppal. With a combined output of almost 10 MTPA, these plants will require close to 8
million ton of coking coal annually (rail evacuation). Moreover, both the contracts are expected to be long
term arrangements thereby resulting in a stable cash flow for the berth. However, from the perspective of
traffic projections, the risk sensitivity to both these projects remains extremely high.
58
MPSEZL Final Report
8.2. Sponge Iron Industry
The sponge iron plants source almost entire supply of coal through traders. While Bhatia is the biggest
trader of coal in the identified belt, Maheshwari is the biggest trader of coal at Mormugao Port (Berth 10 &
11). As per talks with representatives from Bhatia International, the coal movement is currently in favor of
Chennai Port with Krishnapatnam and New Mangalore being the second tier alternatives. This is primarily
because of the iron ore movement as shown in Figure 8-1.
8.2.1. Iron Ore Movement in Karnataka

A major part of the Indian iron ore is exported to China and Japan as shown in Table 17-1. Moreover, the
percentage of exports to China & Japan has increased from 82% to 97%. Orissa and Karnataka are the
chief iron ore producing states in the country.
The iron ore mined from Hospet region is loaded on to trucks and rakes and transported to Chennai and
New Mangalore. Recently, Krishnapatnam has rapidly emerged as a favorable location for this export
oriented ore. This ore is then shipped to various countries for consumption. Around 9 million ton of
Karnataka ore is transported to Goa for export. Of this 9 ton, 25% is transported by road while the
remaining by rake. Due to local persistence, around 40% of the trucks are stopped at the Goa–Karnataka
border and load transferred to trucks on the other side of the border. Thus about 1.5 million ton of iron ore
is carried by trucks directly from mines to the stacking/blending area in Goa. Only these trucks are able to
ferry back coal on return journey depending on the hinterland demand. Based on the difference on
specific gravities in iron ore and coal, it has been estimated that a maximum of 1 million ton of coal can
be transported back in these trucks to Karnataka (Bellary-Koppal-Raichur districts). The 1 million ton of
coal so transported will be cheaper for almost all the Northern and Central districts of Karnataka, where
the chief sponge iron industries are located (Estimates indicate a saving of Rs. 50-170 relative to the
ports of New Mangalore, Chennai and Krishnapatnam). This is further subject to a synchronized trade
pattern between iron ore export and coal demand. Intermediaries like coal traders can facilitate such
patterns to Berth 7’s advantage.
Moreover, two measures can independently increase the available truck space for transporting coal from
Mormugao to Bellary on return journeys. The first is allowing more ore laden trucks to cross Goa-
Karnataka border towards Mormugao/Panjim and the second is routing more Karnataka ore through Goa
ports. During talks with various stakeholders of supply chain, it was learnt that both the options are
possible. While the former can be tackled by MPSEZL on its own, the latter is subject to appropriate
measures initiated and implemented by Mormugao Port Trust.
59
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 8-1 Iron Ore and Coal Movement in Bellary - Hospet Belt
Source: i-maritime analysis, Google Earth
MPSEZL Final Report
Based on the above discussion, two scenarios have been considered for projecting traffic at Berth 7 as
outlined below.
8.3. Scenario 1
This scenario assumes the trade conditions shall persist as they are right now. Iron ore continues to be
handled as per existing pattern and coal trade is suitably predicted based on economically serviceable
hinterland demand. The integrated logistics cost assumes a reduced inland freight cost for road
evacuation of coal from Chennai/New Mangalore/Krishnapatnam port to Bellary and adjoining districts
(refer Table 18-5, Table 18-6 & Table 18-7).
8.4. Scenario 2
This scenario assumes a perceptible shift in iron ore trade movement in favor of Goa. The basic idea is
that the number of trucks available for transporting coal back to Karnataka as return voyage increases. As
per our estimates, a capacity of 2.5-3 million ton of dumper trucks would be sufficient to tap the sponge
iron industry of Bellary. Thus the integrated logistics cost for this scenario, assumes a reduced inland
freight cost for Mormugao-Bellary and other adjoining districts of Karnataka (refer Table 18-8, Table 18-9
& Table 18-10).
Both the scenarios consider a case where KPCL is unable to source 100% coal (as per BHEL’s directive)
from local mines and has to use some imported coal. 15% blending has been assumed for such case.
Currently, Adani Enterprise is supplying the imported coal to KPCL and this is expected to continue in the
future with rail being the preferred mode of transport.
Thus the integrated cost analysis and ensuing traffic projections have been done for both these scenarios
with the above mentioned assumptions.
61
MPSEZL Final Report
9. INTEGRATED LOGISTICS COST ANALYSIS
9.1. Introduction
The Integrated logistics cost is primarily a summation of the following three cost;
Inland Logistics Cost: It is the cost the shipper pays to the inland logistics service provider. This cost
includes the entire cost that the shipper has to pay to various agencies, including railways, for the
transportation of their cargo from their door (may be mine head or production plant) to the port gate or
port storage area. The cost includes only the freight charges excluding the handling and transportation
that the shipper might have to may to the local transporters and handling agencies. The reason for
exclusion of these charges, called as inter carting charges, is the randomness and inconsistencies in
them.
Port Charges: These are the charges that the shipper pays, for getting the ship berthed at the port berth.
Apart from these the major part of the port charges include the handling, stevedoring and wharfage that
the shipper has to pay to the port authorities or individual stevedores or combined, for transportation of
cargo from port compound to vessel.
Voyage Charges: These are the charges that the shipper bears to transfer the cargo from origin port to
the destination port. These include the vessel hire charges, and other related charges to the vessel
including bunkering etc.
The overall Integrated logistics cost or ILC, as explained is sum total of all the above. As the inland
logistics cost is dependent only on distances, competing ports can alter their offerings to the users by
drop in port charges. Also, by facility the port can be differentiated in term of capability to handle large
size vessel thus bringing in economies of scale. However, in a competitive environment with a set of
equally aggressive capable players, the cargo traffic will be diverted to that port which offers the least
integrated logistics cost.
9.2. Inland Logistics Cost calculation: Assumptions & Facts
9.2.1. Inland Cost Assumptions

Inland Transport mode has been selected for each cargo centre- port pair based on the following
assumption:
1. As per primary surveys, the choice of rail and road movement is primarily governed by three factors –
parcel size per order, rake/truck availability and distance between the two transfer locations (port and
plant in this case). Other than this, the distance of railway stock yard, cross border movement of
62
MPSEZL Final Report
trucks, availability of return cargo for trucks and inclination towards multiple handling also affects the
choice of evacuation.
2. A typical rake tonnage is 2500-3500 ton (at times full loading is not allowed for rakes traversing hilly
terrain in which case the tonnage per rake decreases). On the other hand, a 6 wheel dumper truck
carries 12 ton of coal and a 10 wheel dumper truck carries 18 ton of coal (assuming peak loading).
Most of the sponge iron plants, owing to their small size, have a monthly demand of 1500-5000 ton of
imported coal. These plants transport this coal on a weekly basis from the port stockyard. This lowers
the parcel size of each load to around 400-1200 ton rendering railways in-feasible
3. The primary survey also indicated that the demurrage charges for railway stockyards start after 24
hours of arrival of coal. This leaves the importer with a very small window for transporting of coal form
this stock yard to its own plant. This is an important reason why sponge iron plants prefer to use
trucks
4. Integrated steel plants have larger coal (coking coal) requirement as compared to the sponge iron
plants. This because of higher average size of plant as well as complete reliance on imported coal.
These plants tend to prefer rail evacuation especially if they have their own rail sidings in plant.
Moreover, the plants maintain a steady inventory of coking coal in their plants to de-risk operations.
Thus rail movement can be more economical as any surplus coking coal can just be stored for future
consumption. The sponge iron plants on the other hand seldom maintain significant inventories and
mostly operate without stockyards to save on capital and maintenance costs
5. Inland road freight has been assumed at a uniform Rs. 2.5/ton/km. However, freights get adjusted for
reverse logistics along certain routes and the same have been accounted for in Table 18-5
6. Distance from a specific cargo center to any port is measured from either the cargo centre railway
station or nearest railway major station (refer Table 18-1 & Table 18-2). Yahoo maps have been used
to locate highway distances for the cargo center combinations. For cargo centers contributing to a
majority of the cargo (Bellary district for instance), data gathered from primary surveys during site visit
has been used to accurately estimate the road distances. Wherever, cargo centers are relatively
unknown and small, the road distances have been estimated based on nearest city/town. These
estimations should hold true for a margin of 5-15 km. This does not impact the traffic projections since
cargo is not expected to move for a distance advantage < 40-50 km
7. Inter carting charges that could be as high as Rs. 400/- per ton has not been considered as it would
affect the whole logistics cost analysis and the generalization for the same is not possible across
commodities and districts
8. Rail charges have been estimated based on rail freight tables circulated by the Indian Railways. Coal
falls in Class 150 of commodities. In addition to these freight charges, certain miscellaneous
charges/surcharge is also levied from time to time. These are more or less common for all routes and
thus do not affect the relative integrated logistics cost.
63
MPSEZL Final Report
The inland costs are the chief variable that differs in both the scenarios explained in Section 8. The final
inland costs for both rail and road have been computed in Table 18-6, Table 18-9 & Table 18-4.
9.3. Port and Vessel related Charges
In a competitive scenario, port tariff is a function of a number of factors:

1. Facilities and services provided by the port
2. Tariffs charged by the competing ports
3. Benefits (both tangible and intangible) offered by the port over competing ports
The various cargo charges are classified below:

1. Wharfage
2. Demurrage on cargo
3. Hiring of wharf crane
4. Hiring of other equipment for on-shore handling
5. Labour charges
6. Intra-port transportation charges
7. Weighing charges
8. Documentation charges
The various vessel charges are classified below:

1. Port Dues
2. Pilotage and towage
3. Berth-hire charges
Apart from the above two classifications other charges are:

1. Stevedoring charges
2. Labour and equipment charges - inland receipt and despatch
3. Bagging charges
4. Storage charge
5. Supervision charges
6. Customs clearance charges
7. Spillage
8. Cargo safety and pilferage
It is seen that there are a lot of factors that influence the port tariffs. Most of it is need based and cargo
centric. In our analysis the port charges along with charge paid by the user in terms of Wharfage,
Stevedoring and Handling are considered only. Though most of the factors have been critically examined
only a few factors have been considered while determining the tariffs;
64
MPSEZL Final Report
1. Tariffs charged by the competing ports – both port related and cargo related
2. Vessel sizes likely to call on Mormugao and competing ports and hence the relative cost
advantage on account of ocean freight
3. Cargo loading and unloading rate at Mormugao compared to other ports
4. Storage and evacuation facilities offered by Mormugao and competing ports
The following Table 9-2 & Table 9-3 list the port charges for various competing ports. While Gladstone
Port, Queensland, Australia, has been chosen for coking coal calculations, Tanjung Priok, Indonesia, has
been assumed as the load port for thermal coal. It may be noted that the choice of the load ports does not
affect the relative integrated logistics cost much as long as the loading country remains the same. While a
majority of the coking coal imported in India originates in Australia, thermal coal imports are shared
between Indonesia, South Africa and Australia. Indonesia has the largest share of thermal coal export for
India. Moreover, Indonesia, by virtue of its location on the east side, favours the unload ports on East
Coast of India. Similarly, South Africa is more favourable for West Coast Ports of India.
Table 9-1 Vessel Assumptions for Port and Voyage Charge Estimation
Time Charter 6 Bunker

Vessel Size Vessel Size Parcel Size
Vessel Size (NRT) month Speed (nm/hr) Consumption
(DWT) (GRT) (Tonnes)
(US$/day) (tonnes/day)
35,000 20,211 13,057 30,000 10,250 14.40 30.70

45,000 29,758 19,225 40,000 16,500 14.40 30.20
72,000 40,244 26,000 64,000 17,000 14.20 35.20
120,000 75,431 48,733 100,000 18,024 14.00 49.20
150,000 82,041 53,003 120,000 22,000 14.00 49.20
180,000 88,930 57,454 150,000 27,000 14.40 57.80
Bunker price - 180 cst (US$/tonne) 439
Source: i-maritime analysis, Clarksons research
Table 9-1 estimates the various parameters used for calculating the voyage charges between two ports
and the port charges at unload port (Berth 7 and competing ports in this case).
65
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-2 Port Charges Assumption for Coking Coal

Distance from Handling + Stevedoring + Berth Hire Pilotage &
Load Port for Discharge Rate Ship Size Wharfage (Rs. Port Dues
Ports Destination/Origi Barging / Transshipper (US$/GRT/ Towage (US$
Coking Coal (Ton/Day) (DWT) /Tonne) (US$/GRT)
n port (NM) Costs (Rs./Tonne) Shift) /GRT)
Mormugao 25,000 72,000 5,593 30.00 150.00 0.11 0.01 0.18
Panjim 6,000 72,000 5,597 30.00 213.75 0.11 0.01 0.18
Karwar 6,000 35,000 5,537 30.00 200.00 0.10 0.01 0.36
Belekeri 6,000 72,000 5,522 30.00 200.00 0.10 0.01 0.36
New Mangalore 10,134 72,000 5,418 30.00 150.00 0.10 0.01 0.36
Gladstone,
Chennai 8,248 72,000 4,998 23.00 150.00 0.23 0.02 0.59
Queensland,
Ennore 35,251 72,000 5,003 95.00 125.00 0.53 0.08 0.82
Australia
Krishnapatnam 15,000 72,000 5,015 30.00 150.00 0.50 0.05 0.57
Machilipatnam 7,000 72,000 4,999 30.00 150.00 0.32 0.03 0.55
Kakinada 10,000 35,000 5,003 27.00 150.00 0.32 0.03 0.55
Vizag/
11,354 72,000 5,098 26.00 150.00 0.25 0.03 0.49
Gangavaram
Source: i-maritime analysis, Scale of Rates, Clarksons Research
Table 9-3 Port Charges Assumption for Thermal Coal
Discharge Rate Distance from Port Dues Berth Hire (US$ Pilotage &
Load Port for Ship Size Wharfage (Rs. Handling + Stevedoring (Rs.
Ports (Tonnes per Destination/Origi (US$ Per Per GRT Per Towage (US$
Thermal Coal (DWT) Per Tonne) Per Tonne)
Day) n port (NM) GRT) Shift) Per GRT)
Mormugao 25,000 72,000 2,490 30.00 150.00 0.11 0.01 0.18

Panjim 8,000 72,000 2,513 30.00 213.75 0.11 0.01 0.18
Karwar 8,000 35,000 2,453 30.00 200.00 0.10 0.01 0.36
Belekeri 8,000 72,000 2,438 30.00 200.00 0.10 0.01 0.36
New Mangalore 10,134 72,000 2,334 30.00 150.00 0.10 0.01 0.36
Tanjung Priok,
Chennai 8,248 72,000 2,015 23.00 150.00 0.23 0.02 0.59
Indonesia
Ennore 35,251 72,000 2,020 95.00 125.00 0.53 0.08 0.82
Krishnapatnam 15,000 72,000 2,032 30.00 150.00 0.50 0.05 0.57
Machilipatnam 8,000 72,000 2,016 30.00 150.00 0.32 0.03 0.55
Kakinada 10,000 35,000 2,074 27.00 150.00 0.32 0.03 0.55
Vizag/ Gangavaram 11,009 72,000 2,067 26.00 150.00 0.25 0.03 0.49
Source: i-maritime analysis, Scale of Rates, Clarksons Research
MPSEZL Final Report
Based on the above assumptions, the following port charges have been calculated.
9.3.1. Port Charges for Coking Coal
Table 9-4 Mormugao Port Charges - Coking Coal

Mormugao
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Vessel Size (GRT) 40244
Vessel Size (NRT) 26000
Parcel Size (tonnes) 64000
Discharge Rate (tonnes/day) 25000
Stay at berth (day) 3
Berthing/Unberthing Time (hrs) 4
Stay at berth (shift) 9
Stay at berth (hour) 66
Rate Rs/Tonne
Port Dues (US$/GRT) 0.112 3.18
Berth Hire (US$/GRT/shift) 0.008 2.00
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.176 4.99
Total Vessel Related Charges (Rs./Tonne) 10
Wharfage (Rs./Tonne) 30
Handling and Stevedoring (Rs./Tonne) 150
Total Cargo Related Charges (Rs./Tonne) 180
Total Tariff (Rs./Tonne) 190
Source: i-maritime analysis, Mormugao Port Trust Scale of Rates
Table 9-5 Panjim Port Charges - Coking Coal

Panjim
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
67
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-6 Karwar Port Charges - Coking Coal

Karwar
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 35000
Vessel Size (NRT) 13057.5
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.356 10.79
Table 9-7 Belekeri Port Charges - Coking Coal

Belekeri
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.356 10.07
68
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-8 New Mangalore Port Charges - Coking Coal

New Mangalore
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.356 10.07
Table 9-9 Chennai Port Charges - Coking Coal

Chennai
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.587 16.61
69
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-10 Ennore Port Charges - Coking Coal

Ennore
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.820 23.20
Table 9-11 Krishnapatnam Port Charges - Coking Coal

Krishnapatnam
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.570 16.13
70
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-12 Machilipatnam Port Charges - Coking Coal

Machilipatnam
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.550 15.56
Table 9-13 Kakinada Port Charges - Coking Coal

Kakinada
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 35000
Vessel Size (NRT) 13057.49925
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.550 16.67
71
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-14 Vizag/Gangavaram Port Charges - Coking Coal

Vizag/ Gangavaram
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/Tonne
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.490 13.85
9.3.2. Port Charges for Thermal Coal
Table 9-15 Mormugao Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Mormugao
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Parcel Size (ton) 64000
Discharge Rate (ton/day) 25000
Berthin/Underthing Time (days) 4
Rate Rs/ton
Total Vessel Related Charges (Rs./ton) 10
Wharfage (Rs./ton) 30
Handling and Stevedoring (Rs./ton) 150
Total Cargo Related Charges (Rs./ton) 180
Total Tariff (Rs./ton) 190
72
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-16 Panjim Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Panjim
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Table 9-17 Karwar Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Karwar
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 35000
Rate Rs/ton
73
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-18 Belekeri Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Belekeri
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.356 10.07
Table 9-19 New Mangalore Port Charges - Thermal Coal

New Mangalore
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.356 10.07
74
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-20 Chennai Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Chennai
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.587 16.61
Table 9-21 Ennore Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Ennore
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.820 23.20
75
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-22 Krishnapatnam Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Krishnapatnam
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.570 16.13
Table 9-23 Machilipatnam Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Machilipatnam
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.550 15.56
76
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-24 Kakinada Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Kakinada
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 35000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.550 16.67
Table 9-25 Vizag / Gangavaram Port Charges - Thermal Coal

Vizag/ Gangavaram
$1 = INR 45
Vessel DWT 72000
Rate Rs/ton
Towage (US$/GRT) 0.490 13.85
9.4. Voyage Charges
The voyage charges are dependent on the prevailing charter rates, the size of the vessel chartered, the
price of bunker, consumption of bunker by the chartered vessel and the total voyage time. The total
77
MPSEZL Final Report
voyage time includes the sailing time (return journey) and the idle time spent at the berth while
loading/unloading operations as well as waiting time. The assumptions cited in Table 9-1 are used for
calculating voyage charges.
9.4.1. Voyage Charges for Coking Coal

The voyage charges for coking coal are based on the assumption that Gladstone, Queensland (Australia)
is the load port.
Table 9-26 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Mormugao Port (Rs/ton)

Mormugao
6-month time charter rate ($/day) 17000
Distance 5593
Vessel Speed (nm) 14.2
Sailing time (hrs) 788
Loading time (hrs) 66
Time at unload port (apart from discharge time)(hrs) 24
Time at unload port (hrs) 39
Total time (days) 39
Chartering Cost (Rs./tonne) 466.17
Bunkering
Bunker Price (US$/tonne) 439
Bunker Consumption (tonnes/day) 35.2
Bunkering cost (Rs./tonne) 356.63
Port Charges at Overseas Port (Rs./tonne) 0.00
Commission (@2.5%) 20.57
Total Cost (Rs/tonne) 843.37
Table 9-27 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Panjim Port (Rs/ton)

Panjim
Distance 5597
Bunkering
78
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-28 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Karwar Port (Rs/ton)

Karwar
Distance 5537
Bunkering
Table 9-29 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Belekeri Port (Rs/ton)

Belekeri
Distance 5522
Bunkering
79
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-30 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - New Mangalore Port (Rs/ton)
New Mangalore
Distance 5418
Bunkering
Table 9-31 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Chennai Port (Rs/ton)

Chennai
Distance 4998
Bunkering
80
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-32 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Ennore Port (Rs/ton)

Ennore
Distance 5003
Bunkering
Table 9-33 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Krishnapatnam Port (Rs/ton)

Krishnapatnam
Distance 5015
Bunkering
81
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-34 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Machilipatnam Port (Rs/ton)

Machilipatnam
Distance 4999
Bunkering
Table 9-35 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Kakinada Port (Rs/ton)

Kakinada
Distance 5003
Bunkering
82
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-36 Coking Coal Voyage Charges - Vizag/Gangavaram Port (Rs/ton)

Vizag/ Gangavaram
Distance 5098
Bunkering
9.4.2. Voyage Charges for Thermal Coal

The voyage charges for thermal coal are based on the assumption that Tanjung Priok (Indonesia) is the
load port.
Table 9-37 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Mormugao Port (Rs/ton)

Mormugao
Distance 2490
Chartering Cost (Rs./ton) 239.06
Bunkering
Bunker Price (US$/ton) 439
Bunker Consumption (ton/day) 35.2
Bunkering cost (Rs./ton) 158.77
Port Charges at Overseas Port (Rs./ton) 0.00
Total Cost (Rs/ton) 407.78
83
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-38 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Panjim Port (Rs/ton)

Panjim
Distance 2513
Bunkering
Table 9-39 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Karwar Port (Rs/ton)

Karwar
Distance 2453
Bunkering
84
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-40 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Belekeri Port (Rs/ton)

Belekeri
Distance 2438
Bunkering
Table 9-41 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - New Mangalore Port (Rs/ton)
New Mangalore
Distance 2334
Bunkering
85
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-42 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Chennai Port (Rs/ton)

Chennai
Distance 2015
Bunkering
Table 9-43 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Ennore Port (Rs/ton)

Ennore
Distance 2020
Bunkering
86
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-44 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Krishnapatnam Port (Rs/ton)

Krishnapatnam
Distance 2032
Bunkering
Table 9-45 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Machilipatnam Port (Rs/ton)

Machilipatnam
Distance 2016
Bunkering
87
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-46 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Kakinada Port (Rs/ton)

Kakinada
Distance 2074
Bunkering
Table 9-47 Thermal Coal Voyage Charges - Vizag/Gangavaram Port (Rs/ton)

Vizag/ Gangavaram
Distance 2067
Bunkering
Based on the above calculations the combined port and voyage charges for various combinations are as
shown in
88
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-48 Comparison of Port & Voyage Charges for Coking Coal (Rs/ton)
Port Port Tariff Voyage Cost Total Cost
Mormugao 190.17 843.37 1033.54
Panjim 259.24 941.65 1200.89
Karwar 250.12 1278.59 1528.71
Belekeri 255.18 924.49 1179.67
New Mangalore 200.29 856.44 1056.72
Chennai 211.82 816.73 1028.55
Ennore 271.78 743.55 1015.33
Krishnapatnam 230.08 781.09 1011.17
Machilipatnam 230.76 841.30 1072.07
Kakinada 213.38 1135.75 1349.13
Vizag/ Gangavaram 211.63 811.02 1022.64
Table 9-49 Comparison of Port & Voyage Charges for Thermal Coal (Rs/ton)
Port Port Tariff Voyage Cost Total Cost
Mormugao 190.17 407.78 597.95
Panjim 257.47 482.79 740.26
Karwar 248.51 609.34 857.85
Belekeri 252.17 465.64 717.81
New Mangalore 200.29 434.34 634.63
Chennai 211.82 413.49 625.31
Ennore 271.78 340.30 612.09
Krishnapatnam 230.08 365.59 595.68
Machilipatnam 227.96 413.56 641.52
Kakinada 213.38 516.61 729.99
Vizag/ Gangavaram 211.63 392.38 604.01
The high costs for Karwar are due to the low draft (8.5 m) available at the berth, thereby allowing only
small vessels to unload. Kakinada has an available draft of 10 m and experiences similar shortfall. Thus it
can be said that Vizag/Gangavaram are the cheapest ports in terms of port charges and voyage charges
for procuring coking coal from Australia while Mormugao and Krishnapatnam are the cheapest ports for
importing thermal coal from Indonesia.
9.5. Integrated Logistics Cost
Based on the inland costs (rail and road), port charges and voyage costs, the integrated logistics costs
have been computed where
Integrated logistics cost = Inland Cost + Port Charges + Voyage Charges
The green highlighted rows indicate the cargo centers for which Mormugao Port is the cheapest port
indicating a clear integrated logistics cost advantage. The ILC has been calculated for both Scenarios
(discussed in Section 8) with an option of rail and road evacuation for inland movement.
89
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-50 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton)
Mormug New Krishnap Machilip Vizag/ Min. Max. Mormugao Mormugao
State District Location Panjim Karwar Belekeri Chennai Ennore Kakinada Cheapest Port Costliest Port
ao Mangalore atnam atnam Gangavaram Cost Cost Disadvntg Share
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,840.45 2,005.26 1,860.35 1,660.31 954.63 1,192.81 1,187.09 1,195.68 2,406.52 2,959.99 3,214.01 954.63 New Mangalore 3,214.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 885.82 0%
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 1,627.95 1,755.26 1,807.85 1,627.81 1,183.38 1,255.31 1,233.34 1,119.43 1,974.02 2,522.49 2,694.01 1,119.43 Krishnapatnam 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 508.52 0%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 1,282.95 1,370.26 1,555.35 1,375.31 1,515.88 1,982.81 1,956.46 1,793.80 2,409.02 2,849.99 3,054.01 1,282.95 Mormugao 3,054.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -87.31 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Baikampady 1,452.95 1,617.76 1,472.85 1,272.81 643.38 1,949.06 1,948.96 1,979.43 3,029.02 3,529.99 3,721.51 643.38 New Mangalore 3,721.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 809.57 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 2,077.95 2,205.26 2,127.85 1,940.31 1,074.63 1,032.81 1,028.34 1,071.93 2,251.52 2,802.49 3,059.01 1,028.34 Ennore 3,059.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,049.61 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 1,587.95 1,710.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,129.43 Krishnapatnam 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 458.52 0%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 1,585.45 1,710.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,159.63 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,129.43 Krishnapatnam 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 456.02 0%
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 1,402.95 1,522.76 1,577.85 1,400.31 1,139.63 1,359.06 1,338.34 1,224.43 2,181.52 2,682.49 2,881.51 1,139.63 New Mangalore 2,881.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 263.32 0%
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 1,465.45 1,632.76 1,492.85 1,285.31 869.63 2,092.81 2,187.09 2,078.18 2,561.52 3,059.99 3,291.51 869.63 New Mangalore 3,291.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 595.82 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,317.95 1,482.76 1,327.85 1,137.81 709.63 2,018.43 2,083.96 1,983.18 2,931.52 3,432.49 3,634.01 709.63 New Mangalore 3,634.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 608.32 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,542.95 1,670.26 1,715.35 1,540.31 1,130.88 1,320.31 1,297.09 1,181.93 2,099.02 2,597.49 2,829.01 1,130.88 New Mangalore 2,829.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 412.07 0%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 1,585.45 1,710.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,129.43 Krishnapatnam 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 456.02 0%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 1,010.45 1,142.76 1,250.35 1,070.31 1,311.50 1,994.06 1,988.34 1,821.93 2,561.52 3,062.49 3,264.01 1,010.45 Mormugao 3,264.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -59.86 100%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigera 1,382.95 1,507.76 1,560.35 1,380.31 1,364.00 1,740.93 1,712.71 1,550.05 2,199.02 2,697.49 2,896.51 1,364.00 New Mangalore 2,896.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 18.94 25%
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 1,825.45 1,907.76 2,092.85 1,912.81 1,874.00 2,029.68 2,003.34 1,767.55 2,034.02 2,474.99 2,679.01 1,767.55 Krishnapatnam 2,679.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 57.89 5%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,610.45 1,737.76 1,787.85 1,607.81 1,144.63 1,274.06 1,252.09 1,136.93 2,011.52 2,507.49 2,709.01 1,136.93 Krishnapatnam 2,709.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 473.52 0%
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli 1,425.45 1,550.26 1,605.35 1,425.31 1,109.63 1,346.56 1,325.84 1,214.43 2,154.02 2,654.99 2,856.51 1,109.63 New Mangalore 2,856.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 315.82 0%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,802.95 1,967.76 1,822.85 1,622.81 844.63 1,622.81 1,688.34 1,671.93 2,641.52 3,194.99 3,459.01 844.63 New Mangalore 3,459.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 958.32 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 1,392.95 1,520.26 1,520.35 1,395.31 1,122.13 1,372.81 1,350.84 1,246.93 2,209.02 2,704.99 2,906.51 1,122.13 New Mangalore 2,906.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 270.82 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 1,357.95 1,482.76 1,535.35 1,355.31 1,134.63 1,382.81 1,362.09 1,246.93 2,226.52 2,727.49 2,929.01 1,134.63 New Mangalore 2,929.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 223.32 0%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 1,385.45 1,710.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,159.63 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,129.43 Krishnapatnam 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 256.02 0%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 1,425.45 1,550.26 1,605.35 1,425.31 1,109.63 1,346.56 1,325.84 1,214.43 2,154.02 2,654.99 2,856.51 1,109.63 New Mangalore 2,856.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 315.82 0%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 1,300.45 1,395.26 1,805.35 1,727.81 2,212.13 3,320.31 3,297.09 3,073.18 3,204.02 3,644.99 3,836.51 1,300.45 Mormugao 3,836.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -94.81 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,562.95 1,687.76 1,742.85 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,279.06 1,244.59 1,151.93 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,151.93 Krishnapatnam 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 411.02 0%
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 1,762.95 2,027.76 1,952.85 1,760.31 1,004.63 1,122.81 1,163.34 1,133.18 2,281.52 2,834.99 3,104.01 1,004.63 New Mangalore 3,104.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 758.32 0%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,802.95 1,967.76 1,822.85 1,622.81 844.63 1,622.81 1,688.34 1,671.93 2,641.52 3,194.99 3,459.01 844.63 New Mangalore 3,459.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 958.32 0%
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 1,822.95 1,977.76 1,830.35 1,630.31 942.13 1,210.31 1,250.84 1,198.18 2,414.02 2,964.99 3,229.01 942.13 New Mangalore 3,229.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 880.82 0%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 1,357.95 1,482.76 1,535.35 1,355.31 1,134.63 1,375.31 1,360.84 1,246.93 2,226.52 2,727.49 2,926.51 1,134.63 New Mangalore 2,926.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 223.32 0%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 2,220.45 2,345.26 2,270.35 2,090.31 1,154.63 951.56 1,022.09 985.68 2,091.52 2,642.49 2,909.01 951.56 Chennai 2,909.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,268.89 0%
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 950.45 1,037.76 1,290.35 1,157.81 1,164.63 1,632.81 1,624.59 1,509.43 2,751.52 3,187.49 3,384.01 950.45 Mormugao 3,384.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -87.31 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 1,992.95 2,125.26 2,015.35 1,815.31 982.13 1,152.81 1,192.09 1,161.93 2,379.02 2,932.49 3,199.01 982.13 New Mangalore 3,199.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,010.82 0%
Maharashtra Satara Lonand 1,557.95 1,645.26 1,952.85 1,822.81 2,359.63 3,170.31 3,139.59 2,880.68 2,841.52 3,132.49 3,336.51 1,557.95 Mormugao 3,336.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -87.31 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 2,097.95 2,222.76 2,147.85 1,960.31 1,084.63 1,025.31 1,020.84 1,064.43 2,236.52 2,789.99 3,044.01 1,020.84 Ennore 3,044.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,077.11 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 1,890.45 1,977.76 2,165.35 1,985.31 1,892.75 1,973.43 1,954.59 1,701.93 1,936.52 2,377.49 2,569.01 1,701.93 Krishnapatnam 2,569.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 188.52 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,477.95 1,642.76 1,500.35 1,300.31 647.13 1,937.81 2,003.34 1,964.43 3,034.02 3,534.99 3,736.51 647.13 New Mangalore 3,736.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 830.82 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 1,677.95 1,810.26 1,710.35 1,510.31 952.13 1,247.81 1,288.34 1,235.68 2,449.02 2,947.49 3,149.01 952.13 New Mangalore 3,149.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 725.82 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 1,885.45 1,967.76 2,152.85 1,972.81 1,881.50 1,988.43 1,960.21 1,718.80 1,959.02 2,399.99 2,604.01 1,718.80 Krishnapatnam 2,604.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 166.64 0%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudgal 1,515.45 1,602.76 1,727.85 1,547.81 1,557.13 1,834.68 1,808.34 1,656.93 2,189.02 2,629.99 2,821.51 1,515.45 Mormugao 2,821.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -32.36 60%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 1,242.95 1,335.26 1,572.85 1,400.31 1,542.13 2,080.31 2,055.84 1,889.43 2,514.02 2,954.99 3,154.01 1,242.95 Mormugao 3,154.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -92.31 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 955.45 1,042.76 1,490.35 1,412.81 1,867.13 3,057.81 3,067.09 2,843.18 3,121.52 3,562.49 3,754.01 955.45 Mormugao 3,754.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -87.31 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Padubidri 1,405.45 1,495.26 1,317.85 1,117.81 672.13 2,031.56 2,072.71 1,971.93 2,916.52 3,404.99 3,604.01 672.13 New Mangalore 3,604.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 733.32 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 1,570.45 1,695.26 1,620.35 1,432.81 988.38 1,257.81 1,297.09 1,218.18 2,324.02 2,822.49 3,024.01 988.38 New Mangalore 3,024.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 582.07 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 2,040.45 2,172.76 2,095.35 1,905.31 1,060.88 1,046.56 1,114.59 1,083.18 2,299.02 2,852.49 3,119.01 1,046.56 Chennai 3,119.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 993.89 0%
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 1,787.95 1,880.26 1,965.35 1,785.31 1,679.00 1,707.18 1,682.71 1,448.80 1,909.02 2,349.99 2,551.51 1,448.80 Krishnapatnam 2,551.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 339.14 0%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 1,205.45 1,295.26 1,705.35 1,627.81 2,112.13 3,240.31 3,217.09 2,990.68 3,136.52 3,577.49 3,769.01 1,205.45 Mormugao 3,769.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -89.81 100%
Goa South Goa Salcette 672.95 820.26 1,027.85 950.31 1,434.63 2,827.81 2,857.09 2,590.68 2,919.02 3,419.99 3,684.01 672.95 Mormugao 3,684.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -147.31 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 1,917.95 2,005.26 2,157.85 1,975.31 1,879.63 1,939.68 1,917.09 1,673.80 1,899.02 2,334.99 2,544.01 1,673.80 Krishnapatnam 2,544.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 244.14 0%
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 1,635.45 1,760.26 1,812.85 1,632.81 1,185.88 1,251.56 1,230.84 1,115.68 1,964.02 2,464.99 2,666.51 1,115.68 Krishnapatnam 2,666.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 519.77 0%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 890.45 980.26 1,295.35 1,225.31 1,797.13 2,957.81 2,969.59 2,743.18 3,071.52 3,499.99 3,691.51 890.45 Mormugao 3,691.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -89.81 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 1,762.95 1,895.26 1,817.85 1,630.31 997.13 1,161.56 1,200.84 1,148.18 2,314.02 2,867.49 3,129.01 997.13 New Mangalore 3,129.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 765.82 0%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 1,585.45 1,710.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 2,206.52 2,492.49 2,904.01 1,129.43 Krishnapatnam 2,904.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 456.02 0%
Goa South Goa South Goa 672.95 820.26 1,027.85 950.31 1,434.63 2,827.81 2,857.09 2,590.68 2,919.02 3,419.99 3,684.01 672.95 Mormugao 3,684.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -147.31 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 947.95 1,082.76 937.85 742.81 694.63 2,587.81 2,682.09 2,530.68 2,859.02 3,357.49 3,559.01 694.63 New Mangalore 3,559.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 253.32 0%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 1,515.45 1,640.26 1,692.85 1,512.81 1,127.13 1,300.31 1,279.59 1,164.43 2,064.02 2,562.49 2,764.01 1,127.13 New Mangalore 2,764.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 388.32 0%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,472.95 1,600.26 1,550.35 1,420.31 1,073.38 1,371.56 1,348.34 1,234.43 2,201.52 2,699.99 2,904.01 1,073.38 New Mangalore 2,904.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 399.57 0%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,552.95 1,680.26 1,732.85 1,552.81 1,143.38 1,285.31 1,263.34 1,148.18 2,029.02 2,529.99 2,731.51 1,143.38 New Mangalore 2,731.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 409.57 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 1,817.95 1,905.26 2,105.35 1,925.31 1,840.25 1,994.06 1,969.59 1,731.93 2,004.02 2,444.99 2,646.51 1,731.93 Krishnapatnam 2,646.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 86.02 0%
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 1,175.45 1,267.76 1,505.35 1,332.81 1,217.13 1,602.81 1,580.84 1,466.93 2,554.02 2,994.99 3,194.01 1,175.45 Mormugao 3,194.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -41.68 60%
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-51 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton)
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,146.95 1,289.26 1,458.15 1,335.21 979.03 1,070.81 1,074.39 1,136.18 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 979.03 New Mangalore 1,681.79 Kakinada 167.92 0%
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 975.95 1,109.86 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,354.33 1,302.61 1,297.89 1,238.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 975.95 Mormugao 1,596.99 Kakinada -133.91 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Baikampady 1,035.05 1,177.36 1,193.85 1,021.11 759.73 1,387.31 1,395.09 1,462.68 1,699.32 1,914.69 1,893.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,914.69 Kakinada 275.32 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 1,266.65 1,400.46 1,569.15 1,458.71 1,123.03 978.11 973.29 1,032.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 973.29 Ennore 1,596.99 Kakinada 293.36 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 1,181.15 1,323.46 1,492.35 1,369.41 1,046.53 1,037.21 1,032.39 1,101.48 1,445.52 1,660.49 1,640.71 1,032.39 Ennore 1,660.49 Kakinada 148.76 0%
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 1,103.75 1,237.36 1,406.85 1,309.61 1,038.13 1,200.01 1,195.29 1,255.88 1,424.52 1,639.19 1,619.51 1,038.13 New Mangalore 1,639.19 Kakinada 65.62 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,060.25 1,202.56 1,219.05 1,045.71 759.73 1,366.21 1,374.09 1,441.68 1,678.22 1,893.59 1,872.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,893.59 Kakinada 300.52 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 826.45 968.76 1,136.25 1,029.41 1,243.53 1,285.51 1,289.39 1,230.18 1,361.22 1,575.99 1,555.81 826.45 Mormugao 1,575.99 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigera 950.75 1,093.06 1,261.35 1,154.91 1,286.23 1,165.81 1,161.09 1,101.48 1,233.32 1,449.69 1,450.01 950.75 Mormugao 1,450.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -142.31 100%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigere 950.75 1,093.06 1,261.35 1,154.91 1,286.23 1,165.81 1,161.09 1,101.48 1,233.32 1,449.69 1,450.01 950.75 Mormugao 1,450.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,138.45 1,280.76 1,423.95 1,241.01 929.73 1,157.21 1,161.09 1,221.68 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 929.73 New Mangalore 1,681.79 Kakinada 208.72 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 950.75 1,093.06 1,261.35 1,154.91 1,286.23 1,165.81 1,161.09 1,101.48 1,233.32 1,449.69 1,450.01 950.75 Mormugao 1,450.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -142.31 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 942.35 1,084.66 1,252.95 1,146.51 1,303.33 1,174.31 1,169.69 1,110.18 1,241.82 1,470.89 1,450.01 942.35 Mormugao 1,470.89 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 967.55 1,101.46 1,269.75 1,171.71 1,277.73 1,148.51 1,152.59 1,084.08 1,224.72 1,441.29 1,429.01 967.55 Mormugao 1,441.29 Kakinada -116.53 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 950.75 1,093.06 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,396.63 1,767.71 1,754.49 1,695.78 1,826.22 2,040.69 2,010.41 950.75 Mormugao 2,040.69 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 1,181.15 1,323.46 1,492.35 1,369.41 1,046.53 1,037.21 1,032.39 1,101.48 1,445.52 1,660.49 1,640.71 1,032.39 Ennore 1,660.49 Kakinada 148.76 0%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,138.45 1,280.76 1,423.95 1,241.01 929.73 1,157.21 1,161.09 1,221.68 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 929.73 New Mangalore 1,681.79 Kakinada 208.72 0%
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 1,138.45 1,280.76 1,449.65 1,326.71 1,004.23 1,079.21 1,074.39 1,144.68 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 1,004.23 New Mangalore 1,681.79 Kakinada 134.22 0%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 942.35 1,084.66 1,252.95 1,146.51 1,303.33 1,174.31 1,169.69 1,110.18 1,241.82 1,470.89 1,450.01 942.35 Mormugao 1,470.89 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 1,317.65 1,459.96 1,640.85 1,500.81 1,183.63 928.61 931.89 990.78 1,335.92 1,554.99 1,534.51 928.61 Chennai 1,640.85 Karwar 389.04 0%
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 809.65 951.96 1,110.95 1,012.91 1,226.43 1,408.31 1,395.09 1,336.58 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 809.65 Mormugao 1,681.79 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 1,181.15 1,323.46 1,492.35 1,369.41 1,046.53 1,037.21 1,032.39 1,101.48 1,445.52 1,660.49 1,640.71 1,032.39 Ennore 1,660.49 Kakinada 148.76 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 1,266.65 1,400.46 1,569.15 1,458.71 1,123.03 978.11 973.29 1,032.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 973.29 Ennore 1,596.99 Kakinada 293.36 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 1,275.25 1,408.96 1,577.55 1,479.81 1,459.63 1,268.41 1,272.29 1,204.58 1,182.02 1,398.69 1,387.01 1,182.02 Machilipatnam 1,577.55 Karwar 93.23 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,060.25 1,202.56 1,219.05 1,045.71 759.73 1,366.21 1,374.09 1,441.68 1,678.22 1,893.59 1,872.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,893.59 Kakinada 300.52 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,241.01 1,088.53 1,225.61 1,220.99 1,161.78 1,293.12 1,512.99 1,491.91 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,512.99 Kakinada -53.48 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudgal 975.95 1,109.86 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,354.33 1,302.61 1,297.89 1,238.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 975.95 Mormugao 1,596.99 Kakinada -133.91 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 975.95 1,109.86 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,354.33 1,302.61 1,297.89 1,238.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 975.95 Mormugao 1,596.99 Kakinada -133.91 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 793.45 927.46 1,119.45 1,012.91 1,234.93 1,598.41 1,606.49 1,526.18 1,657.02 1,872.39 1,872.71 793.45 Mormugao 1,872.71 Vizag/ Gangavaram -134.01 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Padubidri 1,009.85 1,143.76 1,169.45 987.81 759.73 1,429.31 1,416.09 1,483.58 1,720.52 1,935.69 1,914.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,935.69 Kakinada 250.12 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,241.01 1,088.53 1,225.61 1,220.99 1,161.78 1,293.12 1,512.99 1,491.91 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,512.99 Kakinada -53.48 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 1,266.65 1,400.46 1,569.15 1,458.71 1,123.03 978.11 973.29 1,032.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 973.29 Ennore 1,596.99 Kakinada 293.36 0%
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 1,164.05 1,306.36 1,475.25 1,369.41 1,375.53 1,157.21 1,152.59 1,092.78 1,224.72 1,441.29 1,429.01 1,092.78 Krishnapatnam 1,475.25 Karwar 71.27 0%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 950.75 1,093.06 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,396.63 1,767.71 1,754.49 1,695.78 1,826.22 2,040.69 2,010.41 950.75 Mormugao 2,040.69 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Goa South Goa Salcette 723.05 865.36 982.95 870.51 1,088.53 1,450.31 1,458.09 1,399.68 1,529.42 1,745.49 1,725.31 723.05 Mormugao 1,745.49 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 723.05 865.36 1,086.35 970.91 1,131.73 1,598.41 1,606.49 1,462.68 1,635.92 1,830.09 1,809.71 723.05 Mormugao 1,830.09 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 1,181.15 1,323.46 1,492.35 1,369.41 1,046.53 1,037.21 1,032.39 1,101.48 1,445.52 1,660.49 1,640.71 1,032.39 Ennore 1,660.49 Kakinada 148.76 0%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Goa South Goa South Goa 723.05 865.36 982.95 870.51 1,088.53 1,450.31 1,458.09 1,399.68 1,529.42 1,745.49 1,725.31 723.05 Mormugao 1,745.49 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 793.45 935.76 982.95 842.91 962.53 1,577.11 1,563.89 1,504.88 1,635.92 1,851.29 1,851.71 793.45 Mormugao 1,851.71 Vizag/ Gangavaram -49.46 60%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 993.05 1,135.36 1,303.35 1,197.51 1,243.53 1,122.41 1,117.89 1,057.98 1,190.52 1,407.29 1,408.01 993.05 Mormugao 1,408.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -64.93 100%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 809.65 951.96 1,110.95 1,012.91 1,226.43 1,408.31 1,395.09 1,336.58 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 809.65 Mormugao 1,681.79 Kakinada -142.31 100%
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-52 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton)
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 2,276.04 2,465.89 2,531.21 2,122.17 1,376.72 1,596.05 1,590.33 1,611.17 2,837.07 3,579.13 3,632.64 1,376.72 New Mangalore 3,632.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 899.31 0%
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 2,063.54 2,215.89 2,478.71 2,089.67 1,605.47 1,658.55 1,636.58 1,534.92 2,404.57 3,141.63 3,112.64 1,534.92 Krishnapatnam 3,141.63 Kakinada 528.61 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Baikampady 1,888.54 2,078.39 2,143.71 1,734.67 1,065.47 2,352.30 2,352.21 2,394.92 3,459.57 4,149.13 4,140.14 1,065.47 New Mangalore 4,149.13 Kakinada 823.06 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 2,023.54 2,170.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,544.92 Krishnapatnam 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 478.61 0%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 2,021.04 2,170.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,581.72 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,544.92 Krishnapatnam 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 476.11 0%
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 1,838.54 1,983.39 2,248.71 1,862.17 1,561.72 1,762.30 1,741.58 1,639.92 2,612.07 3,301.63 3,300.14 1,561.72 New Mangalore 3,301.63 Kakinada 276.81 0%
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 1,901.04 2,093.39 2,163.71 1,747.17 1,291.72 2,496.05 2,590.33 2,493.67 2,992.07 3,679.13 3,710.14 1,291.72 New Mangalore 3,710.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 609.31 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,753.54 1,943.39 1,998.71 1,599.67 1,131.72 2,421.68 2,487.21 2,398.67 3,362.07 4,051.63 4,052.64 1,131.72 New Mangalore 4,052.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 621.81 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,978.54 2,130.89 2,386.21 2,002.17 1,552.97 1,723.55 1,700.33 1,597.42 2,529.57 3,216.63 3,247.64 1,552.97 New Mangalore 3,247.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 425.56 0%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 2,021.04 2,170.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,544.92 Krishnapatnam 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 476.11 0%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigera 1,818.54 1,968.39 2,231.21 1,842.17 1,786.10 2,144.18 2,115.96 1,965.55 2,629.57 3,316.63 3,315.14 1,786.10 New Mangalore 3,316.63 Kakinada 32.44 5%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 2,046.04 2,198.39 2,458.71 2,069.67 1,566.72 1,677.30 1,655.33 1,552.42 2,442.07 3,126.63 3,127.64 1,552.42 Krishnapatnam 3,127.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 493.61 0%
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli 1,861.04 2,010.89 2,276.21 1,887.17 1,531.72 1,749.80 1,729.08 1,629.92 2,584.57 3,274.13 3,275.14 1,531.72 New Mangalore 3,275.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 329.31 0%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 2,238.54 2,428.39 2,493.71 2,084.67 1,266.72 2,026.05 2,091.58 2,087.42 3,072.07 3,814.13 3,877.64 1,266.72 New Mangalore 3,877.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 971.81 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 1,828.54 1,980.89 2,191.21 1,857.17 1,544.22 1,776.05 1,754.08 1,662.42 2,639.57 3,324.13 3,325.14 1,544.22 New Mangalore 3,325.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 284.31 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 1,793.54 1,943.39 2,206.21 1,817.17 1,556.72 1,786.05 1,765.33 1,662.42 2,657.07 3,346.63 3,347.64 1,556.72 New Mangalore 3,347.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 236.81 0%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 1,821.04 2,170.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,581.72 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,544.92 Krishnapatnam 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 276.11 0%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 1,861.04 2,010.89 2,276.21 1,887.17 1,531.72 1,749.80 1,729.08 1,629.92 2,584.57 3,274.13 3,275.14 1,531.72 New Mangalore 3,275.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 329.31 0%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 1,736.04 1,855.89 2,476.21 2,189.67 2,634.22 3,723.55 3,700.33 3,488.67 3,634.57 4,264.13 4,255.14 1,736.04 Mormugao 4,264.13 Kakinada -119.85 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,998.54 2,148.39 2,413.71 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,682.30 1,647.83 1,567.42 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,567.42 Krishnapatnam 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 431.11 0%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 2,238.54 2,428.39 2,493.71 2,084.67 1,266.72 2,026.05 2,091.58 2,087.42 3,072.07 3,814.13 3,877.64 1,266.72 New Mangalore 3,877.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 971.81 0%
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 2,258.54 2,438.39 2,501.21 2,092.17 1,364.22 1,613.55 1,654.08 1,613.67 2,844.57 3,584.13 3,647.64 1,364.22 New Mangalore 3,647.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 894.31 0%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 1,793.54 1,943.39 2,206.21 1,817.17 1,556.72 1,778.55 1,764.08 1,662.42 2,657.07 3,346.63 3,345.14 1,556.72 New Mangalore 3,346.63 Kakinada 236.81 0%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 2,656.04 2,805.89 2,941.21 2,552.17 1,576.72 1,354.80 1,425.33 1,401.17 2,522.07 3,261.63 3,327.64 1,354.80 Chennai 3,327.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,301.23 0%
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 1,386.04 1,498.39 1,961.21 1,619.67 1,586.72 2,036.05 2,027.83 1,924.92 3,182.07 3,806.63 3,802.64 1,386.04 Mormugao 3,806.63 Kakinada -112.35 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 2,428.54 2,585.89 2,686.21 2,277.17 1,404.22 1,556.05 1,595.33 1,577.42 2,809.57 3,551.63 3,617.64 1,404.22 New Mangalore 3,617.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,024.31 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 2,326.04 2,438.39 2,836.21 2,447.17 2,314.85 2,376.68 2,357.83 2,117.42 2,367.07 2,996.63 2,987.64 2,117.42 Krishnapatnam 2,996.63 Kakinada 208.61 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,913.54 2,103.39 2,171.21 1,762.17 1,069.22 2,341.05 2,406.58 2,379.92 3,464.57 4,154.13 4,155.14 1,069.22 New Mangalore 4,155.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 844.31 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 2,113.54 2,270.89 2,381.21 1,972.17 1,374.22 1,651.05 1,691.58 1,651.17 2,879.57 3,566.63 3,567.64 1,374.22 New Mangalore 3,567.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 739.31 0%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudgal 1,951.04 2,063.39 2,398.71 2,009.67 1,979.22 2,237.93 2,211.58 2,072.42 2,619.57 3,249.13 3,240.14 1,951.04 Mormugao 3,249.13 Kakinada -28.19 25%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 1,678.54 1,795.89 2,243.71 1,862.17 1,964.22 2,483.55 2,459.08 2,304.92 2,944.57 3,574.13 3,572.64 1,678.54 Mormugao 3,574.13 Kakinada -117.35 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 1,391.04 1,503.39 2,161.21 1,874.67 2,289.22 3,461.05 3,470.33 3,258.67 3,552.07 4,181.63 4,172.64 1,391.04 Mormugao 4,181.63 Kakinada -112.35 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Padubidri 1,841.04 1,955.89 1,988.71 1,579.67 1,094.22 2,434.80 2,475.96 2,387.42 3,347.07 4,024.13 4,022.64 1,094.22 New Mangalore 4,024.13 Kakinada 746.81 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 2,006.04 2,155.89 2,291.21 1,894.67 1,410.47 1,661.05 1,700.33 1,633.67 2,754.57 3,441.63 3,442.64 1,410.47 New Mangalore 3,442.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 595.56 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 2,476.04 2,633.39 2,766.21 2,367.17 1,482.97 1,449.80 1,517.83 1,498.67 2,729.57 3,471.63 3,537.64 1,449.80 Chennai 3,537.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,026.23 0%
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 2,223.54 2,340.89 2,636.21 2,247.17 2,101.10 2,110.43 2,085.96 1,864.30 2,339.57 2,969.13 2,970.14 1,864.30 Krishnapatnam 2,970.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 359.24 0%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 1,641.04 1,755.89 2,376.21 2,089.67 2,534.22 3,643.55 3,620.33 3,406.17 3,567.07 4,196.63 4,187.64 1,641.04 Mormugao 4,196.63 Kakinada -114.85 100%
Goa South Goa Salcette 1,108.54 1,280.89 1,698.71 1,412.17 1,856.72 3,231.05 3,260.33 3,006.17 3,349.57 4,039.13 4,102.64 1,108.54 Mormugao 4,102.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -172.35 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 1,326.04 1,440.89 1,966.21 1,687.17 2,219.22 3,361.05 3,372.83 3,158.67 3,502.07 4,119.13 4,110.14 1,326.04 Mormugao 4,119.13 Kakinada -114.85 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 2,198.54 2,355.89 2,488.71 2,092.17 1,419.22 1,564.80 1,604.08 1,563.67 2,744.57 3,486.63 3,547.64 1,419.22 New Mangalore 3,547.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 779.31 0%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 2,021.04 2,170.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,637.07 3,111.63 3,322.64 1,544.92 Krishnapatnam 3,322.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 476.11 0%
Goa South Goa South Goa 1,108.54 1,280.89 1,698.71 1,412.17 1,856.72 3,231.05 3,260.33 3,006.17 3,349.57 4,039.13 4,102.64 1,108.54 Mormugao 4,102.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -172.35 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 1,383.54 1,543.39 1,608.71 1,204.67 1,116.72 2,991.05 3,085.33 2,946.17 3,289.57 3,976.63 3,977.64 1,116.72 New Mangalore 3,977.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 266.81 0%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 1,951.04 2,100.89 2,363.71 1,974.67 1,549.22 1,703.55 1,682.83 1,579.92 2,494.57 3,181.63 3,182.64 1,549.22 New Mangalore 3,182.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 401.81 0%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,908.54 2,060.89 2,221.21 1,882.17 1,495.47 1,774.80 1,751.58 1,649.92 2,632.07 3,319.13 3,322.64 1,495.47 New Mangalore 3,322.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 413.06 0%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,988.54 2,140.89 2,403.71 2,014.67 1,565.47 1,688.55 1,666.58 1,563.67 2,459.57 3,149.13 3,150.14 1,563.67 Krishnapatnam 3,150.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 424.86 0%
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 1,611.04 1,728.39 2,176.21 1,794.67 1,639.22 2,006.05 1,984.08 1,882.42 2,984.57 3,614.13 3,612.64 1,611.04 Mormugao 3,614.13 Kakinada -28.19 25%
MPSEZL Final Report
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-53 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 1 (Rs/ton)
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,582.54 1,749.89 2,129.01 1,797.07 1,401.12 1,474.05 1,477.63 1,551.67 1,897.07 2,300.93 2,080.44 1,401.12 New Mangalore 2,300.93 Kakinada 181.41 0%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 1,411.54 1,570.49 1,949.01 1,633.57 1,776.42 1,705.85 1,701.13 1,654.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,411.54 Mormugao 2,216.13 Kakinada -158.95 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 1,702.24 1,861.09 2,240.01 1,920.57 1,545.12 1,381.35 1,376.53 1,448.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,376.53 Ennore 2,240.01 Karwar 325.70 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,495.84 1,663.19 1,889.91 1,507.57 1,181.82 1,769.45 1,777.33 1,857.17 2,108.77 2,512.73 2,291.34 1,181.82 New Mangalore 2,512.73 Kakinada 314.01 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 1,262.04 1,429.39 1,807.11 1,491.27 1,665.62 1,688.75 1,692.63 1,645.67 1,791.77 2,195.13 1,974.44 1,262.04 Mormugao 2,195.13 Kakinada -167.35 100%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigera 1,386.34 1,553.69 1,932.21 1,616.77 1,708.32 1,569.05 1,564.33 1,516.97 1,663.87 2,068.83 1,868.64 1,386.34 Mormugao 2,068.83 Kakinada -130.64 100%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigere 1,386.34 1,553.69 1,932.21 1,616.77 1,708.32 1,569.05 1,564.33 1,516.97 1,663.87 2,068.83 1,868.64 1,386.34 Mormugao 2,068.83 Kakinada -130.64 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,574.04 1,741.39 2,094.81 1,702.87 1,351.82 1,560.45 1,564.33 1,637.17 1,897.07 2,300.93 2,080.44 1,351.82 New Mangalore 2,300.93 Kakinada 222.21 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 1,386.34 1,553.69 1,932.21 1,616.77 1,708.32 1,569.05 1,564.33 1,516.97 1,663.87 2,068.83 1,868.64 1,386.34 Mormugao 2,068.83 Kakinada -130.64 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 1,377.94 1,545.29 1,923.81 1,608.37 1,725.42 1,577.55 1,572.93 1,525.67 1,672.37 2,090.03 1,868.64 1,377.94 Mormugao 2,090.03 Kakinada -147.74 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 1,403.14 1,562.09 1,940.61 1,633.57 1,699.82 1,551.75 1,555.83 1,499.57 1,655.27 2,060.43 1,847.64 1,403.14 Mormugao 2,060.43 Kakinada -96.44 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,574.04 1,741.39 2,094.81 1,702.87 1,351.82 1,560.45 1,564.33 1,637.17 1,897.07 2,300.93 2,080.44 1,351.82 New Mangalore 2,300.93 Kakinada 222.21 0%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 1,377.94 1,545.29 1,923.81 1,608.37 1,725.42 1,577.55 1,572.93 1,525.67 1,672.37 2,090.03 1,868.64 1,377.94 Mormugao 2,090.03 Kakinada -147.74 100%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 1,753.24 1,920.59 2,311.71 1,962.67 1,605.72 1,331.85 1,335.13 1,406.27 1,766.47 2,174.13 1,953.14 1,331.85 Chennai 2,311.71 Karwar 421.38 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 1,702.24 1,861.09 2,240.01 1,920.57 1,545.12 1,381.35 1,376.53 1,448.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,376.53 Ennore 2,240.01 Karwar 325.70 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,495.84 1,663.19 1,889.91 1,507.57 1,181.82 1,769.45 1,777.33 1,857.17 2,108.77 2,512.73 2,291.34 1,181.82 New Mangalore 2,512.73 Kakinada 314.01 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 1,702.24 1,861.09 2,240.01 1,920.57 1,545.12 1,381.35 1,376.53 1,448.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,376.53 Ennore 2,240.01 Karwar 325.70 0%
Goa South Goa Salcette 1,158.64 1,325.99 1,653.81 1,332.37 1,510.62 1,853.55 1,861.33 1,815.17 1,959.97 2,364.63 2,143.94 1,158.64 Mormugao 2,364.63 Kakinada -167.35 100%
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Goa South Goa South Goa 1,158.64 1,325.99 1,653.81 1,332.37 1,510.62 1,853.55 1,861.33 1,815.17 1,959.97 2,364.63 2,143.94 1,158.64 Mormugao 2,364.63 Kakinada -167.35 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 1,229.04 1,396.39 1,653.81 1,304.77 1,384.62 1,980.35 1,967.13 1,920.37 2,066.47 2,470.43 2,270.34 1,229.04 Mormugao 2,470.43 Kakinada -75.74 100%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 1,428.64 1,595.99 1,974.21 1,659.37 1,665.62 1,525.65 1,521.13 1,473.47 1,621.07 2,026.43 1,826.64 1,428.64 Mormugao 2,026.43 Kakinada -44.84 60%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-54 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton)
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,529.82 1,689.01 1,860.35 1,660.31 954.63 1,192.81 1,187.09 1,195.68 2,406.52 2,959.99 3,214.01 954.63 New Mangalore 3,214.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 575.19 0%
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 1,112.95 1,247.76 1,807.85 1,627.81 1,183.38 1,255.31 1,233.34 1,119.43 1,974.02 2,522.49 2,694.01 1,112.95 Mormugao 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -6.48 25%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 940.45 1,055.26 1,555.35 1,375.31 1,515.88 1,982.81 1,956.46 1,793.80 2,409.02 2,849.99 3,054.01 940.45 Mormugao 3,054.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -114.81 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Baikampady 1,452.95 1,617.76 1,472.85 1,272.81 643.38 1,949.06 1,948.96 1,979.43 3,029.02 3,529.99 3,721.51 643.38 New Mangalore 3,721.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 809.57 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 1,092.95 1,225.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,092.95 Mormugao 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -36.48 60%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 1,091.70 1,225.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,159.63 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,091.70 Mormugao 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -37.73 60%
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 1,000.45 1,131.51 1,577.85 1,400.31 1,139.63 1,359.06 1,338.34 1,224.43 2,181.52 2,682.49 2,881.51 1,000.45 Mormugao 2,881.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -131.06 100%
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 1,248.57 1,409.63 1,492.85 1,285.31 869.63 2,092.81 2,187.09 2,078.18 2,561.52 3,059.99 3,291.51 869.63 New Mangalore 3,291.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 378.94 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,317.95 1,482.76 1,327.85 1,137.81 709.63 2,018.43 2,083.96 1,983.18 2,931.52 3,432.49 3,634.01 709.63 New Mangalore 3,634.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 608.32 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,070.45 1,205.26 1,715.35 1,540.31 1,130.88 1,320.31 1,297.09 1,181.93 2,099.02 2,597.49 2,829.01 1,070.45 Mormugao 2,829.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -60.43 100%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 1,091.70 1,225.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,091.70 Mormugao 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -37.73 60%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 804.20 941.51 1,250.35 1,070.31 1,311.50 1,994.06 1,988.34 1,821.93 2,561.52 3,062.49 3,264.01 804.20 Mormugao 3,264.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -137.31 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 1,518.57 1,615.88 2,092.85 1,912.81 1,874.00 2,029.68 2,003.34 1,767.55 2,034.02 2,474.99 2,679.01 1,518.57 Mormugao 2,679.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -97.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,104.20 1,239.01 1,787.85 1,607.81 1,144.63 1,274.06 1,252.09 1,136.93 2,011.52 2,507.49 2,709.01 1,104.20 Mormugao 2,709.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -32.73 60%
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli 1,011.70 1,145.26 1,605.35 1,425.31 1,109.63 1,346.56 1,325.84 1,214.43 2,154.02 2,654.99 2,856.51 1,011.70 Mormugao 2,856.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -97.93 100%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,802.95 1,967.76 1,822.85 1,622.81 844.63 1,622.81 1,688.34 1,671.93 2,641.52 3,194.99 3,459.01 844.63 New Mangalore 3,459.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 958.32 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 977.95 1,111.51 1,535.35 1,355.31 1,134.63 1,382.81 1,362.09 1,246.93 2,226.52 2,727.49 2,929.01 977.95 Mormugao 2,929.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -133.56 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 991.70 1,225.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,159.63 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 991.70 Mormugao 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -137.73 100%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 1,011.70 1,145.26 1,605.35 1,425.31 1,109.63 1,346.56 1,325.84 1,214.43 2,154.02 2,654.99 2,856.51 1,011.70 Mormugao 2,856.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -97.93 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 1,300.45 1,395.26 1,805.35 1,727.81 2,212.13 3,320.31 3,297.09 3,073.18 3,204.02 3,644.99 3,836.51 1,300.45 Mormugao 3,836.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -94.81 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,080.45 1,214.01 1,742.85 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,279.06 1,244.59 1,151.93 1,991.52 2,492.49 2,694.01 1,080.45 Mormugao 2,694.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -71.48 100%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,802.95 1,967.76 1,822.85 1,622.81 844.63 1,622.81 1,688.34 1,671.93 2,641.52 3,194.99 3,459.01 844.63 New Mangalore 3,459.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 958.32 0%
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 1,516.70 1,668.38 1,830.35 1,630.31 942.13 1,210.31 1,250.84 1,198.18 2,414.02 2,964.99 3,229.01 942.13 New Mangalore 3,229.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 574.57 0%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 977.95 1,111.51 1,535.35 1,355.31 1,134.63 1,375.31 1,360.84 1,246.93 2,226.52 2,727.49 2,926.51 977.95 Mormugao 2,926.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -133.56 100%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 2,220.45 2,345.26 2,270.35 2,090.31 1,154.63 951.56 1,022.09 985.68 2,091.52 2,642.49 2,909.01 951.56 Chennai 2,909.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,268.89 0%
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 774.20 889.01 1,290.35 1,157.81 1,164.63 1,632.81 1,624.59 1,509.43 2,751.52 3,187.49 3,384.01 774.20 Mormugao 3,384.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -114.81 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 1,644.20 1,779.01 2,015.35 1,815.31 982.13 1,152.81 1,192.09 1,161.93 2,379.02 2,932.49 3,199.01 982.13 New Mangalore 3,199.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 662.07 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 1,567.32 1,668.38 2,165.35 1,985.31 1,892.75 1,973.43 1,954.59 1,701.93 1,936.52 2,377.49 2,569.01 1,567.32 Mormugao 2,569.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -101.06 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,477.95 1,642.76 1,500.35 1,300.31 647.13 1,937.81 2,003.34 1,964.43 3,034.02 3,534.99 3,736.51 647.13 New Mangalore 3,736.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram 830.82 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 1,137.95 1,275.26 1,710.35 1,510.31 952.13 1,247.81 1,288.34 1,235.68 2,449.02 2,947.49 3,149.01 952.13 New Mangalore 3,149.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 185.82 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 1,563.57 1,660.88 2,152.85 1,972.81 1,881.50 1,988.43 1,960.21 1,718.80 1,959.02 2,399.99 2,604.01 1,563.57 Mormugao 2,604.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -97.31 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudgal 1,056.70 1,171.51 1,727.85 1,547.81 1,557.13 1,834.68 1,808.34 1,656.93 2,189.02 2,629.99 2,821.51 1,056.70 Mormugao 2,821.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -114.81 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 920.45 1,037.76 1,572.85 1,400.31 1,542.13 2,080.31 2,055.84 1,889.43 2,514.02 2,954.99 3,154.01 920.45 Mormugao 3,154.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -117.31 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 955.45 1,042.76 1,490.35 1,412.81 1,867.13 3,057.81 3,067.09 2,843.18 3,121.52 3,562.49 3,754.01 955.45 Mormugao 3,754.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -87.31 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Padubidri 1,405.45 1,495.26 1,317.85 1,117.81 672.13 2,031.56 2,072.71 1,971.93 2,916.52 3,404.99 3,604.01 672.13 New Mangalore 3,604.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 733.32 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 1,084.20 1,217.76 1,620.35 1,432.81 988.38 1,257.81 1,297.09 1,218.18 2,324.02 2,822.49 3,024.01 988.38 New Mangalore 3,024.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 95.82 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 2,040.45 2,172.76 2,095.35 1,905.31 1,060.88 1,046.56 1,114.59 1,083.18 2,299.02 2,852.49 3,119.01 1,046.56 Chennai 3,119.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 993.89 0%
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 1,192.95 1,310.26 1,965.35 1,785.31 1,679.00 1,707.18 1,682.71 1,448.80 1,909.02 2,349.99 2,551.51 1,192.95 Mormugao 2,551.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -117.31 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 1,205.45 1,295.26 1,705.35 1,627.81 2,112.13 3,240.31 3,217.09 2,990.68 3,136.52 3,577.49 3,769.01 1,205.45 Mormugao 3,769.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -89.81 100%
Goa South Goa Salcette 672.95 820.26 1,027.85 950.31 1,434.63 2,827.81 2,857.09 2,590.68 2,919.02 3,419.99 3,684.01 672.95 Mormugao 3,684.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -147.31 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 1,587.95 1,689.01 2,157.85 1,975.31 1,879.63 1,939.68 1,917.09 1,673.80 1,899.02 2,334.99 2,544.01 1,587.95 Mormugao 2,544.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -85.86 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 890.45 980.26 1,295.35 1,225.31 1,797.13 2,957.81 2,969.59 2,743.18 3,071.52 3,499.99 3,691.51 890.45 Mormugao 3,691.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -89.81 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 1,471.70 1,606.51 1,817.85 1,630.31 997.13 1,161.56 1,200.84 1,148.18 2,314.02 2,867.49 3,129.01 997.13 New Mangalore 3,129.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 474.57 0%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 1,091.70 1,225.26 1,765.35 1,585.31 1,160.88 1,265.31 1,244.59 1,129.43 2,206.52 2,492.49 2,904.01 1,091.70 Mormugao 2,904.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -37.73 60%
Goa South Goa South Goa 672.95 820.26 1,027.85 950.31 1,434.63 2,827.81 2,857.09 2,590.68 2,919.02 3,419.99 3,684.01 672.95 Mormugao 3,684.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -147.31 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 947.95 1,082.76 937.85 742.81 694.63 2,587.81 2,682.09 2,530.68 2,859.02 3,357.49 3,559.01 694.63 New Mangalore 3,559.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram 253.32 0%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 1,056.70 1,190.26 1,692.85 1,512.81 1,127.13 1,300.31 1,279.59 1,164.43 2,064.02 2,562.49 2,764.01 1,056.70 Mormugao 2,764.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -70.43 100%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,035.45 1,170.26 1,550.35 1,420.31 1,073.38 1,371.56 1,348.34 1,234.43 2,201.52 2,699.99 2,904.01 1,035.45 Mormugao 2,904.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -37.93 60%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,075.45 1,210.26 1,732.85 1,552.81 1,143.38 1,285.31 1,263.34 1,148.18 2,029.02 2,529.99 2,731.51 1,075.45 Mormugao 2,731.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -67.93 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 1,512.95 1,614.01 2,105.35 1,925.31 1,840.25 1,994.06 1,969.59 1,731.93 2,004.02 2,444.99 2,646.51 1,512.95 Mormugao 2,646.51 Vizag/ Gangavaram -101.06 100%
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 886.70 1,004.01 1,505.35 1,332.81 1,217.13 1,602.81 1,580.84 1,466.93 2,554.02 2,994.99 3,194.01 886.70 Mormugao 3,194.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -117.31 100%
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-55 Integrated Logistics Cost for Thermal Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton)
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,146.95 1,289.26 1,458.15 1,335.21 979.03 1,070.81 1,074.39 1,136.18 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 979.03 New Mangalore 1,681.79 Kakinada 167.92 0%
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 975.95 1,109.86 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,354.33 1,302.61 1,297.89 1,238.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 975.95 Mormugao 1,596.99 Kakinada -133.91 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Baikampady 1,035.05 1,177.36 1,193.85 1,021.11 759.73 1,387.31 1,395.09 1,462.68 1,699.32 1,914.69 1,893.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,914.69 Kakinada 275.32 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 1,266.65 1,400.46 1,569.15 1,458.71 1,123.03 978.11 973.29 1,032.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 973.29 Ennore 1,596.99 Kakinada 293.36 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,060.25 1,202.56 1,219.05 1,045.71 759.73 1,366.21 1,374.09 1,441.68 1,678.22 1,893.59 1,872.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,893.59 Kakinada 300.52 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 826.45 968.76 1,136.25 1,029.41 1,243.53 1,285.51 1,289.39 1,230.18 1,361.22 1,575.99 1,555.81 826.45 Mormugao 1,575.99 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigere 950.75 1,093.06 1,261.35 1,154.91 1,286.23 1,165.81 1,161.09 1,101.48 1,233.32 1,449.69 1,450.01 950.75 Mormugao 1,450.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,138.45 1,280.76 1,423.95 1,241.01 929.73 1,157.21 1,161.09 1,221.68 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 929.73 New Mangalore 1,681.79 Kakinada 208.72 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 942.35 1,084.66 1,252.95 1,146.51 1,303.33 1,174.31 1,169.69 1,110.18 1,241.82 1,470.89 1,450.01 942.35 Mormugao 1,470.89 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 967.55 1,101.46 1,269.75 1,171.71 1,277.73 1,148.51 1,152.59 1,084.08 1,224.72 1,441.29 1,429.01 967.55 Mormugao 1,441.29 Kakinada -116.53 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 950.75 1,093.06 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,396.63 1,767.71 1,754.49 1,695.78 1,826.22 2,040.69 2,010.41 950.75 Mormugao 2,040.69 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,138.45 1,280.76 1,423.95 1,241.01 929.73 1,157.21 1,161.09 1,221.68 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 929.73 New Mangalore 1,681.79 Kakinada 208.72 0%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 942.35 1,084.66 1,252.95 1,146.51 1,303.33 1,174.31 1,169.69 1,110.18 1,241.82 1,470.89 1,450.01 942.35 Mormugao 1,470.89 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 1,317.65 1,459.96 1,640.85 1,500.81 1,183.63 928.61 931.89 990.78 1,335.92 1,554.99 1,534.51 928.61 Chennai 1,640.85 Karwar 389.04 0%
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 809.65 951.96 1,110.95 1,012.91 1,226.43 1,408.31 1,395.09 1,336.58 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 809.65 Mormugao 1,681.79 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 1,266.65 1,400.46 1,569.15 1,458.71 1,123.03 978.11 973.29 1,032.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 973.29 Ennore 1,596.99 Kakinada 293.36 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,060.25 1,202.56 1,219.05 1,045.71 759.73 1,366.21 1,374.09 1,441.68 1,678.22 1,893.59 1,872.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,893.59 Kakinada 300.52 0%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudgal 975.95 1,109.86 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,354.33 1,302.61 1,297.89 1,238.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 975.95 Mormugao 1,596.99 Kakinada -133.91 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 975.95 1,109.86 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,354.33 1,302.61 1,297.89 1,238.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 975.95 Mormugao 1,596.99 Kakinada -133.91 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 793.45 927.46 1,119.45 1,012.91 1,234.93 1,598.41 1,606.49 1,526.18 1,657.02 1,872.39 1,872.71 793.45 Mormugao 1,872.71 Vizag/ Gangavaram -134.01 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Padubidri 1,009.85 1,143.76 1,169.45 987.81 759.73 1,429.31 1,416.09 1,483.58 1,720.52 1,935.69 1,914.71 759.73 New Mangalore 1,935.69 Kakinada 250.12 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 1,266.65 1,400.46 1,569.15 1,458.71 1,123.03 978.11 973.29 1,032.78 1,382.42 1,596.99 1,577.11 973.29 Ennore 1,596.99 Kakinada 293.36 0%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 950.75 1,093.06 1,278.15 1,171.71 1,396.63 1,767.71 1,754.49 1,695.78 1,826.22 2,040.69 2,010.41 950.75 Mormugao 2,040.69 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Goa South Goa Salcette 723.05 865.36 982.95 870.51 1,088.53 1,450.31 1,458.09 1,399.68 1,529.42 1,745.49 1,725.31 723.05 Mormugao 1,745.49 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 723.05 865.36 1,086.35 970.91 1,131.73 1,598.41 1,606.49 1,462.68 1,635.92 1,830.09 1,809.71 723.05 Mormugao 1,830.09 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Goa South Goa South Goa 723.05 865.36 982.95 870.51 1,088.53 1,450.31 1,458.09 1,399.68 1,529.42 1,745.49 1,725.31 723.05 Mormugao 1,745.49 Kakinada -142.31 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 793.45 935.76 982.95 842.91 962.53 1,577.11 1,563.89 1,504.88 1,635.92 1,851.29 1,851.71 793.45 Mormugao 1,851.71 Vizag/ Gangavaram -49.46 60%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 993.05 1,135.36 1,303.35 1,197.51 1,243.53 1,122.41 1,117.89 1,057.98 1,190.52 1,407.29 1,408.01 993.05 Mormugao 1,408.01 Vizag/ Gangavaram -64.93 100%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,035.05 1,168.96 1,337.55 1,232.31 1,234.93 1,105.01 1,100.49 1,041.18 1,173.42 1,390.19 1,387.01 1,035.05 Mormugao 1,390.19 Kakinada -6.13 25%
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 809.65 951.96 1,110.95 1,012.91 1,226.43 1,408.31 1,395.09 1,336.58 1,466.52 1,681.79 1,661.81 809.65 Mormugao 1,681.79 Kakinada -142.31 100%
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-56 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Road Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton)
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,965.41 2,149.64 2,531.21 2,122.17 1,376.72 1,596.05 1,590.33 1,611.17 2,837.07 3,579.13 3,632.64 1,376.72 New Mangalore 3,632.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 588.69 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 1,528.54 1,685.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,528.54 Mormugao 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -16.39 25%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 1,527.29 1,685.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,581.72 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,527.29 Mormugao 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -17.64 25%
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 1,436.04 1,592.14 2,248.71 1,862.17 1,561.72 1,762.30 1,741.58 1,639.92 2,612.07 3,301.63 3,300.14 1,436.04 Mormugao 3,301.63 Kakinada -125.69 100%
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 1,684.16 1,870.26 2,163.71 1,747.17 1,291.72 2,496.05 2,590.33 2,493.67 2,992.07 3,679.13 3,710.14 1,291.72 New Mangalore 3,710.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 392.44 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,753.54 1,943.39 1,998.71 1,599.67 1,131.72 2,421.68 2,487.21 2,398.67 3,362.07 4,051.63 4,052.64 1,131.72 New Mangalore 4,052.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 621.81 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,506.04 1,665.89 2,386.21 2,002.17 1,552.97 1,723.55 1,700.33 1,597.42 2,529.57 3,216.63 3,247.64 1,506.04 Mormugao 3,247.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -46.94 60%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 1,527.29 1,685.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,527.29 Mormugao 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -17.64 25%
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 1,954.16 2,076.51 2,763.71 2,374.67 2,296.10 2,432.93 2,406.58 2,183.05 2,464.57 3,094.13 3,097.64 1,954.16 Mormugao 3,097.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -122.35 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,539.79 1,699.64 2,458.71 2,069.67 1,566.72 1,677.30 1,655.33 1,552.42 2,442.07 3,126.63 3,127.64 1,539.79 Mormugao 3,127.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -12.64 25%
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli 1,447.29 1,605.89 2,276.21 1,887.17 1,531.72 1,749.80 1,729.08 1,629.92 2,584.57 3,274.13 3,275.14 1,447.29 Mormugao 3,275.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram -84.44 100%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 2,238.54 2,428.39 2,493.71 2,084.67 1,266.72 2,026.05 2,091.58 2,087.42 3,072.07 3,814.13 3,877.64 1,266.72 New Mangalore 3,877.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 971.81 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 1,431.04 1,590.89 2,191.21 1,857.17 1,544.22 1,776.05 1,754.08 1,662.42 2,639.57 3,324.13 3,325.14 1,431.04 Mormugao 3,325.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram -113.19 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 1,413.54 1,572.14 2,206.21 1,817.17 1,556.72 1,786.05 1,765.33 1,662.42 2,657.07 3,346.63 3,347.64 1,413.54 Mormugao 3,347.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -143.19 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 1,427.29 1,685.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,581.72 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,427.29 Mormugao 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -117.64 100%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 1,447.29 1,605.89 2,276.21 1,887.17 1,531.72 1,749.80 1,729.08 1,629.92 2,584.57 3,274.13 3,275.14 1,447.29 Mormugao 3,275.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram -84.44 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,516.04 1,674.64 2,413.71 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,682.30 1,647.83 1,567.42 2,422.07 3,111.63 3,112.64 1,516.04 Mormugao 3,112.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -51.39 100%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 2,238.54 2,428.39 2,493.71 2,084.67 1,266.72 2,026.05 2,091.58 2,087.42 3,072.07 3,814.13 3,877.64 1,266.72 New Mangalore 3,877.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 971.81 0%
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 1,952.29 2,129.01 2,501.21 2,092.17 1,364.22 1,613.55 1,654.08 1,613.67 2,844.57 3,584.13 3,647.64 1,364.22 New Mangalore 3,647.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 588.06 0%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 2,656.04 2,805.89 2,941.21 2,552.17 1,576.72 1,354.80 1,425.33 1,401.17 2,522.07 3,261.63 3,327.64 1,354.80 Chennai 3,327.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,301.23 0%
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 2,079.79 2,239.64 2,686.21 2,277.17 1,404.22 1,556.05 1,595.33 1,577.42 2,809.57 3,551.63 3,617.64 1,404.22 New Mangalore 3,617.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 675.56 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 2,002.91 2,129.01 2,836.21 2,447.17 2,314.85 2,376.68 2,357.83 2,117.42 2,367.07 2,996.63 2,987.64 2,002.91 Mormugao 2,996.63 Kakinada -114.51 100%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,913.54 2,103.39 2,171.21 1,762.17 1,069.22 2,341.05 2,406.58 2,379.92 3,464.57 4,154.13 4,155.14 1,069.22 New Mangalore 4,155.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram 844.31 0%
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 1,573.54 1,735.89 2,381.21 1,972.17 1,374.22 1,651.05 1,691.58 1,651.17 2,879.57 3,566.63 3,567.64 1,374.22 New Mangalore 3,567.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 199.31 0%
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 1,999.16 2,121.51 2,823.71 2,434.67 2,303.60 2,391.68 2,363.46 2,134.30 2,389.57 3,019.13 3,022.64 1,999.16 Mormugao 3,022.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -122.35 100%
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 1,519.79 1,678.39 2,291.21 1,894.67 1,410.47 1,661.05 1,700.33 1,633.67 2,754.57 3,441.63 3,442.64 1,410.47 New Mangalore 3,442.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 109.31 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 2,476.04 2,633.39 2,766.21 2,367.17 1,482.97 1,449.80 1,517.83 1,498.67 2,729.57 3,471.63 3,537.64 1,449.80 Chennai 3,537.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 1,026.23 0%
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 1,628.54 1,770.89 2,636.21 2,247.17 2,101.10 2,110.43 2,085.96 1,864.30 2,339.57 2,969.13 2,970.14 1,628.54 Mormugao 2,970.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram -142.35 100%
Goa South Goa Salcette 1,108.54 1,280.89 1,698.71 1,412.17 1,856.72 3,231.05 3,260.33 3,006.17 3,349.57 4,039.13 4,102.64 1,108.54 Mormugao 4,102.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -172.35 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 2,023.54 2,149.64 2,828.71 2,437.17 2,301.72 2,342.93 2,320.33 2,089.30 2,329.57 2,954.13 2,962.64 2,023.54 Mormugao 2,962.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -65.76 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 1,907.29 2,067.14 2,488.71 2,092.17 1,419.22 1,564.80 1,604.08 1,563.67 2,744.57 3,486.63 3,547.64 1,419.22 New Mangalore 3,547.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 488.06 0%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 1,527.29 1,685.89 2,436.21 2,047.17 1,582.97 1,668.55 1,647.83 1,544.92 2,637.07 3,111.63 3,322.64 1,527.29 Mormugao 3,322.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -17.64 25%
Goa South Goa South Goa 1,108.54 1,280.89 1,698.71 1,412.17 1,856.72 3,231.05 3,260.33 3,006.17 3,349.57 4,039.13 4,102.64 1,108.54 Mormugao 4,102.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -172.35 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 1,383.54 1,543.39 1,608.71 1,204.67 1,116.72 2,991.05 3,085.33 2,946.17 3,289.57 3,976.63 3,977.64 1,116.72 New Mangalore 3,977.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram 266.81 0%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 1,492.29 1,650.89 2,363.71 1,974.67 1,549.22 1,703.55 1,682.83 1,579.92 2,494.57 3,181.63 3,182.64 1,492.29 Mormugao 3,182.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -56.94 100%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,471.04 1,630.89 2,221.21 1,882.17 1,495.47 1,774.80 1,751.58 1,649.92 2,632.07 3,319.13 3,322.64 1,471.04 Mormugao 3,322.64 Vizag/ Gangavaram -24.44 25%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,511.04 1,670.89 2,403.71 2,014.67 1,565.47 1,688.55 1,666.58 1,563.67 2,459.57 3,149.13 3,150.14 1,511.04 Mormugao 3,150.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram -52.64 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 1,948.54 2,074.64 2,776.21 2,387.17 2,262.35 2,397.30 2,372.83 2,147.42 2,434.57 3,064.13 3,065.14 1,948.54 Mormugao 3,065.14 Vizag/ Gangavaram -126.10 100%
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 9-57 Integrated Logistics Cost for Coking Coal, Rail Evacuation - Scenario 2 (Rs/ton)
Min. Max. Mormugao Mormugao
State District Location Mormug New Krishnap Machilip Vizag/ Cheapest Port Costliest Port
Cost Cost Disadvntg Share
ao Panjim Karwar Belekeri Mangalore Chennai Ennore atnam atnam Kakinada Gangavaram
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,582.54 1,749.89 2,129.01 1,797.07 1,401.12 1,474.05 1,477.63 1,551.67 1,897.07 2,300.93 2,080.44 1,401.12 New Mangalore 2,300.93 Kakinada 181.41 0%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 1,411.54 1,570.49 1,949.01 1,633.57 1,776.42 1,705.85 1,701.13 1,654.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,411.54 Mormugao 2,216.13 Kakinada -158.95 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 1,702.24 1,861.09 2,240.01 1,920.57 1,545.12 1,381.35 1,376.53 1,448.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,376.53 Ennore 2,240.01 Karwar 325.70 0%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Brahmavar 1,495.84 1,663.19 1,889.91 1,507.57 1,181.82 1,769.45 1,777.33 1,857.17 2,108.77 2,512.73 2,291.34 1,181.82 New Mangalore 2,512.73 Kakinada 314.01 0%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 1,262.04 1,429.39 1,807.11 1,491.27 1,665.62 1,688.75 1,692.63 1,645.67 1,791.77 2,195.13 1,974.44 1,262.04 Mormugao 2,195.13 Kakinada -167.35 100%
Karnataka Koppal Ginigere 1,386.34 1,553.69 1,932.21 1,616.77 1,708.32 1,569.05 1,564.33 1,516.97 1,663.87 2,068.83 1,868.64 1,386.34 Mormugao 2,068.83 Kakinada -130.64 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,574.04 1,741.39 2,094.81 1,702.87 1,351.82 1,560.45 1,564.33 1,637.17 1,897.07 2,300.93 2,080.44 1,351.82 New Mangalore 2,300.93 Kakinada 222.21 0%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 1,386.34 1,553.69 1,932.21 1,616.77 1,708.32 1,569.05 1,564.33 1,516.97 1,663.87 2,068.83 1,868.64 1,386.34 Mormugao 2,068.83 Kakinada -130.64 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 1,377.94 1,545.29 1,923.81 1,608.37 1,725.42 1,577.55 1,572.93 1,525.67 1,672.37 2,090.03 1,868.64 1,377.94 Mormugao 2,090.03 Kakinada -147.74 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 1,403.14 1,562.09 1,940.61 1,633.57 1,699.82 1,551.75 1,555.83 1,499.57 1,655.27 2,060.43 1,847.64 1,403.14 Mormugao 2,060.43 Kakinada -96.44 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,574.04 1,741.39 2,094.81 1,702.87 1,351.82 1,560.45 1,564.33 1,637.17 1,897.07 2,300.93 2,080.44 1,351.82 New Mangalore 2,300.93 Kakinada 222.21 0%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 1,753.24 1,920.59 2,311.71 1,962.67 1,605.72 1,331.85 1,335.13 1,406.27 1,766.47 2,174.13 1,953.14 1,331.85 Chennai 2,311.71 Karwar 421.38 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 1,702.24 1,861.09 2,240.01 1,920.57 1,545.12 1,381.35 1,376.53 1,448.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,376.53 Ennore 2,240.01 Karwar 325.70 0%
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada Mangalore 1,495.84 1,663.19 1,889.91 1,507.57 1,181.82 1,769.45 1,777.33 1,857.17 2,108.77 2,512.73 2,291.34 1,181.82 New Mangalore 2,512.73 Kakinada 314.01 0%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 1,702.24 1,861.09 2,240.01 1,920.57 1,545.12 1,381.35 1,376.53 1,448.27 1,812.97 2,216.13 1,995.74 1,376.53 Ennore 2,240.01 Karwar 325.70 0%
Goa South Goa Salcette 1,158.64 1,325.99 1,653.81 1,332.37 1,510.62 1,853.55 1,861.33 1,815.17 1,959.97 2,364.63 2,143.94 1,158.64 Mormugao 2,364.63 Kakinada -167.35 100%
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Goa South Goa South Goa 1,158.64 1,325.99 1,653.81 1,332.37 1,510.62 1,853.55 1,861.33 1,815.17 1,959.97 2,364.63 2,143.94 1,158.64 Mormugao 2,364.63 Kakinada -167.35 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 1,229.04 1,396.39 1,653.81 1,304.77 1,384.62 1,980.35 1,967.13 1,920.37 2,066.47 2,470.43 2,270.34 1,229.04 Mormugao 2,470.43 Kakinada -75.74 100%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 1,428.64 1,595.99 1,974.21 1,659.37 1,665.62 1,525.65 1,521.13 1,473.47 1,621.07 2,026.43 1,826.64 1,428.64 Mormugao 2,026.43 Kakinada -44.84 60%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 1,470.64 1,629.59 2,008.41 1,694.17 1,657.02 1,508.25 1,503.73 1,456.67 1,603.97 2,009.33 1,805.64 1,456.67 Krishnapatnam 2,009.33 Kakinada 13.96 25%
MPSEZL Final Report
10. TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
The Integrated Logistics Costs for all possible OD routes have been calculated and analyzed in previous
section. These costs were used in conjunction with a decision matrix, shown in Table 10-1, to project
traffic at Berth 7, Mormugao Port under both the scenarios.
Table 10-1 Decision Matrix for Traffic Projections
Berth No 7 - Min (Other ports) Berth No 7 Advantage/

Comments
Disadvantage
From To Base Case
-500 -100 100% Absolute
Absolute
-100 -90 100% Control over
Advantage
-90 -80 100% the traffic,
-80 -70 100% genuine
Sustained logisitics
-70 -60 100%
Advantage advanatge,
-60 -50 100%
share can
-50 -40 60%
Gaining Ground drop only by
-40 -30 60%
poor
-30 -20 25%
-20 -10 25% Optimal Traffic Dynamic
-10 0 25% Distribution Traffic, Based
0 10 25% between Chief on
10 20 25% Competitors Competition
20 30 25%
30 40 5% Expected to
40 50 5% Loosing Ground get only
50 60 5% spillover,
60 70 0% Sustained occasional
70 80 0% Disdvantage and need
80 90 0% based cargo,
Absolute share can
90 100 0%
Disadvantage increase by
100 500 0%
providing other
Here the following points about the decision matrix may be noted:
1. Primary surveys with potential clients indicated that existing players will shift traffic to a new port
for as low as a Rs. 50-100 integrated logistics cost advantage
2. Berth 7 will be a late entrant in an extremely competitive environment and is expected to
encounter “stickiness” in shifting logistics networks to its own advantage. Thus it is not expected
to source complete traffic “conversions” if it is offering an advantage of up to Rs. 30 - 50 against
the next cheapest alternative. 60% traffic shift has been assumed in this case, which is expected
to possible especially if supported by main coal traders
3. For an advantage of Rs. 30 to a disadvantage of Rs. 30, Mormugao Port is expected to face
heavy competition from the three existing ports of New Mangalore, Chennai/Ennore and
Krishnapatnam. All four ports are importing coal for the identified hinterland and are also
exporting iron-ore from the same hinterland. The ports are more or less on comparable footing in
terms of infrastructure also. Thus an equal distribution of traffic has been assumed in this case
(25%)
99
MPSEZL Final Report
4. A 5 % traffic share has been assumed for a disadvantage of up to Rs. 60 to allow for spot
purchases and market fluctuations. A case in point is the recent spurt in thermal coal demand
from regional sugar players. This demand has offset and even surpassed the deficit caused by
declining thermal coal demand from sponge iron players on account of lower production. On a
similar note, such an allowance permits scope for sudden coal demand due to unforeseen
externalities
5. For an unfavorable difference of Rs. 60 or more, Berth 7 is not expected to garner any traffic
movement. This is in sync with the assumption that the end users are willing to shift cargo for a
difference of Rs. 50-60 from existing port
6. Moreover, certain assumption have been made with respect to choice of road versus rail
evacuation
a. For steel plants, it has been assumed that plants with capacity in excess of 0.15 million
ton will use rail evacuation and the rest road (12,500 coal import ton per month). The
same trend has been reflected during primary surveys also where it was indicated that
Tata Metaliks (0.16million ton) and Apparent Steel (0.14 million ton) evacuate cargo
through road while Mukund Steel (0.30 million ton) and Kalyani Steel (0.30 million ton)
uses rail evacuation
b. Cement plants mostly use road evacuation due to small parcel sizes
c. Sponge iron plants use road evacuation because of small parcel sizes and weekly
shipments
d. Thermal power plants in excess of 50 MW capacity have been assumed to use rail
evacuation as the parcel size is suitably big (approx 17000 ton per month)
e. It may be noted that the choice of road versus rail evacuation is also dependent on the
rake availability which seems to be a major concern in the hinterland. Further, road
evacuation, though relatively costly, allows door-to-door delivery decreasing chances of
pilferage/theft in transition
10.1. Scenario 1
100
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-2 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Cement Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton)
Project Mormugao
Commodity Company Name Capacity Units Location District State
Status Share FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20
Cement Jaykaycem Ltd. Under Implementation 3.00 Million tonnes Mudgal Bagalkot Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02
Cement Kesoram Industries Ltd. Completed 0.00 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Nirani Cements Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 1.00 Million tonnes Mudhol Bagalkot Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Cement A C C Ltd. Announcement 0.50 Million tonnes Raichur Raichur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement A C C Ltd. Shelved 0.60 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement A C C Ltd. Completed 0.00 Million tonnes Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. Completed 0.18 Million tonnes Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Grasim Industries Ltd. Completed 3.54 Million tonnes Malkhed Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. Under Implementation 0.50 Million tonnes Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka 5% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. Announcement 3.30 Million tonnes Mogla Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement J S W Cement Ltd. Under Implementation 0.59 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Kesoram Industries Ltd. Under Implementation 5.00 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Under Implementation 1.00 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Madras Cements Ltd. Completed 1.00 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Ratna Cements (Yadwad) Ltd. Completed 0.17 Million tonnes Yadwad Belgaum Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Raymond Ltd. Shelved 2.60 Million tonnes Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka 5% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement South India Cements Ltd. Completed 0.11 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Ultratech Cement Ltd. Under Implementation 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement A C C Ltd. Announcement 3.00 Million tonnes Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement A C C Ltd. Completed 2.60 Million tonnes Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Karnataka Instrade Corpn. Ltd. Completed 0.09 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Lakshmi Cement & Ceramics Inds. Ltd.Completed 0.07 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Madras Cements Ltd. Completed 0.08 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Mysore Cements Ltd. Completed 0.70 Million tonnes AmmasandaraTumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Cement Plants Thermal Coal at Berth 7 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-3 Berth 7 Share of Coking Coal from Steel Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton)
Commodity Company Name Capacity Units Location District State Mormuga

o Share FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20
ISP Aaress Iron & Steel Ltd. 3.50 Million tonnes Koppal Koppal Karnataka 100% 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.80 2.80 2.80
ISP Janki Corp Ltd. 0.15 Million tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP K A P Steel Ltd. 0.12 Million TonnesMahadevpura Bangalore Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Kalyani Steels Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Surana Industries Ltd. 0.25 Million tonnes Raichur Raichur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Aparant Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.16 Million tonnes South Goa South Goa Goa 100% 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12
ISP B M M Ispat Ltd. 2.00 Million tonnes Hospet Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.53 1.06 1.06 1.60 1.60
ISP Bhushan Steel Ltd. 2.80 Million tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Brindavan Alloys Ltd. 0.05 Million TonnesPeenya Bangalore Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Canara Steel Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesBaikampady Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Essar Steel Ltd. 6.00 Million tonnes Bagalkot Bagalkot Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 1.58 1.58 1.58 3.17 3.17 4.80 4.80
ISP Hospet Steels Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Koppal Koppal Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP J S W Steel Ltd. 6.80 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Kalyani Steels Ltd. 0.67 Million TonnesGinigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54
ISP Kirloskar Ferrous Inds. Ltd. 0.24 Million TonnesBevinahalli Koppal Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Marmagoa Steel Ltd. 0.11 Million TonnesSalcette South Goa Goa 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Mukand Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Nava Karnataka Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBangalore Bangalore Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Sona Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Lonand Satara Maharashtra 100% 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.24 0.24
ISP Tata Metaliks Ltd. 0.14 Million TonnesSindhudurg Sindhudurg Maharashtra 100% 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
ISP Usha Iron & Ferro Metals Corpn. Ltd. 1.20 Million tonnes Brahmavar Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Usha Ispat Ltd. 0.59 Million TonnesSindhudurg Sindhudurg Maharashtra 100% 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47
ISP Vijaya Steels Ltd. 0.09 Million tonnes Kunigal Tumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Basai Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.13 Million tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP K B Steel Ltd. 0.04 Million tonnes Horovanahalli Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Kalyani Ferrous Inds. Ltd. [Merged] 0.24 Million TonnesGinigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19
ISP S L R Steels Ltd. 0.15 Million tonnes ParamenahalliChitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Steel Authority Of India Ltd. 0.20 Million tonnes Bhadravati Shimoga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP 'Visvesvaraya Iron & Steel Ltd. [Merged] 0.21 Million TonnesBhadravati Shimoga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Steel Plants Coking
1.44 2.44 4.63 4.63 4.63 6.82 8.62 10.88 10.88
Coal at Berth 7
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-4 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Sponge Iron Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton)
Sponge iron Anagha Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Hindusthan Calcined Metals Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesJanikunta Tanda
Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Hothur Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 0.06 Million TonnesVeniveerapuraBellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron P M Exports 0.09 Million TonnesSira Tumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Rasasri Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesAsundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Shree Ram Electrocast Pvt. Ltd. 0.06 Million TonnesHonnarahalli Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Shree Venkateshwara Sponge & Iron Power Pvt.0.05
Ltd. Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron South India Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesKoppathimmanahalli
Kolar Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Supra Steel & Power Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Balajiswamy Premium Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Basai Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.15 Million TonnesSidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Benaka Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Bharat Mines & Minerals 0.03 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Black Smith India Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Caroma Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.17 Million TonnesKibbanahalli Tumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Dhruvdesh Meta Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesHirebaganal Koppal Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Divyajoti Steels Ltd. 0.04 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Embitee Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesVeniveerapuraBellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Gayathri Metals Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Hothur Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesVeniveerapuraBellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Hothur Steels 0.11 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Jai Raj Ispat Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Janki Corp Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesSidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Kalyani Steels Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesGinigera Raichur Karnataka 25% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron Kundil Ispat Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesKumry Belgaum Karnataka 100% 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Sponge iron Lakshmi Venkateshwara Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesChikkanthapuraBellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Laxminarasimha Iron & Steels Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Mahamanav Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Marmagoa Steel Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesMangalore Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Maruti Fertochem Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesHirebangir Koppal Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Mastek Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Noble Distilleries & Powers Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesSiriwar Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Parwaz Sponge Iron 0.07 Million TonnesVaradapura Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Popuri Steels Ltd. 0.17 Million TonnesThorangallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Pragati Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesHorovanahalli Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Rosvar Iron & Power Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesHorovanahalli Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sajjala Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Shri Raghavendra Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sigma Solid Strips Pvt. Ltd. 0.05 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sunvik Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesJodidevarahalliTumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Trivista Steel & Power Pvt. Ltd. 0.04 Million TonnesHirebaganal Koppal Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Vir Sponge & Power Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesHassan Hassan Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Yeshashvi Steels & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 0.04 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron A P S M Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Agarwal Sponge & Energy Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Bellary Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Chakkilam Powertek Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Guru Mehar Construction Pvt. Ltd. 0.00 Million TonnesDharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron H K T Mining Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesDhanapur Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Kakatiya Sponge & Power Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron others bellary 0.80 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Rayen Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesJanikunta Tanda
Sponge iron Shirdi Sai Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sree Giri Tej Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.00 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sri Balaji Steel & Power 0.01 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sri Subramanya Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesVeniveerapuraBellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sujatha Narayana & Associates 0.10 Million TonnesKasabahobli Hassan Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Ubenaka Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Vanya Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesHirebaganal Koppal Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Sponge Iron Plants
0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
Thermal Coal at Berth 7
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-5 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Thermal Power Plants – Scenario 1 (million ton)

Thermal Power Coastal Maharashtra Mega Power Ltd. 4000 Mw Munge Sindhudurg Maharashtra 100%
Captive jetties being planned for these power plants
Thermal Power Dhopave Coastal Power Co. Ltd. 1600 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100%
Thermal Power Ecocoke & Power Pvt. Ltd. 20 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06
Thermal Power Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. 15 Mw Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka 5% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. 70 Mw Mogla Gulbarga Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06
Thermal Power Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. 250 Mw Raichur Raichur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power J S W Energy (Vijayanagar) Ltd. 600 Mw Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power J S W Energy Ltd. 260 Mw Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Mangalore Power Co. Ltd. 250 Mw Mangalore Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Mukand Ltd. 15 Mw Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Thermal Power Tata Power Co. Ltd. 37.5 Mw Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Udupi Power Corpn. Ltd. 1200 Mw Padubidri Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Chalais Holding Ltd. 300 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Finolex Cables Ltd. 50 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100%
Thermal Power Finolex Industries Ltd. 22 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100% Currently being handled at Ratnagiri. No plans of shifting cargo to another jetty as per primary survey
Thermal Power Finolex Industries Ltd. 21 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100%
Thermal Power J S W Energy (Ratnagiri) Ltd. 1200 Mw Jaigad Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100% JSW Jaigarh Port will handle this cargo
Thermal Power Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. 500 Mw Bellary Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Kesoram Industries Ltd. 17.5 Mw Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Steel Authority Of India Ltd. 15 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05
Total Power Plants Thermal
0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.12 0.12 0.18 0.18
Coal at Berth 7
MPSEZL Final Report
Based on the above calculations the cargo forecast for coal at Berth 7 as per Scenario 1 is enclosed
below.
Table 10-6 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenarios 1 (million ton)

Power Plants 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.44 1.44 1.92 2.40 2.40 2.40
Cement Plants 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04
Steel Plants 1.44 2.44 4.63 4.63 4.63 6.82 8.62 10.88 10.88
Total Coal 1.51 2.51 4.70 6.15 6.15 8.83 11.12 13.38 13.38
Table 10-7 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenarios 1 with KPCL’s coal (million ton)
Power Plants 1.18 1.18 1.18 2.62 2.77 3.25 3.73 3.73 3.73
Cement Plants 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04
Steel Plants 1.44 2.44 4.63 4.63 4.63 6.82 8.62 10.88 10.88
Total Coal 2.69 3.69 5.89 7.33 7.48 10.16 12.45 14.71 14.71

It is evident that coking coal from steel plants is the biggest set of cargo at Berth 7. Further, these
projections include a part of the existing cargo at Berth 10 & 11. While the coking coal demand from steel
plants is completely reflected in these projections the thermal coal demand from sponge iron players is
underestimated. In reality, currently, close to 0.5 million ton of thermal coal is being handled for sponge
iron plants and 0.2 million ton for sugar refiners. This underestimation is due to the influence of traders on
sponge iron players’ choice of ports. Since all sponge iron players rely on traders for meeting their
thermal coal requirements, demand accretion happens at the trader’s end leaving them with a higher
bargaining power. These inland freight costs are directly payable by the receiver (sponge iron unit in this
case). The jump in traffic in FY 2013 is due to the commencement of traffic for Aaress Iron & Steel plant
(Baldota Group) at Koppal. As confirmed during the primary survey Phase I of this plant with a capacity of
1.25 MTPA is expected to get commissioned in FY 2013. FY 2014 witnesses a further increase in traffic
due to commencement of operations of Essar steel plant at Bagalkot and captive thermal power plants in
Karnataka. In the future, the jump in traffic is again due to capacity addition in Aaress Iron & Steel plant
and Essar Steel. Thus it may be said that the entire traffic projections hinge on two key players – Essar
and Baldota Group. While this increases the risk sensitivity of Berth 7 cash flows, it may also result in long
term cargo handling agreement resulting in stable cash flows.
10.2. Scenario 2
Scenario 2 assumes a shift in iron ore movement from Hospet belt to Mormugao from current focus of
operations on Chennai. The basic idea is to ensure sufficient availability of trucks that can carry coal to
Karnataka as return journey. This has been further detailed in Section 8.4
105
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-8 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Cement Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton)
Mormugao
Share FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20
Cement Jaykaycem Ltd. 3.00 Million tonnes Mudgal Bagalkot Karnataka 100% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04
Cement Kesoram Industries Ltd. 0.00 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Nirani Cements Pvt. Ltd. 1.00 Million tonnes Mudhol Bagalkot Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Cement A C C Ltd. 0.50 Million tonnes Raichur Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
Cement A C C Ltd. 0.60 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement A C C Ltd. 0.00 Million tonnes Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. 0.18 Million tonnes Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Grasim Industries Ltd. 3.54 Million tonnes Malkhed Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Cement Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. 0.50 Million tonnes Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01
Cement Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. 3.30 Million tonnes Mogla Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04
Cement J S W Cement Ltd. 0.59 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Larsen & Toubro Ltd. 1.00 Million tonnes Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Cement Madras Cements Ltd. 1.00 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Ratna Cements (Yadwad) Ltd. 0.17 Million tonnes Yadwad Belgaum Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Raymond Ltd. 2.60 Million tonnes Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement South India Cements Ltd. 0.11 Million tonnes Sedam Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Ultratech Cement Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Karnataka Instrade Corpn. Ltd. 0.09 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Lakshmi Cement & Ceramics Inds. Ltd. 0.07 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Madras Cements Ltd. 0.08 Million tonnes Mathodu Chitradurga Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cement Mysore Cements Ltd. 0.70 Million tonnes AmmasandaraTumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Cement Plants Thermal Coal at Berth
0.17 7 0.17 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.34
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-9 Berth 7 Share of Coking Coal from Steel Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton)
ISP Aaress Iron & Steel Ltd. 3.50 Million tonnes Koppal Koppal Karnataka 100% 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.80 2.80 2.80
ISP Janki Corp Ltd. 0.15 Million tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03
ISP K A P Steel Ltd. 0.12 Million TonnesMahadevpura Bangalore Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Kalyani Steels Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Surana Industries Ltd. 0.25 Million tonnes Raichur Raichur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Aparant Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.16 Million tonnes South Goa South Goa Goa 100% 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12
ISP B M M Ispat Ltd. 2.00 Million tonnes Hospet Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.53 1.06 1.06 1.60 1.60
ISP Bhushan Steel Ltd. 2.80 Million tonnes Bellary Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Brindavan Alloys Ltd. 0.05 Million TonnesPeenya Bangalore Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Canara Steel Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesBaikampady Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Essar Steel Ltd. 6.00 Million tonnes Bagalkot Bagalkot Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 1.58 1.58 1.58 3.17 3.17 4.80 4.80
ISP Hospet Steels Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Koppal Koppal Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Kalyani Steels Ltd. 0.67 Million TonnesGinigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54
ISP Kirloskar Ferrous Inds. Ltd. 0.24 Million TonnesBevinahalli Koppal Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Marmagoa Steel Ltd. 0.11 Million TonnesSalcette South Goa Goa 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Mukand Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Nava Karnataka Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBangalore Bangalore Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Sona Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 0.30 Million tonnes Lonand Satara Maharashtra 100% 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.24 0.24
ISP Tata Metaliks Ltd. 0.14 Million TonnesSindhudurg Sindhudurg Maharashtra 100% 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
ISP Usha Iron & Ferro Metals Corpn. Ltd. 1.20 Million tonnes Brahmavar Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Usha Ispat Ltd. 0.59 Million TonnesSindhudurg Sindhudurg Maharashtra 100% 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47
ISP Vijaya Steels Ltd. 0.09 Million tonnes Kunigal Tumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Basai Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.13 Million tonnes Sidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02
ISP K B Steel Ltd. 0.04 Million tonnes Horovanahalli Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03
ISP Kalyani Ferrous Inds. Ltd. [Merged] 0.24 Million TonnesGinigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19
ISP S L R Steels Ltd. 0.15 Million tonnes ParamenahalliChitradurga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP Steel Authority Of India Ltd. 0.20 Million tonnes Bhadravati Shimoga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ISP 'Visvesvaraya Iron & Steel Ltd. [Merged] 0.21 Million TonnesBhadravati Shimoga Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total Steel Plants Coking
1.45 2.45 4.65 4.67 4.67 6.87 8.69 10.96 10.96
Coal at Berth 7
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-10 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Sponge Iron Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton)
Mormugao
Sponge iron Anagha Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Hindusthan Calcined Metals Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesJanikunta Tanda
Sponge iron P M Exports 0.09 Million TonnesSira Tumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Rasasri Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesAsundi Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Shree Ram Electrocast Pvt. Ltd. 0.06 Million TonnesHonnarahalli Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04
Sponge iron Shree Venkateshwara Sponge & Iron Power Pvt.0.05
Ltd. Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron South India Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesKoppathimmanahalli
Kolar Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Supra Steel & Power Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Balajiswamy Premium Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Basai Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.15 Million TonnesSidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron Benaka Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Bharat Mines & Minerals 0.03 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Black Smith India Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Caroma Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.17 Million TonnesKibbanahalli Tumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Dhruvdesh Meta Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesHirebaganal Koppal Karnataka 100% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron Divyajoti Steels Ltd. 0.04 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Embitee Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesVeniveerapuraBellary Karnataka 100% 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Sponge iron Hothur Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesVeniveerapuraBellary Karnataka 100% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.07
Sponge iron Hothur Steels 0.11 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Sponge iron Janki Corp Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesSidaginomola Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Kalyani Steels Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesGinigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07
Sponge iron Kundil Ispat Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesKumry Belgaum Karnataka 100% 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Sponge iron Lakshmi Venkateshwara Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesChikkanthapuraBellary Karnataka 100% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron Laxminarasimha Iron & Steels Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Mahamanav Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Marmagoa Steel Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesMangalore Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Maruti Fertochem Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesHirebangir Koppal Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Mastek Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Noble Distilleries & Powers Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesSiriwar Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Parwaz Sponge Iron 0.07 Million TonnesVaradapura Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Pragati Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesHorovanahalli Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.05
Sponge iron Rosvar Iron & Power Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesHorovanahalli Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.07
Sponge iron Sajjala Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Shri Raghavendra Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Sigma Solid Strips Pvt. Ltd. 0.05 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron Sunvik Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesJodidevarahalliTumkur Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Vir Sponge & Power Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesHassan Hassan Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Yeshashvi Steels & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 0.04 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron A P S M Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Sponge iron Agarwal Sponge & Energy Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Bellary Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 0.08 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd. 0.07 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sponge iron Chakkilam Powertek Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Guru Mehar Construction Pvt. Ltd. 0.00 Million TonnesDharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron H K T Mining Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesDhanapur Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Kakatiya Sponge & Power Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Sponge iron others bellary 0.80 Million TonnesBellary Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32
Sponge iron Rayen Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.10 Million TonnesJanikunta Tanda
Sponge iron Shirdi Sai Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Sree Giri Tej Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 0.00 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sri Balaji Steel & Power 0.01 Million TonnesHalkundi Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Sri Subramanya Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.02 Million TonnesVeniveerapuraBellary Karnataka 100% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Sujatha Narayana & Associates 0.10 Million TonnesKasabahobli Hassan Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sponge iron Ubenaka Sponge Iron Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesBelagallu Bellary Karnataka 60% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sponge iron Vanya Steels Pvt. Ltd. 0.03 Million TonnesHirebaganal Koppal Karnataka 100% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Total Sponge Iron Plants
1.38 1.38 1.44 1.59 1.59 1.65 1.80 1.86 1.86
Thermal Coal at Berth 7
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 10-11 Berth 7 Share of Thermal Coal from Thermal Power Plants – Scenario 2 (million ton)
Mormugao
Thermal Power Coastal Maharashtra Mega Power Ltd. 4000 Mw Munge Sindhudurg Maharashtra 100%
Captive jetties being planned for these power plants
Thermal Power Dhopave Coastal Power Co. Ltd. 1600 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100%
Thermal Power Ecocoke & Power Pvt. Ltd. 20 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06
Thermal Power Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. 15 Mw Gulbarga Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.05
Thermal Power Ittina Cements Pvt. Ltd. 70 Mw Mogla Gulbarga Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.06
Thermal Power J S W Energy (Vijayanagar) Ltd. 600 Mw Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power J S W Energy Ltd. 260 Mw Thorangallu Bellary Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Mangalore Power Co. Ltd. 250 Mw Mangalore Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Mukand Ltd. 15 Mw Ginigera Raichur Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05
Thermal Power Tata Power Co. Ltd. 37.5 Mw Wadi Gulbarga Karnataka 100% 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12
Thermal Power Udupi Power Corpn. Ltd. 1200 Mw Padubidri Dakshina Kannada
Karnataka 0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Chalais Holding Ltd. 300 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Finolex Cables Ltd. 50 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100%
Thermal Power Finolex Industries Ltd. 22 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100% Currently being handled at Ratnagiri. No plans of shifting cargo to another jetty as per primary survey
Thermal Power Finolex Industries Ltd. 21 Mw Ratnagiri Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100%
Thermal Power J S W Energy (Ratnagiri) Ltd. 1200 Mw Jaigad Ratnagiri Maharashtra 100% JSW Jaigarh Port will handle this cargo
Thermal Power Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. 500 Mw Bellary Bellary Karnataka 25% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Thermal Power Steel Authority Of India Ltd. 15 Mw Dharwad Dharwad Karnataka 100% 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05
Total Power Plants Thermal
0.23 0.23 0.31 0.34 0.34 0.41 0.45 0.52 0.52
Coal at Berth 7
MPSEZL Final Report
The cumulative demand from the hinterland has been summarized in Table 10-12.
Table 10-12 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenario 2 (million ton)

Power Plants 0.23 0.23 0.31 1.78 1.78 2.33 2.85 2.92 2.92
Cement Plants 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.34
Steel Plants 1.45 2.45 4.65 4.67 4.67 6.87 8.69 10.96 10.96
Total Coal 3.24 4.24 6.60 8.28 8.28 11.12 13.65 16.08 16.08
Table 10-13 Breakup of Coal Demand at Berth 7 - Scenario 2 with KPCL coal (million ton)
Power Plants 1.42 1.42 1.49 2.96 3.11 3.66 4.18 4.25 4.25
Cement Plants 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.34
Steel Plants 1.45 2.45 4.65 4.67 4.67 6.87 8.69 10.96 10.96
Total Coal 4.42 5.42 7.78 9.47 9.62 12.45 14.99 17.41 17.41

Here, as envisaged, the favorable movement of iron ore towards Mormugao (road evacuation) results in
lower integrated logistics costs for Mormugao – Bellary route. Thus Berth 7 will be able to serve most of
the sponge iron belt of Karnataka. Starting with 1.38 million ton in FY 2012, the berth moves on to handle
1.86 million ton of thermal coal for sponge iron players. Coking coal for Essar Steel and Aaress Iron &
Steel remains a key cargo for the berth. Due to the favorable return logistics cost, Berth 7 is also able to
serve more captive power plants in the interior.
110
MPSEZL Final Report
10.3. Comparison of Scenarios
Table 10-14 Comparison of Scenario 1 & 2

S. No. Scenario 1 Scenario 2 i-maritime remarks
The risk is diversified across 4 industries. Scenario 2 is more favorable for a

High reliance on a single industry. More
1 Helps neutralize adverse movement in diverse set-up. Reliance on a
susceptible to market fluctuations
either industry single industry should be avoided
The market would be well spread out over Neutral view. Both the scenarios
2 High reliance on 2 key players
a few independent clients, traders etc havetheir own pros/cons
Scenario 1 is more favorable. Key

players like Essar Steel and
High chances of a long term agreement Sponge iron industry is vacillating in nature
3 Baldota Group are expected to
resulting in stable cash flows as demonstrated in current environment
more resilient to adverse market
conditions
Scenario 1 is more favorable as
Focus on high turnaround of coal from High turnaround may not be possible as
storage area within the port
4 within the port as players expected to traders do not maintain their won
seems to be a bottleneck in
have captive stockyards stockyards
realisable capacity
Scenario 1 is more likely to play
Scenario is more realistic in current Needs a lot of effort on part of various
5 out if market forces are allowed to
terms agencies including MPSEZL
decide
Even for Scenario 1, the cargo
volumes are close to the potential
6 Low to Medium peak cargo volumes Medium to High peak cargo volumes
peak capacity proposed for Berth
7
Involving the coal traders is

beneficial in the long run. These
7 Coal Traders do not use the berth Heavy use by Coal Traders
traders are expected to bring in
spot volumes to the port
Road evacuation is desirable

though relatively uneconomical.
8 Rail evacuation for most of the cargo A healthy mix of rail-road cargo
This is because of erratic supply
of rakes.
111
MPSEZL Final Report
11. RISK ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION
Risk analysis and its subsequent mitigation forms an integral part of any project plan. The key risks
identified for Berth 7 are categorised below.
11.1. Trade Pattern Risk
Trade pattern risk refers to the potential issues that can crop up due to unforeseen changes in supply-
demand dynamics.
11.1.1. Supply Trade Risk

Supply side of the trade pattern refers to the exporting nations/companies providing the imported coal to
end users. In case of Berth 7, Indonesia, South Africa and Australia would be the key supply side
stakeholders. Any disruption in mining/port related activities at these stakeholders’ end would affect
operations at Berth 7. A case in point would be the massive flooding in coal mines of Queensland
Australia. That led to a fall in the Australian coal output and the traders/end users across the globe has to
suitably re-arrange their procurement and logistics plans to ensure steady production.
Further, Indonesian coal reserves are fast depleting and are not expected to last for more than 19 years
at the current levels of production (refer Table 14-1). Currently a majority of the thermal coal imports are
met through Indonesia. As its resources dwindle/production stagnates, the increasingly growing Indian
demand will have to look for alternate sources for thermal coal. South Africa (currently a major exporter to
European countries) and Australia (the second largest thermal coal exporter) may be the natural choice.
In the eventuality of South African exports to India increasing, the suitability of West Coast ports for
unloading this coal is expected to marginally increase due to lower voyage cost relative to East Coast
ports. Mormugao would be one of the key ports for such a scenario.
Such risks cannot be mitigated by the port operator and are more contingent on the end user/trader.
Suitability of the port for multiple source locations is one way in which such risk may be minimised. Berth
7 fulfils these criteria as it is suitably located for South Africa as well as Australia.
11.1.2. Demand Trade Risk

This includes the risk of a port handling capapcity mismatch with respect to the demand for coal in
hinterland. The economic landscape may not allow timely completion of projects while the port capacity
designed to cater to that demand is already in place. Such risks may have a more pronounced effect in
case the port is planning to rely on key industry/players for handling traffic. This is the case with Scenario
1 of our analysis where Essar Steel and Baldota Group are providing a majority of the traffic demand.
Thus any potential delays in implementation of their projects would adversely affect the profitability of the
port.
112
MPSEZL Final Report
Demand trade risk also arises if the industrial setup in the hinterland is susceptible to market fluctuations.
This might result in an erratic flow of cargo at the port. While on one hand the port may have surplus
capapcity during a few months of the year, it would struggle to cope up with the heavy traffic during the
rest of the year resulting in large pre-berthing delays and cargo evacuation challenges from stockyard.
The sponge iron industry in the hinterland of Berth 7 exhibited some of these traits as the demand for its
finished product was hit by recession and it correspondingly lowered its coal intake.
Mitigation measures for demand trade risk can be implemented by handling coal for than one industry
type. IN case of Berth 7, it is advisable to enter into contracts with diverse industrial players such as
thermal power plants, steel plants and sponge iron plants. Also, attracting traders can be helpful in
minimising such risks as they have a much diverse industry network.
11.2. Inland logistics bottlenecks
Road and rail evacuation form an integral part of any port plan. Currently, Mormugao Port is handling
commodities through inland waterways, road and railways. Coal is being handled only by rail and road.
Berth 5A and 6A do not have a provision for road evacuation and completely rely on rail. Berth 10 & 11
evacuate a majority of their cargo through road (around 80% of total traffic) and some cargo through rail.
Berth 7 is proposed to have both road and rail evacuation.
Rake availability is a prime concern for all players in hinterland. Rail is a much cheaper alternative to road
transport over large distances, especially if the parcel size per shipment is suitably large. However, due to
lack of sufficient number of rakes, clients have to use road transport. Players like sponge iron plants
employ road evacuation by choice because their parcel size per shipment is relatively small.
The route of Konkan rail through Western Ghats is another potential element of risk as well as a
bottleneck. During monsoons, landslides limit the carrying capapcity of the rails and can lead to stock
accumulation at the port due to slower evacuation.
On the road transport side, availability of trucks on Mormugao Karnataka route can be a concern at times.
This is primarily because of the use of large number of trucks on Bellary – Chennai/New
Mangalore/Krishnapatnam routes for iron ore exports.
The port operator cannot mitigate such risk to a great extent. Konkan Railways and Southern Railways is
planning to expand the capacity of its lines on key routes to address such issues. Truck availability is a
supply-demand driven variable. Thus, as the traffic builds up, truck availability concerns should get
addressed through suitable re-alignment of supply demand.
113
MPSEZL Final Report
11.3. Internal Competition
Mormugao Port is currently handling coal (thermal and coking) on 4 berths – 5A, 6A (JSW berths
operated by SWPL) and 10, 11 (Mormugao Port Trust operated berths). Berths 5A and 6A handle only
captive cargo for JSW Steel and its captive power plant. Going forward, JSW Cement cargo is also
expected to be handled at these berths. As per interaction with Port Officials, SWPL is not keen on
handling any third party cargo because of the high captive demand which is fast approaching peak
capapcity of these berths thereby minimising the risk of internal competition to Berth 7.
Berth 10 & 11 have un-mechanised operations for coal handling and have been causing a lot of problems
with local population due to pollution. Thus Port Authorities are planning to shift this cargo to Berth 7 and
there is not much risk of internal competition from these berths.
Further, Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) is planning to develop Vasco Bay with 4-5 berths in two phases.
These will include general cargo, container and bulk handling facilities. It is also planning to develop East
of Breakwater facilities at a later stage. However, the earliest of these projects will take at least 5-7 years
to implement and the risk of internal competition is minimal.
Building and operating an efficient material handling and storage system, is the key to mitigating such
measures. First mover advantage and the ability to enter into long term contracts with big players are
some other options that can be exercised by MPSEZL.
11.4. Infrastructure Mismatch
For any port project, the ability of the infrastructure to handle the planned cargo is an absolute necessity.
A major risk that can arise as infrastructure mismatch is the increase in ship size in contrast to the
permissible vessel size dictated by the draft at the berth.
However, this risk is not expected to surface at Berth 7 as the available draft will be 14.0 m, which can
handle up to panamax vessels, the prevalent vessel of choice for dry bulk. Later on, as and when trade
pattern shifts towards capesize vessels, port and MPSEZL may undertake dredging to accommodate the
same.
11.5. Environment
Pollution is one of the biggest concerns for any coal handling berth/terminal and needs to be suitably
addressed.
114
MPSEZL Final Report
Figure 11-1 Pollution from Existing Coal Operations at Berth 10 & 11
Source: i-maritime analysis, Google Earth
Figure 11-1 depicts the flow of air pollution from Berth 10/11 to the adjoining residential area of Vasco.
This has been the cause of serious concern is one of the biggest reason influencing the shift of Berth
10/11 cargo to Berth 7. As is evident in the image, Berth 7 is suitably away from residential settlement
thereby minimising the pollution from coal handling operations. Moreover, the berth is surrounded by
Headland Sada hills on the land side that should minimise the inland air pollution flow from berth.
Adequate dust suppression system may be used to further minimise the pollution.
115
MPSEZL Final Report
12. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
Sensitivity analysis has been used to ascertain the key variables that affect the traffic projections and
map the corresponding shift in the same. While the actual traffic at the port would be dependent on a host
of factors like macro-economic variables, hinterland industrial set up, competing ports and infrastructure,
availability of adequate resources, etc. the traffic projections are based on certain assumptions and
sensitivity analysis helps assess the likely effect of change in these assumptions.
12.1. Sensitivity due to mismatch in Hinterland Capacity Accretion
In our calculations there is a basic assumption regarding the completion of upcoming industrial capacities
in the hinterland (refer Table 6-11). Now, the port capacity may be designed based on the traffic
projection while the actual capacities that come up may not be in sync with the aforementioned
assumptions. This would lead to a capacity mismatch. Thus, sensitivity of the traffic projections to the
change in assumptions regarding upcoming capacity accretion has been analysed.
Table 12-1 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from “Completed” Projects - Scenario 1 (million ton)
Industry FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20
Cement 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Integrated Steel 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44
Sponge iron 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
TPP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grand Total 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50
% of Total Traffic Projections 99% 60% 32% 31% 31% 21% 17% 13% 13%

Table 12-1 tabulates the coal traffic at Berth 7 from completed projects in the hinterland. As is evident,
almost the entire cargo at Berth 7 in first year is expected to come from existing projects and 60% in
second year. Thereafter it decreases to up to 13% in FY 20.
Table 12-2 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from "Under Implementation" Projects - Scenario 1 (million ton)
Cement 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
TPP 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grand Total 0.01 1.01 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.02 2.83 2.83 2.83

Similarly, Table 12-2 lists the industry-wise breakup of coal traffic from “Under Implementation” projects in
hinterland. Since the projects are already under implementation, the chances of these projects not
coming up are extremely marginal. In all, more than 50% of the projected traffic comes originates from
projects that are completed or are under implementation till FY 2018 (refer Table 12-3).
116
MPSEZL Final Report
total projected traffic)
Completed Projects 99% 60% 32% 31% 31% 21% 17% 13% 13%
Under Implementation Projects 1% 40% 21% 21% 21% 14% 32% 25% 25%
Total 100% 100% 53% 53% 53% 36% 49% 39% 39%
Source – i-maritime analysis

Thus it can be said that the sensitivity of the Scenario 1 traffic projections to hinterland capacity accretion
is limited to 50% of the total projections. Moreover, there is little or no such sensitivity in the first two years
of operations. This brings stability to cash flows right from the beginning. As the business development
initiatives are established, the berth should have sufficient buffer to tide over minor changes.
Table 12-4 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from “Completed” Projects - Scenario 2 (million ton)
Cement 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13
Sponge iron 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23
TPP 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Grand Total 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
% of Total Traffic Projections
92% 71% 45% 44% 44% 33% 27% 22% 22%

On a similar note, Scenario 2 traffic projections consistently derive more than 50% of the traffic from
“Completed” and “Under Implementation” projects. This limits the risk associated with overestimated
traffic projections due to delay in envisaged capacity build up.
Table 12-5 Coal Traffic at Berth 7 from "Under Implementation" Projects - Scenario 2 (million ton)
Cement 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.12 0.12 0.12
Sponge iron 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.47 0.47 0.47
TPP 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.10
Grand Total 0.24 1.24 1.24 1.49 1.49 1.49 3.54 3.54 3.54
% of Total Traffic Projections
8% 29% 19% 22% 22% 16% 31% 26% 26%
total projected traffic)
Completed
92% 71% 45% 44% 44% 33% 27% 22% 22%
Projects
Under
Implementation 8% 29% 19% 22% 22% 16% 31% 26% 26%
Projects
Total 100% 100% 64% 66% 66% 49% 58% 48% 48%
117
MPSEZL Final Report
Thus the Scenario 2 projections are marginally more stable than Scenario 1 projections in terms of
capacity build-up assumptions.
It may be further noted that a large part of the “Announcement” category of traffic projections will come
from Essar Steel project in Bagalkot (1.58 million ton in FY 2014 to 4.8 million ton in FY 2019). As
communicated through primary survey with Essar Group, the project is getting implemented for the
proposed capacity and it can be safely assumed that the traffic projections in either scenario will not be
affected by the project not getting implemented.
12.2. Sensitivity due to Variation in Decision Matrix Variables for Cargo Distribution
The second set of variables that may have a critical impact on the traffic projections is the decision matrix
for cargo distribution across competing ports (refer Table 10-1). This decision matrix has been prepared
based on primary interviews with various stakeholders of the logistics network. However, a minor change
in the price points influencing shift of cargo, based on market dynamics may completely change the traffic
projections. Thus the sensitivity of the projections for both scenarios has been analysed.
Table 12-7 100% cargo movement from Berth 7, Mormugao Port – Scenario 1 (million ton)
Cement 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02
Sponge iron 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
TPP 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.11
Grand Total 1.48 2.48 4.72 4.72 4.72 6.95 8.75 11.05 11.05

Table 12-7 shows the cargo that is coming from such cargo centres where Mormugao has a clear
integrated logistics cost (ILC) based advantage (100% cargo shift) over the other competing ports. As
evident, 99% of the cargo is originating from such cargo centres. Table 12-8 shows similar results for
Scenario2 projections where more than three-fourths of the cargo projections are from cargo centres
which show a clear ILC advantage for Mormugao Port.
Table 12-8 100% cargo movement from Berth 7, Mormugao Port – Scenario 2 (million ton)
Cement 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.24 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.34
Sponge iron 0.56 0.56 0.61 0.70 0.70 0.75 0.84 0.90 0.90
TPP 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.32 0.32 0.37 0.41 0.46 0.46
Grand Total 2.41 3.41 5.73 5.91 5.91 8.24 10.22 12.61 12.61

Thus it can be said that the traffic projections are not much sensitive to changes in the decision matrix.
118
MPSEZL Final Report
13. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the comparison of traffic projections for both the scenarios, the following conclusion can be
surmised:
1. Scenario 1 is more likely to play in the initial few years. After 2-4 years, iron-ore trade movement
may prove to be conducive for Scenario 2 to play
2. This makes it imperative for MPSEZL to
a. Ink a cargo handling contract with at least one of Baldota Group and Essar Steel for
dedicated coal procurement
b. Involve traders like Maheshwari and Bhatia from the commencement of operations at
Berth 7. Maheshwari, being the largest trader in Mormugao Port, will help in smooth shift
of clients from Berths 10, 11 to berth 7 while Bhatia, by virtue of its strong hold on
sponge iron industry of Bellary can help procure thermal coal for the same
3. Moreover, it may be possible for MPSEZL to initiate its captive trading operations at Berth 7. This
will help it assume responsibility of delivering coal (thermal and coking) at the doorstep of clients.
By doing so MPSEZL will have a tri pronged advantage:
a. It will essentially control the entire supply chain from load port to end user’s plant. Thus it
can offer coal at better landed prices (margins can be better at lower price if
intermediaries are eliminated.
b. By offering coal at a cheaper landed price, MPSEZL will garner a bigger traffic share at
Berth 7
c. As confirmed during primary interviews, the end users are more comfortable and hence
more likely to do business with players having larger control on logistics chain. This
helps them assume responsibility of logistics and thus reduces risks based on supply
chain disruption due to external factors
4. As the berth starts handling berth at superior discharge rates and builds a rapport within the
industry, Scenario 2 may be influenced to play out to MPSEZL’s advantage. Either ways, the
berth will attain peak cargo in a few years and can upgrade its handling capapcity as more traffic
builds up in the hinterland
5. MPSEZL can circumnavigate the reverse logistics movement by setting up a “stock and sale”
point at/near Bellary and transporting coal (primarily thermal, for sponge iron plants and captive
thermal plants) through rail from Mormugao to the “stock and sale point”. The landed price of
coal for end users would be cheaper for such an arrangement as compared to the current
system where the end user has to source the coal from ports on East Coast (Chennai/
Krishnapatnam) since rail would be cheaper than road and Mormugao has a distance advantage
over East coast ports for Bellary
119
MPSEZL Final Report
14. MACRO OVERVIEW OF COAL – GLOBAL (APPENDIX)
Table 14-1 Global Coal Reserve Distribution (million ton)

Anthracite and Sub-bituminous and
Region Total Share of Total R/P ratio
bituminus lignite
US 108,950 129,358 238,308 28.9% 224
Canada 3,471 3,107 6,578 0.8% 97
Mexico 860 351 1,211 0.1% 106
Total North America 113,281 132,816 246,097 29.8% 216
Brazil - 7,059 7,059 0.9% *
Colombia 6,434 380 6,814 0.8% 93
Venezuela 479 - 479 0.1% 74
Other S. & Cent. America 51 603 654 0.1% *
Total S. & Cent. America 6,964 8,042 15,006 1.8% 172
Bulgaria 5 1,991 1,996 0.2% 70
Czech Republic 1,673 2,828 4,501 0.5% 75
Germany 152 6,556 6,708 0.8% 35
Greece - 3,900 3,900 0.5% 58
Hungary 199 3,103 3,302 0.4% 351
Kazakhstan 28,170 3,130 31,300 3.8% 273
Poland 6,012 1,490 7,502 0.9% 52
Romania 12 410 422 0.1% 12
Russian Federation 49,088 107,922 157,010 19.0% 481
Spain 200 330 530 0.1% 32
Turkey - 1,814 1,814 0.2% 21
Ukraine 15,351 18,522 33,873 4.1% 438
United Kingdom 155 - 155 0.0% 9
Other Europe & Eurasia 1,025 18,208 19,233 2.3% 268
Total Europe & Eurasia 102,042 170,204 272,246 33.0% 218
South Africa 30,408 - 30,408 3.7% 121
Zimbabwe 502 - 502 0.1% 287
Other Africa 929 174 1,103 0.1% *
Middle East 1,386 - 1,386 0.2% *
Total Middle East & Africa 33,225 174 33,399 4.0% 131
Australia 36,800 39,400 76,200 9.2% 190
China 62,200 52,300 114,500 13.9% 41
India 54,000 4,600 58,600 7.1% 114
Indonesia 1,721 2,607 4,328 0.5% 19
Japan 355 - 355 0.0% 289
New Zealand 33 538 571 0.1% 111
North Korea 300 300 600 0.1% 17
Pakistan 1 2,069 2,070 0.3% 496
South Korea 133 - 133 0.0% 48
Thailand - 1,354 1,354 0.2% 75
Vietnam 150 - 150 0.0% 4
Other Asia Pacific 115 276 391 0.0% 26
Total Asia Pacific 155,808 103,444 259,252 31.4% 64
Total World 411,320 414,680 826,000 100.0% 122
Source: BP Statistical Review, 2009
120
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 14-2 Commodity-wise breakup of Dry Bulk Trade (million ton)

Commodity 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Iron Ore 401 21% 447 22% 450 21% 480 22% 516 22% 587 24% 658 25% 723 26% 783 26% 843 28%
Coal 457 24% 516 25% 550 26% 573 26% 619 27% 660 26% 688 26% 729 26% 772 26% 795 26%
Coking Coal 162 8% 174 8% 169 8% 171 8% 178 8% 179 7% 184 7% 190 7% 207 7% 219 7%
Steam Coal 295 15% 342 17% 381 18% 402 18% 441 19% 481 19% 504 19% 539 19% 565 19% 576 19%
Grains 247 13% 264 13% 260 12% 271 12% 264 11% 275 11% 272 10% 292 10% 305 10% 319 10%
Bauxite/Alumina 54 3% 54 3% 52 2% 55 3% 60 3% 68 3% 78 3% 79 3% 84 3% 86 3%
Phosphate Rock 33 2% 30 1% 31 1% 30 1% 29 1% 31 1% 31 1% 30 1% 32 1% 31 1%
Total Major Bulks 1,192 62% 1,311 64% 1,343 64% 1,409 64% 1,488 65% 1,621 65% 1,727 66% 1,853 66% 1,976 67% 2,074 68%
Minor Bulks 727 38% 749 36% 765 36% 776 36% 815 35% 873 35% 900 34% 952 34% 987 33% 988 32%
Total Dry Bulk 1,919 2,060 2,108 2,185 2,303 2,494 2,627 2,805 2,963 3,062
Table 14-3 Region wise breakup of Global Steel Production (million ton)
Country Production
China 501
Japan 119
US 91
Russia 69
India 55
South Korea 54
Germany 46
Ukraine 37
Brazil 34
Italy 31
Others 291
Total 1326.5
Source: IISI (World Steel in Figures 2009)
Table 14-4 % Change in Industrial Production

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09
Germany 3.5% -0.5% 5.0% -0.6% -2.1% -0.2% 1.9% 2.7% 5.2% 5.5% -21.6% -18.1% -18.0%
OECD
3.0% 0.8% 3.9% -0.6% -1.8% -0.3% 1.1% 0.4% 2.5% 2.4% -19.6% -16.3%
Europe
USA 3.3% 2.7% 5.4% -2.9% -0.7% 0.3% 4.4% 3.1% 4.2% 2.0% -12.5% -13.4% -13.6%
Japan -6.6% 0.4% 5.9% -7.7% -1.4% 3.2% 5.5% 1.3% 4.6% 2.7% -30.7% -29.5% -23.5%
OECD Total 1.5% 1.4% 4.7% -2.5% -1.3% 0.5% 2.9% 1.5% 3.4% 2.3% -19.0% -17.4%
China 5.7% 8.8% 11.5% 9.0% 12.1% 16.7% 16.3% 15.5% 16.4% 17.6% 7.3% 8.9% 10.8%
121
MPSEZL Final Report
15. MACRO OVER VIEW – DOMESTIC (APPENDIX)
Table 15-1 Domestic Coking and Thermal Coal Production (million ton)
Type of Coal FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 CAGR
Coking Coal 32.98 30.90 28.67 30.20 29.40 30.22 31.51 32.10 34.46 33.31 0.11%
Non-Coking Coal 271.12 282.80 299.12 311.08 331.85 352.39 375.53 398.74 422.63 459.64 6.04%
Source: Provisional Coal Statistics (2009), Ministry of Coal
Figure 15-1 Domestic Coking and Thermal Coal Production (million ton)
500.00 40.00
450.00 35.00
400.00
30.00
350.00
300.00 25.00
250.00 20.00
200.00 15.00
150.00
10.00
100.00
50.00 5.00
0.00 0.00
Non-Coking Coal Coking Coal
Source: Provisional Coal Statistics (2009), Ministry of Coal
122
MPSEZL Final Report
16. PRIMARY INTERVIEWS (APPENDIX)
Person Met: Mr. Prema Kumar

Designation: Executive Engineer (Proj.), Civil Engg. Department
Date: 27/08/09
Place: Mormugao Port Trust Office
Minutes:
• The meeting started off with a brief overview of the purpose of the visit with respect to the
construction of Berth 7
• Mr. Prema Kumar suggested meeting Mr. Gubbi for more understanding on the project since the
Mechanical Engineering Department was handling the development of Berth 7
• It was discussed that Berth 10 & 11 cargo is being planned to be shifted to Berth 7 in future.
However, these plans are not yet finalised
123
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Mukund R Gubbi

Designation: Superintending Engineer (Proj.), Mechanical Engg. Department
Date: 27/08/09
Place: Mormugao Port Trust Office
Minutes:
• The meeting started with Rohan explaining the purpose of the meeting with respect to the project
of Berth No 7 at Mormugao Port. Mr. Gubbi is part of the team that is heading the project on
behalf of Mormugao Port Trust
• Berths 10 and 11 were discussed for assessing the internal competition at Mormugao Port. These
berths are not mechanised and unload coal/coke through ship cranes. This is piled on the berth
right next to the ship. Pay-loaders are then used to load this coal into the waiting dumper trucks.
There is a rail siding to facilitate wagon loading. Half rakes are loaded on this siding at a time.
• Mr. Gubbi directed all further questions past traffic statistics, handling rates, peak capacities, etc.
on Berth 10 & 11 to Mr. Vyapuri (Traffic Manager) as he is looking after those berths.
• The Cargo Handling Labour Department (CHLD) is handling the coal loading/unloading at Berth
10 & 11
• SWPL (South West Port Limited), a subsidiary of JSW Group, is operating Berth 5A and 6A,
which is adjacent to the proposed Berth 7. These berths are handling around 4.5 MTPA (captive
requirement for JSW Steel). The peak capacity of these berths is around 7 MTPA.
• An in-motion wagon loader takes around 1.5 hours to load a rake (3500 ton)
• To further facilitate rail evacuation, the Port Trust is planning to restructure the existing set up to
allow the construction of 8 parallel railway lines. 2 of these would be dedicated for berth 7 and 2
for Berth 5A and 6A
• Currently, Berth 10 &11 are primarily evacuating through road. Moreover, the Port Trust is
planning to shift their cargo from these berths to Berth 7 in the future. This is however based on
available facilities for storage and road evacuation and the difference in handling charges at the
two berths
• When enquired about rail being a potential bottleneck, Mr. Gubbi said that it is the availability of
rakes that is a bottleneck. One full rake requires 800 m of length to be loaded. Currently, the port
is loading half a rake at a time.
• Mr. Gubbi further suggested meeting Mr. Kuncheria (Chief Mechanical Engineer)
124
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Atul Jadhav

Designation: President – Goa Barge Association, MD – New Era Shipping
Date: 29/08/09
Place: Vasco, Goa
Minutes:
of Berth No 7 at Mormugao Port. It was explained that Mr. Jadhav’s opinion on the project was
solicited based on his role as President of Goa Barge Owners Association
• Mr. Jadhav explained that one potential problem can be the lack of availability of sufficient backup
area for storage and rail/road evacuation. Moreover, the citizens of Vasco have been protesting
against the pollution from coal handling for a long time, which can create problems in the future
also. He suggested that there is a vacant piece of land near the Zuari Bridge that could be used
as a stockyard. It is not near any place of inhabitation and coal be transported by barges (mid-sea
lighterage operations). The cross roads near this location can be used for road-based evacuation
to Hubli (through Ponda), Konkan (through Karnataka) and Karwar (through Margao)
125
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Lyndon Rodrigues

Designation: Director – Rodrigues & Associates (Stevedores)
Date: 29/08/09
Place: Vasco, Goa
Minutes:
of Berth No 7 at Mormugao Port. Mr. Rodrigues’s company is amongst the largest stevedores in
Goa and handles close to 50% of the total coal/coke handled at Mormugao Port. They are
currently handling coal for Maheshwari Traders
• Currently, 1.2-1.5 million ton of coal is being handled at Berths 10 & 11 (combined) in a year. Of
this, 0.7 million ton is coke imported by the steel players directly (from Australia) while the rest is
coal (around 0.7 million ton) imported by traders for various industries in the hinterland. These
include sponge iron players, cement industry, thermal power plants, sugar refineries and small
steel mills.
• The most important steel players are Kalyani, Kirloskar, Mukund, Tata Metaliks and Apparant. A
break up of their coke requirement and evacuation method is given below.
• The most important coal traders active at Mormugao Port are Bhatia, Aggarwal, Maheshwari and
Coastal Energy.
Table 16-1 Break-up of Coal/Coke handled at Berth 10 & 11
Type of Approx Qty Method of

Name of Player
Players (million ton) evacuation
Kalyani 0.20 80% rail

Kirloskar 0.20 80% road
Mukund 0.20 80% rail
Steel Players
Apparant 0.15 100% road
Tata Metaliks 0.15 100% road
Total Steel Players 0.90
Bhatia 0.15
Coastal Energy 0.20 Almost
Coal Traders Maheshwari 0.25 entirely road
Agarwal 0.20 bound
Total Traders 0.80
Grand Total 1.70
Source: Rodrigues & Associates
• Mukund Steel has recently shifted its entire coke import cargo from Mormugao to Chennai Port
due to availability of cheaper rail freight. While a wagon can be loaded up to 42 ton in Mormugao
(because of Western Ghats), the same wagon can be loaded up to 60 ton in Chennai. Thus a
rake transports around 3500 ton from Chennai while the same rake transports up to 2500 ton
from Mormugao. This translates into an increase of 40%
• Thus the total cargo handled at Berth 10 & 11 is close to 1.5 million ton (1.7 - 0.2 = 1.5 for
Mukund Steel)
126
MPSEZL Final Report
• Apart from the above mentioned players, Goa Carbon imports raw petroleum coke, converts it
into calcined petroleum coke (CPC) and exports the same. The total volumes of export and
import are close to 0.1 MTPA but have decreased in the recent past
• Recently the neighbouring sugar refineries have procured 0.2 million ton of coal as fuel for their
furnaces for refining sugar. This is because the national output of sugar is insufficient to meet the
domestic demand currently. Thus some quantity of raw sugar was imported from Brazil, refined
and sold in domestic market. Due to the extra refining, bagasse (the traditional fuel for a sugar
refinery) was insufficient to refine the additional sugar and coal was imported for the same. Shri
Renuka Sugars is amongst the largest players in the sugar industry. Going forward, 40000 ton
per month are expected to be imported from September to May
• JK Cement has set up a plant 80-90 km from Belgaum. It is currently going through dry runs at
the plant. Going forward, it is expected to import 30,000-40,000 ton of coal per month. However,
this will be handled at the Berths 5A and 6A (operated by SWPL, a subsidiary of JSW)
• Multiple handlings with coke are avoided because of pilferage due to fines so generated
• Coal has to be handled such that it does not get contaminated by coming into contact with iron
ore
• The truck freight for Hospet to Mormugao is Rs. 750/ton and for Belgaum to Mormugao is Rs.
600/ton. A 6 wheeler dumper carries 13 ton of coal while a 10 wheeler carries 18 ton
• The charges paid by client at the Berth 10/11 are in range of Rs. 110-120/ton for coke and Rs.
100 per ton of coal. This includes CHLD (Cargo handling labour Department) charges. The
stevedore earns 40% - 50% of these charges
• The truck freight is paid for by the receiver directly. The trader’s job is to source the cargo till the
time it gets loaded in the truck/rake. The scale of rate charges are paid by client through
stevedores as per actuals
• The total charges payable at the port are Rs. 150-160 per ton for coal and Rs 180 per ton for
coke
• The storage charges are Rs. 84/10 sq m/day. The demurrage is payable after 60 days. However,
a new system has been proposed by the Port Trust that will raise the storage charges by a
considerable margin. The new system will drastically cut the period of demurrage and charge the
customers on basis of tonnage instead of land area
• The typical height of a coal stockyard is in the range of 7-8 m. 1 sq m of such a stockyard can
accommodate 5-6 ton of coal. Coke is a lighter commodity and similar land area can
accommodate lesser tonnage of coke. Berth 10 & 11 have a combined storage area of 80,000 sq
m and can store around 0.18-0.21 million ton at any given time.
• Road is the preferred mode of evacuation for Berth 10/11
• The truck freight for Tata Metaliks is Rs. 400/ton and Rs. 300/ton for Apparent Steel
127
MPSEZL Final Report
• Earlier the port had proposed that JSW start handling some cargo of Berth 10 & 11. However, it
did not work out because of the lack of availability of road evacuation (Berth 5A and 6A are only
rail evacuated) and the excess rates charged by SWPL
• Berth 10 & 11 frequently face pre berthing delay because of slow evacuation. These berths are
not mechanised and lack shore handling cranes. Ship gears are used to handle coal/coke.
Discharge rates average at around 12,000 ton/day for coal and 6000 ton/day for coke. Peak rates
are around 18,000 ton/day for coal and 8000 ton/day for coke
• Berth 5A and 6A are able to handle coal/coke at 25,000 ton/day. SWPL operates these berths
through a completely mechanised set up
• Coal is handled only at Berth 11 while coke is handled at Berth 10 and 11
• Mr. Rodrigues helped with certain important contact numbers with the steel plants mentioned
earlier:
o Tata Metaliks – Sameer Gaekwad, Head – Raw Materials (9922434366)
o Kirloskar – Baba Yousuf (9823175472)
o Kalyani, Mukund – Mr. Deshpande, GM – Jeena & Co. (9822596173)
128
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Ashish Machado

Designation: Director – Machado & Sons (Stevedores)
Date: 31/08/09
Place: Vasco, Goa
Minutes:
of Berth No 7 at Mormugao Port. Mr. Machado’s company is amongst the largest stevedores for
iron ore in Goa and handles substantial quantities of coal/coke also. They are currently handling
coal for Coastal Energy
• Mr. Machado remarked that Berth 10/11 are not the ideal berths and offer many constraints such
as pollution from the manual handling processes as well as slow clearance from the plot side
• Commenting on Berth 7, Mr. Machado said that the method of calculation of 4.41 MT of capacity
may be questionable. Also, there should be a provision of offering separate plots to different
clients for storage purposes. Further, robust rail and road connectivity is a must for sourcing any
demand for coal/coke
• Machado & Sons is expecting to handle 0.15 – 0.25 MT of coal at Mormugao Port in the current
year
• The key stevedores at Mormugao Port are
o Rodrigues & Associates
o Menezes & Sons
o J M Baxi
o Seaways
o Mormugao Logistics
o Machado & Sons
o Amit Transport
• He further provided the breakup of coal handled at Mormugao Port for the last 3 years as shown
below
129
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 16-2 Past 3 Year Breakup of Coal Traffic at Mormugao Port

Category Importers 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
Aparant Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 143,436 73,285 65,610
Goa Crabon Ltd. 94,227 45,191 73,758
J. S. W. Steel Ltd 3,728,743 3,892,399 4,282,331
Kalyani Steel Ltd. 142,990 185,623 0
Kirloskar Ferrous India Ltd. 168,743 167,511 11,000
Independent
Kirloskar Industries Ltd. 28,601 0 29,624
Players
Mukund Kalyani Steel Ltd. 53,062 0 0
Mukund Steel Ltd. 110,500 24,214 0
Nikhil Alloy Steel Ltd. 0 0 41,050
Sesa Goa Ltd. 51,706 265,381 167,618
Tata Metalliks Ltd. 132,548 157,346 105,597
Total Independent Players 4,654,556 4,810,950 4,776,588
Agarwal Coal Corp. 0 0 55,000
Bhatia Coal Sales 0 0 25,000
Bhatia International 0 0 75,048
Traders
Coastal Energy Pvt. Ltd. 50,045 48,160 0
Maheshwari 292,702 238,991 279,443
Rawmet Commodities 0 105,723 0
Total Traders 342,747 392,874 434,491
Total 4,997,303 5,203,824 5,211,079
Total Excluding JSW 1,268,560 1,311,425 928,748
Source: Machado & Sons
130
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Kuncheria

Designation: Chief Mechanical Engineer
Date: 31/08/09
Place: Vasco, Goa
Minutes:
• Mr. Kuncheria is heading the department (Mechanical Engineering) that is working on the Berth 7
development in Mormugao Port Trust
• Rohan enquired about the potential constraints in the smooth implementation/feasibility of the
project
• Mr. Kuncheria said that the project was extremely simple in nature. He did not find any potential
constraints towards the same
• He also mentioned that Port Trust will be trying to capture a pie of the iron ore exports from the
Bellary Hospet belt. The Railways are working on the double laning of Bellary to Port to facilitate
the same
131
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. V Y Dhond

Designation: Dock Manager
Date: 31/08/09
Place: Vasco, Goa
Minutes:
of Berth No 7 at Mormugao Port
• Mr. Dhond enquired as to what cargo can be expected to be handled at the berth. Rohan outlined
the presence of various industries such as sponge iron, integrated steel plants, cement plants
and thermal power plants as the potential source of demand for imported coal. It was further
explained that the Bellary-Hospet belt forms a key hinterland for the proposed berth 7
• It was also discussed that Berth 10 & 11 cargo may be shifted to Berth 7 in near future. Mr.
Dhond remarked that we should concentrate on sourcing more coal cargo for other clients so that
the Berth 7 can lead to additional revenues for Mormugao Port Trust
132
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. S C Umarye

Designation: Executive Engineer (Proj)
Date: 31/08/09
Place: Vasco, Goa
Minutes:
of Berth No 7 at Mormugao Port.
• Mr Umarye said that the project is very straight forward and does not see any constraints in the
implementation
• He helped organise a site visit to the proposed location. The site visit covered the proposed
location of the berth and the stock yards
133
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Srinivasa Rao

Designation: MD, Bellary Ispat Pvt. Ltd. & Balajiswamy Premium Steels Pvt. Ltd.; President, Bellary
District Sponge Iron Manufacturers Association
Date: 2/09/09
Place: Bellary, Karnataka
Minutes:
• Rohan started off with a brief overview of the development of Berth 7 at Mormugao Port Trust. He
also explained the role of MPSEZL towards the same and the objective of the traffic assessment
being conducted by i-maritime
• Mr Rao’s company, Balajiswamy Premium Steels Pvt. Ltd., operates a 200 ton per day (TPD)
sponge iron plant on the outskirts of Bellary. He is also presiding over the Bellary District Sponge
Iron Manufacturers Ltd.
• Currently, the coal for Bellary Hospet area is being unloaded at Chennai (Tamil Nadu), Mangalore
(Karnataka) and Krishnapatnam (Andhra Pradesh). Chennai remains the most favoured locations
amongst these three ports. Krishnapatnam is coming up as strong contender as more and more
iron ore exports are routed through it
• Currently, Balajiswamy Premium Steels is procuring 8000 ton of coal per month. Of this, 3000 ton
per month is being imported from South Africa while 5000 ton is being sourced from the Singareni
mines in Andhra Pradesh. The % of the imported coal of total coal requirement varies from 25-
75%
• Mr. Rao is also coal trader supplying coal to some other sponge iron plants in Bellary – Hospet
belt.
• The freight charges for coal are Rs. 500 per ton (Krishnapatnam/Chennai – Bellary) and Rs.
600/ton (Mangalore – Bellary)
• He further suggested meeting Mr. Nagarajan from the Bellary District Sponge Iron Manufacturers
Association for further information on the sponge iron industry in Bellary
134
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. L V Srinivasa Rao

Designation: Dy. Manager, Bellary Steels & Alloys Ltd.
Date: 2/09/09
Minutes:
• Bellary Alloy & Steel has a 200 TPD plant on the outskirts of Bellary. They import 3000 Ton of
coal from South Africa per month and procure around 4000 ton of indigenous coal from Singareni
mines of Andhra Pradesh. The % of imported coal of the total coal depends on the availability of
indigenous coal (usually around 70%)
• 1 ton of sponge iron requires 1.1 ton of imported coal or 1.5 ton of indigenous coal.
• They source their imported coal through Bhatia traders. Bhatia is responsible for sourcing the
required quantity and quality of coal at the port. There on the client is responsible for transporting
the same to its plant. Currently, Bellary Alloy & Steel is sourcing all their cargo via road
• The reason for choosing road over rail transport is the smaller parcel size requirement (rake
parcel sizes vary from 2500 to 3500 ton) and the multiple handling in rail transport. Bellary
Junction is 8 km away from the plant location and has coal unloading facilities. There is another
station, Hagri, about 15 km from the plant where coal is handled.
• The freight rate from Chennai to Bellary is around Rs. 500/ton
• The truck availability is a major reason for importing coal from Chennai. Iron ore is exported from
Bellary through Chennai port. The trucks transporting this ore are used to transport coal on the
return journey
• In all, there are around 80 sponge iron plants in and around Bellary – Hospet with an average
output of 150-200 TPD. In all there are close to 150 sponge iron plants in the hinterland being
discussed with average 100-150 TPD
• He further suggested getting in touch with Bellary District Sponge Iron Manufacturers Association
135
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Nagarajan

Designation: Bellary District Sponge Iron Manufacturers Association
Date: 2/09/09
Minutes:
• Mr. Nagarajan explained that most of the sponge iron companies in Bellary are registered with
the BDSIA (Bellary District Sponge Iron Manufacturers Association). Of these registered
companies around 38 are currently operational.
• The total output of BDSIA registered companies would be around 4500-4800 TPD. The
cumulative output for Bellary district would be around 5500 TPD and total output of Karnataka
state would be close to 7000 TPD
• These companies used a mix of imported to domestic coal in the ratio of 70% to 30%. 80-90% of
the imported coal is sourced through traders. Bhatia is amongst the biggest trader in Bellary
• Chennai, New Mangalore and Krishnapatnam are the ports of choice for traders. Their clients do
not have any objection to this
• While the final choice of port lies with the customer, the trader usually influences this decision
• The cumulative sponge iron industry output in the region has gone down by 20-40% in last 6-12
months. This is because of the recession. Moreover, expansion plans are also on hold because
of the same reason
• Mr. Nagarajan suggested that MPSEZL should set up a marketing office in Bellary if it wants to
source any coal demand
136
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. V T Ramesh

Designation: Sr. Manager (Marketing), Bhatia International Ltd.
Date: 2/09/09
Minutes:
• Mr. Ramesh explained that the main reason for lack of coal import from Mormugao to Bellary was
the absence of iron ore movement on the Bellary – Mormugao Port route. Thus freight on former
route was Rs 500-520/ton (coal) and Rs 1200/ton for latter route
• Roads were preferred by sponge iron players over rake because of lower parcel size and multiple
handling. A single rake transfers 2500-3500 ton of coal. Sponge iron players do not usually order
such large quantities of coal in one go
• The current rate of coal is Rs 4650/ton ex-Chennai and Rs 4600/ton ex New Mangalore
• He further commented that KPCL had imported 0.8 million ton this fiscal year
• The crux of the matter as brought out by this conversation remains that until Hospet iron ore
starts getting exported from Mormugao, the freight charges will remain prohibitive towards coal
movement on Mormugao - Bellary route
137
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. Hari Prasad

Designation: AGM, Rayen Steels
Date: 3/09/09
Minutes:
• Rayen Steels has 275 TPD plant in Bellary. Started in 2006, the plant consumes around 6000-
7000 ton of coal per month. Of this 50% is imported. Bhatia is the preferred trader for the same
• The plant usually orders in batches of 3000-4000 ton and lifts the coal @ 1200 ton per week. The
remaining coal keep lying at the port stock yard
• Chennai, New Mangalore and Krishnapatnam are the preferred ports for unloading the coal. The
choice of these ports is as suggested by traders
• Domestic coal is sourced from Singareni mines. The railways allow a window of 24 hours for the
domestic coal to be cleared from their stock yard beyond which demurrage charges are levied
• The freight for Chennai – Bellary route is Rs. 550-600/ton and may go up to Rs 700 per ton
during rains. It is Rs. 600-700 per ton for Krishnapatnam
• They are open to shifting cargo to Mormugao Port for an integrated logistical advantage of Rs 50-
100 per ton
• The sponge iron industry in Bellary has grown sharply. In 2006 there were only 10 plants while
currently 35 are operational
• The plant is setting up a captive power plant of 5 MW as per a directive of Karnataka Govt.
making it mandatory for any new sponge iron plant to set up its own power supply due to paucity
of electricity
138
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Contacted: Mr. Usman

Designation: Hothur Ispat (9449595768)
Date: 3/09/09
Place: Bellary, Karnataka (Telephonic)
Minutes:
• Hothur Ispat has one of the largest sponge iron plant in the area with a 300 TPD production
• Their coal requirement is close to 10,000 ton per month. Of this 50% is imported and the rest is
domestic. Imported coal is sourced from Bhatia traders
• The imported coal is unloaded at Chennai. At times it is unloaded at New Mangalore
• The reason for choice of Chennai is abundant truck availability at competitive rates. Freight from
Mormugao Port to Bellary costs in the range of Rs 800-1000 per ton
• The plant is building a private rail siding about 2 km from the location. It is expected to get
operational by November. Hothur Ispat owns around 100 acres of land around this siding that can
be used as a coal stock yard. It is planning to use this siding for its captive use as well as lease it
to coal traders
• They are also constructing a captive power plant of 10 MW. It is expected to be operational by
December. 1 MW of power is sufficient to run a 300 TPD sponge iron plant. The remaining will be
used to provide power to expansion projects as well will be sold to the state grid
139
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Met: Mr. K G Srinivasan

Designation: Executive Engineer (Civil), Karnataka Power Corp. Ltd.
Date: 3/09/09
Minutes:
• Currently there is a 500 MW coal based thermal power plant at Bellary that is being operated by
Karnataka Power Corp. Ltd.
• Earlier they were using imported coal but as per a recent meeting with BHEL (designed the
turbines), they have switched to 100% domestic coal.
• KPCL has a stockpile of 40000 ton of imported coal currently which they are slowly using by
blending with domestic coal
• They are sourcing domestic coal from Maharashtra and Singareni
• 100% coal is brought in by rail
• The plant is adding boilers (1000 MW by March 2011 and 1500 MW by 2104). However, the new
boilers will also run only on domestic coal
140
MPSEZL Final Report
Person Contacted: Mr. U P Patil

Designation: Vice President, Projects, MSPL (Baldota Group)
Date: 16/09/09
Place: Mumbai (Telephonic)
Minutes:
• Rohan started off with an introduction of i-maritime, the Berth 7 project background and
MPSEZL’s role in the same
• Mr. Patil explained that Baldota Group is currently building a 3.55 MTPA steel plant in Koppal,
Karnataka. The plant will be developed in two phases – Phase I with 1.25 MTPA capacities and
Phase II with 2.3 MTPA capacities. The plant will have its won captive power plant and ancillary
units to support the integrated steel manufacturing process
• He explained that on an average 1 million ton of coking coal and 0.25 million ton of thermal coal
is required for making 1 million ton of steel
• The plant will import all its coking coal from Australia and thermal coal from South Africa,
Indonesia and Vietnam
• The group has not yet decided about the unload port in India for its imported coal. However, when
questioned about the suitability of Mormugao Port with mechanised coal handling facilities for
unloading coal, Mr. Patil confirmed that if the conditions are favourable, they would source coal
from Mormugao
• Baldota Group is also exporting iron ore from its Hospet mines. They exported almost 5 million
ton of iron ore in last fiscal year. More than 40% of this was transported from Goa (around 2
million ton) and the remaining to New Mangalore and Chennai. 60% of its total iron ore export
was evacuated by rail and the rest by road. Road is a relatively less economical option as
compared to rail but exporters have to use road to meet spot demands. Timely rake unavailability
is major concern for the same
• The plant is constructing two rail sidings, one connecting it to Goa and the second to Chennai.
Coal procurement would happen through rail
• For Phase I of the project, land has been acquired and work has started. Construction will begin
in April 2010 and is expected to take 24-30 months to complete. Considering a further 3-6 months
of dry-run and delays, the Phase of the plant should commence operations in FY 2014. Phase II
construction will begin after that
141
MPSEZL Final Report
17. SCENARIOS INFLUENCING TRADE PATTERN (APPENDIX)
Table 17-1 Breakup of Indian Iron-Ore Exports to Various Countries
Importing Country 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
World 57.09 51.50 87.28 84.05 91.42 68.63

Africa 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00
America 0.11 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.83 0.00
Asia (excl. Middle
52.57 49.68 77.17 82.09 88.41 68.14
East)
China 25.16 35.22 60.34 69.75 76.51 61.41
Japan 21.65 10.57 11.25 9.98 8.89 4.85
Middle East 0.40 0.44 5.63 0.29 0.36 0.02
Europe 3.84 1.23 4.39 1.64 1.78 0.34
European Union 2.30 0.89 2.01 0.86 0.76 0.23
Other European
1.54 0.34 2.38 0.77 1.02 0.10
countries
Oceania 0.16 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.14
Others 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00
% China of Total 44% 68% 69% 83% 84% 89%
% Japan of Total 38% 21% 13% 12% 10% 7%
% Non China/Japan
18% 11% 18% 5% 7% 3%
Exports
Source: CMIE
142
MPSEZL Final Report
18. INTEGRATED LOGISTICS COST ANALYSIS (APPENDIX)
Table 18-1 Inland Road Distances (km)

Cargo Centers Mormugao Panjim Karwar Belekeri New Mangalore Chennai Ennore Krishnapatnam Machilipatnam Kakinada Vizag/ Gangavaram
Bagalkot 274 252 279 263 470 724 717 639 707 848 980
Honnarahalli 315 388 363 347 420 512 506 427 540 705 836
Mudhol 258 238 286 273 484 776 770 690 749 890 1,020
Bangalore 592 586 508 489 352 326 333 381 644 829 982
Biswanahalli 593 585 508 489 353 326 391 380 643 828 986
Bommasandra 613 547 529 509 375 323 352 400 660 844 1,019
Mahadevpura 600 593 516 497 360 320 327 375 638 824 976
Peenya 577 573 495 475 341 337 402 390 663 849 1,006
Kumry 141 119 173 176 424 806 810 731 844 983 1,112
Yadwad 231 211 259 246 466 782 775 697 765 906 1,036
Asundi 412 406 380 364 439 504 497 419 533 717 836
Belagallu 396 388 363 347 421 512 506 427 540 705 836
Bellary 395 388 363 347 420 512 506 427 540 705 836
Chikkanthapura 378 372 343 329 397 556 548 469 583 747 890
Chikkanthapura 378 371 343 327 398 549 554 470 583 747 874
Dhanapur 395 388 363 347 421 512 506 427 540 705 836
Halkundi 405 399 372 356 408 519 512 433 548 711 842
Horovanahalli 331 324 299 283 380 577 571 495 605 770 901
Horovanahalli 331 324 299 283 380 577 571 495 605 770 901
Hospet 331 324 299 283 380 577 571 495 605 770 901
Janikunta Tanda 386 379 354 347 421 523 506 445 540 705 836
Sidaginomola 415 408 382 366 441 501 495 416 529 694 825
Sidiginamola 415 407 382 366 439 502 496 416 529 695 826
Siriwar 395 388 363 347 421 512 506 427 626 705 920
Thorangallu 367 360 334 318 394 540 534 455 569 733 864
Toranagallu 367 360 334 318 394 540 534 455 569 733 864
Torangal 367 360 334 318 394 540 534 455 569 733 864
Torangallu 367 360 334 318 394 540 534 455 569 733 864
Varadapura 350 344 277 281 351 597 589 511 624 788 920
Veniveerapura 382 376 350 334 407 528 521 442 555 720 851
Mathodu 432 428 341 317 254 498 541 512 723 887 1,018
Paramenahalli 389 382 305 286 283 506 548 498 673 837 968
Baikampady 342 351 246 222 7 706 713 738 955 1,120 1,247
Brahmavar 288 297 188 168 60 743 785 740 916 1,081 1,212
Mangalore 352 361 257 233 10 700 742 730 957 1,122 1,253
Padubidri 323 302 184 160 30 750 779 734 910 1,070 1,200
Panambur, Mangalore 348 356 252 228 2 700 742 731 961 1,126 1,257
Dharwad 165 161 157 141 361 730 734 654 768 933 1,064
Gulbarga 491 467 494 478 661 749 742 625 557 698 830
Malkhed 517 495 523 507 671 719 716 590 518 659 786
Mogla 515 491 518 502 665 727 719 599 527 668 800
Sedam 528 506 520 503 664 701 696 575 503 642 776
Wadi 488 466 499 483 643 730 724 606 545 686 817
Hassan 482 491 386 362 168 532 574 574 800 986 1,142
Kasabahobli 482 491 386 362 168 532 574 574 800 986 1,142
Koppathimmanahalli 649 642 565 549 416 261 328 312 580 765 922
Hatkalangle 228 206 282 285 526 921 911 831 872 993 1,145
Kagal 153 181 258 261 509 898 892 815 856 1,001 1,129
Bevinahalli 322 313 288 273 404 587 581 503 616 781 911
Hirebaganal 318 312 265 271 390 598 591 521 627 790 921
Hirebangir 304 297 271 255 400 606 600 521 634 799 930
Koppal 304 297 271 255 400 600 599 521 634 799 929
Ginigera 314 307 281 265 389 595 587 509 623 787 917
Ginigere 314 306 281 265 389 594 588 510 623 787 918
Mudgal 367 345 348 332 492 645 638 566 619 760 887
Raichur 476 456 443 427 557 577 571 455 507 648 779
Jaigad 281 262 379 404 631 1,078 1,074 991 1,025 1,166 1,293
Ratnagiri 243 222 339 364 591 1,046 1,042 958 998 1,139 1,266
Lonand 384 362 438 442 690 1,018 1,011 914 880 961 1,093
Bhadravati 347 357 254 227 188 587 630 593 768 932 1,075
Shimoga 329 337 234 209 183 607 650 612 781 946 1,077
Munge 143 121 253 278 493 973 982 899 992 1,133 1,260
Sindhudurg 117 96 175 203 465 933 943 859 972 1,108 1,235
Salcette 30 32 68 93 320 881 898 798 911 1,076 1,232
South Goa 30 32 68 93 320 881 898 798 911 1,076 1,232
Ammasandara 497 506 401 377 256 454 460 480 706 892 1,044
Jodidevarahalli 466 515 438 417 296 398 441 430 656 842 1,000
Kibbanahalli 490 495 389 365 246 468 511 482 709 894 1,050
Kunigal 558 554 463 439 278 422 464 453 695 881 1,038
Sira 466 462 384 365 290 429 471 442 669 855 1,010
Nandikur 303 311 207 183 49 736 760 734 912 1,077 1,204
Tadri 140 137 32 10 48 785 828 774 887 1,051 1,182
Source: i-maritime analysis, Yahoo maps, Road Guides
143
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-2 Inland Rail Distances (km)

Cargo Centers Mormugao Panjim Karwar Belekeri New Mangalore Chennai Ennore Krishnapatnam Machilipatnam Kakinada Vizag/ Gangavaram Cargo Station Code
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Ammasandara 596 592 652 673 360 479 498 586 917 1,067 1,196 AMSA
Asundi 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Bagalkot 391 388 441 489 794 745 759 707 810 960 1,089 BGK
Baikampady 469 466 349 307 51 845 865 952 1,179 1,328 1,457 SL
Bangalore 733 730 789 805 529 363 377 470 821 970 1,100 SBC
Belagallu 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Bellary 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Bevinahalli 639 636 696 711 435 435 450 542 894 1,043 1,172 TK
Bhadravati 543 540 593 641 429 621 636 728 864 1,013 1,143 BDVT
Biswanahalli 733 730 789 805 529 363 377 470 821 970 1,100 SBC
Bommasandra 733 730 789 805 529 363 377 470 821 970 1,100 SBC
Brahmavar 498 495 378 336 60 822 837 929 1,156 1,305 1,434 MAQ
Chikkanthapura 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Chikkanthapura 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Dhanapur 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Dharwad 220 217 276 318 663 729 744 692 795 945 1,074 DWR
Ginigera 366 363 422 464 720 583 598 546 649 798 927 GIN
Ginigere 366 363 422 464 720 583 598 546 649 798 927 GIN
Gulbarga 680 677 736 778 953 716 730 678 651 800 3,135 GR
Halkundi 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Haruvanahalli 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Hassan 590 587 611 569 293 578 593 685 911 1,061 1,190 HAS
Hatkalangle 385 382 441 483 835 1,035 1,050 998 1,101 1,250 3,236 KOP
Hirebaganal 366 363 422 464 720 583 598 546 649 798 927 GIN
Hirebangir 355 352 411 453 731 594 609 557 660 809 938 KBL
Honnarahalli 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Horovanahalli 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Hospet 383 380 439 481 703 566 581 529 632 781 911 HPT
Jaigad 367 364 446 488 846 1,276 1,295 1,238 1,341 1,491 1,620 RN
Janikunta Tanda 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Jodidevarahalli 639 636 696 711 435 435 450 542 894 1,043 1,172 TK
Kagal 385 382 441 483 835 1,035 1,050 998 1,101 1,250 3,236 KOP
Kasabahobli 590 587 611 569 293 578 593 685 911 1,061 1,190 HAS
Kibbanahalli 590 587 646 666 386 484 499 591 911 1,061 1,190 BSN
Koppal 355 352 411 453 731 594 609 557 660 809 938 KBL
Koppathimmanahalli 799 796 855 871 595 310 325 417 768 918 1,047 KQZ
Kumry 200 197 250 298 650 851 866 814 916 1,066 1,195 BGM
Kunigal 639 636 696 711 435 435 450 542 894 1,043 1,172 TK
Lonand 525 522 581 623 975 1,175 1,185 1,138 1,119 1,269 3,002 LNN
Mahadevpura 733 730 789 805 529 363 377 470 821 970 1,100 SBC
Malkhed 742 738 798 840 909 704 723 666 589 739 868 MQR
Mangalore 498 495 378 336 60 822 837 929 1,156 1,305 1,434 MAQ
Mathodu 463 460 519 561 487 652 667 615 717 867 996 CTA
Mogla 680 677 736 778 953 716 730 678 651 800 3,135 GR
Mudgal 391 388 441 489 794 745 759 707 810 960 1,089 BGK
Mudhol 391 388 441 489 794 745 759 707 810 960 1,089 BGK
Munge 174 170 253 295 652 1,082 1,102 1,045 1,148 1,297 1,427 SNDD
Nandikur 406 403 286 244 108 908 923 1,015 1,241 1,391 1,520 UD
Padubidri 431 428 311 269 83 878 893 985 1,211 1,361 1,496 PDD
Panambur, Mangalore 514 511 394 352 0 871 885 978 1,204 1,354 1,488 PNMB
Paramenahalli 463 460 519 561 487 652 667 615 717 867 996 CTA
Peenya 733 730 789 805 529 363 377 470 821 970 1,100 SBC
Raichur 620 617 676 717 809 571 586 534 637 787 916 RC
Ratnagiri 367 364 446 488 846 1,276 1,295 1,238 1,341 1,491 1,620 RN
Salcette 31 28 82 122 482 917 932 880 983 1,133 1,262 MAO
Sedam 680 677 736 778 953 716 730 678 651 800 3,135 GR
Shimoga 559 556 615 657 445 637 652 744 880 1,030 1,159 SME
Sidaginomola 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Sidiginamola 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Sindhudurg 85 85 220 247 540 1,100 1,110 975 1,120 1,250 1,370 SNDD
Sira 639 636 696 711 435 435 450 542 894 1,043 1,172 TK
Siriwar 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
South Goa 31 28 82 122 482 917 932 880 983 1,133 1,262 MAO
Tadri 174 171 54 12 340 1,059 1,074 1,022 1,125 1,274 1,404 GOK
Thorangallu 416 413 472 514 670 533 548 496 599 749 878 TNGL
Toranagallu 416 413 472 514 670 533 548 496 599 749 878 TNGL
Torangal 416 413 472 514 670 533 548 496 599 749 878 TNGL
Torangallu 416 413 472 514 670 533 548 496 599 749 878 TNGL
Varadapura 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Veniveerapura 462 459 518 560 651 515 529 477 580 730 859 BIOP
Wadi 717 714 773 815 916 679 694 642 614 764 3,163 WADI
Yadwad 200 197 250 298 650 851 866 814 916 1,066 1,195 BGM
Source: railway distance tables
144
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-3 Inland Road Freight Costs - Normal (Rs./ton)

State District Cargo Centers Mormugao Panjim Karwar Belekeri New Mangalore Chennai Ennore Krishnapatnam Machilipatnam Kakinada Vizag/ Gangavaram
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1243 1265 1003 943 640 1135 1150 1200 1765 2230 2610
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 1025 1015 950 910 1098 1260 1243 1048 1333 1793 2090
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 685 630 698 658 1175 1810 1793 1598 1768 2120 2450
Karnataka Dakshina Kannada
Baikampady 855 878 615 555 18 1765 1783 1845 2388 2800 3118
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 1480 1465 1270 1223 880 815 833 953 1610 2073 2455
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 990 970 908 868 1053 1280 1265 1068 1350 1763 2090
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 988 970 908 868 1050 1280 1265 1068 1350 1763 2090
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 1155 1138 945 898 770 1115 1128 1073 1638 2103 2403
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 868 893 635 568 470 1468 1575 1483 1920 2330 2688
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli 1483 1463 1270 1223 883 815 978 950 1608 2070 2465
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra 1385 1368 1323 1273 938 808 880 1000 1650 2110 2548
Brahmavar 708 743 470 420 150 1858 1963 1850 2290 2703 3030
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 940 930 858 823 993 1390 1370 1173 1458 1868 2225
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 988 970 908 868 1053 1280 1265 1068 1350 1763 2090
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 413 403 393 353 903 1825 1835 1635 1920 2333 2660
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera 785 768 703 663 973 1488 1468 1273 1558 1968 2293
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 1228 1168 1235 1195 1653 1873 1855 1563 1393 1745 2075
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1008 998 930 890 1020 1298 1280 1083 1370 1778 2105
Karnataka Bellary Haruvanahalli 990 970 908 868 1053 1280 1265 1068 1350 1763 2090
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1205 1228 965 905 420 1330 1435 1435 2000 2465 2855
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle 550 498 685 695 1315 2285 2278 2078 2180 2533 2863
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 790 780 713 673 975 1495 1478 1303 1568 1975 2303
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 760 743 678 638 1000 1515 1500 1303 1585 1998 2325
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 988 970 908 868 1050 1280 1265 1068 1350 1763 2090
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 828 810 748 708 950 1443 1428 1238 1513 1925 2253
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 765 655 948 1010 1578 2695 2685 2478 2563 2915 3233
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 990 970 908 868 1053 1280 1265 1068 1350 1763 2090
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 1305 1288 1095 1043 740 995 1103 1075 1640 2105 2500
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 510 455 645 653 1273 2245 2230 2038 2140 2493 2823
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1205 1228 965 905 420 1330 1435 1435 2000 2465 2855
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 1225 1238 973 913 615 1170 1278 1205 1773 2235 2625
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 755 738 675 638 1000 1513 1498 1303 1585 1998 2323
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 1623 1605 1413 1373 1040 653 820 780 1450 1913 2305
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 353 298 433 440 1060 2015 2025 1828 2110 2458 2780
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 1395 1385 1158 1098 695 1055 1160 1133 1738 2203 2595
Maharashtra Satara Lonand 960 905 1095 1105 1725 2545 2528 2285 2200 2403 2733
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 1500 1483 1290 1243 900 800 818 938 1595 2060 2440
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 1328 1238 1308 1268 1678 1798 1790 1475 1295 1648 1965
Mangalore 880 903 643 583 25 1750 1855 1825 2393 2805 3133
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 1080 1070 853 793 635 1245 1353 1280 1808 2218 2545
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 1288 1228 1295 1255 1663 1818 1798 1498 1318 1670 2000
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal 685 630 698 658 1175 1810 1793 1598 1768 2120 2450
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 653 595 715 683 1210 1940 1925 1725 1873 2225 2550
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 418 303 633 695 1233 2433 2455 2248 2480 2833 3150
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 758 778 518 458 123 1840 1900 1835 2280 2693 3010
Padubidri 730 755 460 400 75 1875 1948 1835 2275 2675 3000
Panambur, Mangalore 870 890 630 570 5 1750 1855 1828 2403 2815 3143
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 973 955 763 715 708 1265 1370 1245 1683 2093 2420
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 1443 1433 1238 1188 853 843 1005 975 1658 2123 2515
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 1190 1140 1108 1068 1393 1443 1428 1138 1268 1620 1948
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 665 555 848 910 1478 2615 2605 2395 2495 2848 3165
Goa South Goa Salcette 75 80 170 233 800 2203 2245 1995 2278 2690 3080
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 1320 1265 1300 1258 1660 1753 1740 1438 1258 1605 1940
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 823 843 585 523 458 1518 1625 1530 1953 2365 2693
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 1038 1020 955 915 1103 1253 1238 1040 1323 1735 2063
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 350 240 438 508 1163 2333 2358 2148 2430 2770 3088
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 1165 1155 960 913 725 1073 1178 1105 1673 2138 2525
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 988 970 908 868 1053 1280 1265 1068 1565 1763 2300
Goa South Goa South Goa 75 80 170 233 800 2203 2245 1995 2278 2690 3080
Karnataka Uttara Kannada
Tadri 350 343 80 25 120 1963 2070 1935 2218 2628 2955
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 988 970 908 868 1053 1280 1265 1068 1350 1763 2090
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 870 860 750 703 878 1493 1473 1278 1560 1970 2300
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 950 940 875 835 1018 1320 1303 1105 1388 1800 2128
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 1220 1165 1248 1208 1608 1825 1810 1515 1363 1715 2043
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 585 528 648 615 1165 1955 1938 1743 1913 2265 2590
145
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-4 Inland Rail Freight Costs (Rs. per ton)

State Cargo Centers Mormugao Panjim Karwar Belekeri New Mangalore Chennai Ennore Krishnapatnam Machilipatnam Kakinada Vizag/ Gangavaram
Goa South Goa Salcette 125 125 125 153 454 825 846 804 888 1016 1121
Goa South Goa South Goa 125 125 125 153 454 825 846 804 888 1016 1121
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 378 370 420 454 720 677 686 643 741 867 973
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 378 370 420 454 720 677 686 643 741 867 973
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 669 660 711 741 488 353 361 437 741 867 973
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli 669 660 711 741 488 353 361 437 741 867 973
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra 669 660 711 741 488 353 361 437 741 867 973
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 669 660 711 741 488 353 361 437 741 867 973
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 669 660 711 741 488 353 361 437 741 867 973
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle 370 370 420 454 762 931 931 888 994 1100 2216
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 212 212 253 295 592 783 783 741 825 952 1058
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 212 212 253 295 592 783 783 741 825 952 1058
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 370 361 412 454 643 523 541 488 583 711 825
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 395 395 446 480 609 497 506 462 549 677 804
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 437 429 480 515 600 480 488 446 532 660 783
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 437 429 480 523 454 600 609 566 652 783 888
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 437 429 480 523 454 600 609 566 652 783 888
Baikampady 437 437 336 303 125 762 783 867 1058 1185 1290
Brahmavar 462 462 361 328 125 741 762 846 1037 1164 1269
Mangalore 462 462 361 328 125 741 762 846 1037 1164 1269
Padubidri 412 404 312 270 125 804 804 888 1079 1206 1311
Panambur, Mangalore 480 480 378 344 125 783 804 888 1079 1206 1311
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 229 229 278 312 609 660 677 635 720 846 952
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 617 617 669 703 867 652 660 617 600 720 2172
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 677 669 720 762 825 643 660 609 541 669 783
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 617 617 669 703 867 652 660 617 600 720 2172
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 617 617 669 703 867 652 660 617 600 720 2172
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 652 652 703 741 825 617 635 592 566 694 2183
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 541 541 566 523 295 532 549 626 825 952 1058
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 541 541 566 523 295 532 549 626 825 952 1058
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 720 720 783 783 549 303 320 395 694 825 931
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 583 583 635 652 412 412 420 506 804 931 1037
Karnataka Koppal Ginigere 353 353 404 437 652 541 549 506 592 720 846
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 353 353 404 437 652 541 549 506 592 720 846
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 344 344 395 429 669 549 558 515 600 741 846
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 344 344 395 429 669 549 558 515 600 741 846
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera 353 353 404 437 652 541 549 506 592 720 846
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal 378 370 420 454 720 677 686 643 741 867 973
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 566 566 617 652 741 532 541 497 583 711 825
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 506 497 549 592 404 575 583 660 783 909 1016
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 515 515 566 600 420 583 600 677 804 931 1037
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 549 549 600 617 344 446 462 541 825 952 1058
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 583 583 635 652 412 412 420 506 804 931 1037
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 541 541 592 609 370 454 462 549 825 952 1058
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 583 583 635 652 412 412 420 506 804 931 1037
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 583 583 635 652 412 412 420 506 804 931 1037
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 387 387 287 253 135 825 825 909 1100 1227 1330
Karnataka Uttara KannadaTadri 196 196 125 125 328 952 952 909 994 1121 1248
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 370 370 420 454 762 931 931 888 994 1100 2216
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 353 353 420 454 762 1142 1142 1100 1185 1311 1406
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 353 353 420 454 762 1142 1142 1100 1185 1311 1406
Maharashtra Satara Lonand 488 488 541 575 867 1037 1058 1016 994 1121 2115
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 196 187 262 295 600 973 994 931 1016 1142 1269
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 125 125 229 253 497 973 994 867 994 1100 1206
146
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-5 % Reduction in Inland Freight Cost due to Reverse Cargo Availability (Scenario 1)
Cargo Centers New Krishnapatna Vizag/
State District Mormugao Panjim Karwar Belekeri Chennai Ennore Machilipatnam Kakinada
Mangalore m Gangavaram
Goa South Goa Salcette 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Goa South Goa South Goa 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Haruvanahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Baikampady 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Brahmavar 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Mangalore 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Padubidri 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Panambur, Mangalore 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 100% 100% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Satara Lonand 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
147
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-6 Reduced Inland Freight Cost via Road - Scenario 1 (Rs./ton)
Goa South Goa Salcette 75.00 80.00 170.00 232.50 800.00 2,202.50 2,245.00 1,995.00 2,277.50 2,690.00 3,080.00
Goa South Goa South Goa 75.00 80.00 170.00 232.50 800.00 2,202.50 2,245.00 1,995.00 2,277.50 2,690.00 3,080.00
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 685.00 630.00 697.50 657.50 881.25 1,357.50 1,344.38 1,198.13 1,767.50 2,120.00 2,450.00
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 645.00 595.00 715.00 682.50 907.50 1,455.00 1,443.75 1,293.75 1,872.50 2,225.00 2,550.00
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 1,480.00 1,465.00 1,270.00 1,222.50 440.00 407.50 416.25 476.25 1,610.00 2,072.50 2,455.00
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli 1,482.50 1,462.50 1,270.00 1,222.50 441.25 407.50 488.75 475.00 1,607.50 2,070.00 2,465.00
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra 1,532.50 1,367.50 1,322.50 1,272.50 468.75 403.75 440.00 500.00 1,650.00 2,110.00 2,547.50
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 1,500.00 1,482.50 1,290.00 1,242.50 450.00 400.00 408.75 468.75 1,595.00 2,060.00 2,440.00
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 1,442.50 1,432.50 1,237.50 1,187.50 426.25 421.25 502.50 487.50 1,657.50 2,122.50 2,515.00
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle 570.00 515.00 705.00 712.50 657.50 1,151.25 1,138.75 1,038.75 2,180.00 2,482.50 2,862.50
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 352.50 297.50 432.50 440.00 530.00 1,007.50 1,012.50 913.75 2,110.00 2,457.50 2,780.00
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 577.50 527.50 647.50 615.00 582.50 977.50 968.75 871.25 1,912.50 2,265.00 2,590.00
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 1,030.00 1,015.00 950.00 910.00 548.75 630.00 621.25 523.75 1,332.50 1,792.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 990.00 970.00 907.50 867.50 526.25 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 987.50 970.00 907.50 867.50 525.00 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 945.00 930.00 857.50 822.50 496.25 695.00 685.00 586.25 1,457.50 1,867.50 2,225.00
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 987.50 970.00 907.50 867.50 526.25 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 1,012.50 997.50 930.00 890.00 510.00 648.75 640.00 541.25 1,370.00 1,777.50 2,105.00
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli 827.50 810.00 747.50 707.50 475.00 721.25 713.75 618.75 1,512.50 1,925.00 2,252.50
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 787.50 970.00 907.50 867.50 525.00 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 827.50 810.00 747.50 707.50 475.00 721.25 713.75 618.75 1,512.50 1,925.00 2,252.50
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 965.00 947.50 885.00 867.50 526.25 653.75 632.50 556.25 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 1,037.50 1,020.00 955.00 915.00 551.25 626.25 618.75 520.00 1,322.50 1,735.00 2,062.50
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 987.50 970.00 907.50 867.50 526.25 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,565.00 1,762.50 2,300.00
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 917.50 900.00 835.00 795.00 492.50 675.00 667.50 568.75 1,422.50 1,832.50 2,160.00
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 875.00 860.00 692.50 702.50 438.75 746.25 736.25 638.75 1,560.00 1,970.00 2,300.00
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 955.00 940.00 875.00 835.00 508.75 660.00 651.25 552.50 1,387.50 1,800.00 2,127.50
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 1,080.00 1,070.00 852.50 792.50 317.50 622.50 676.25 640.00 1,807.50 2,217.50 2,545.00
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 972.50 955.00 762.50 715.00 353.75 632.50 685.00 622.50 1,682.50 2,092.50 2,420.00
Baikampady 855.00 877.50 615.00 555.00 8.75 1,323.75 1,336.88 1,383.75 2,387.50 2,800.00 3,117.50
Brahmavar 720.00 742.50 470.00 420.00 75.00 1,393.13 1,471.88 1,387.50 2,290.00 2,702.50 3,030.00
Mangalore 880.00 902.50 642.50 582.50 12.50 1,312.50 1,391.25 1,368.75 2,392.50 2,805.00 3,132.50
Padubidri 807.50 755.00 460.00 400.00 37.50 1,406.25 1,460.63 1,376.25 2,275.00 2,675.00 3,000.00
Panambur, Mangalore 870.00 890.00 630.00 570.00 2.50 1,312.50 1,391.25 1,370.63 2,402.50 2,815.00 3,142.50
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 412.50 402.50 392.50 352.50 676.88 1,368.75 1,376.25 1,226.25 1,920.00 2,332.50 2,660.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 1,227.50 1,167.50 1,235.00 1,195.00 1,239.38 1,404.38 1,391.25 1,171.88 1,392.50 1,745.00 2,075.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 1,292.50 1,237.50 1,307.50 1,267.50 1,258.13 1,348.13 1,342.50 1,106.25 1,295.00 1,647.50 1,965.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 1,287.50 1,227.50 1,295.00 1,255.00 1,246.88 1,363.13 1,348.13 1,123.13 1,317.50 1,670.00 2,000.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 1,320.00 1,265.00 1,300.00 1,257.50 1,245.00 1,314.38 1,305.00 1,078.13 1,257.50 1,605.00 1,940.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 1,220.00 1,165.00 1,247.50 1,207.50 1,205.63 1,368.75 1,357.50 1,136.25 1,362.50 1,715.00 2,042.50
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,205.00 1,227.50 965.00 905.00 210.00 997.50 1,076.25 1,076.25 2,000.00 2,465.00 2,855.00
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,205.00 1,227.50 965.00 905.00 210.00 997.50 1,076.25 1,076.25 2,000.00 2,465.00 2,855.00
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 1,622.50 1,605.00 1,412.50 1,372.50 520.00 326.25 410.00 390.00 1,450.00 1,912.50 2,305.00
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 805.00 782.50 720.00 682.50 505.00 733.75 726.25 628.75 1,540.00 1,952.50 2,277.50
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 795.00 780.00 662.50 677.50 487.50 747.50 738.75 651.25 1,567.50 1,975.00 2,302.50
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 760.00 742.50 677.50 637.50 500.00 757.50 750.00 651.25 1,585.00 1,997.50 2,325.00
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 760.00 742.50 677.50 637.50 500.00 750.00 748.75 651.25 1,585.00 1,997.50 2,322.50
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera 785.00 767.50 702.50 662.50 729.38 1,115.63 1,100.63 954.38 1,557.50 1,967.50 2,292.50
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal 917.50 862.50 870.00 830.00 922.50 1,209.38 1,196.25 1,061.25 1,547.50 1,900.00 2,217.50
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 1,190.00 1,140.00 1,107.50 1,067.50 1,044.38 1,081.88 1,070.63 853.13 1,267.50 1,620.00 1,947.50
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 867.50 892.50 635.00 567.50 235.00 1,467.50 1,575.00 1,482.50 1,920.00 2,330.00 2,687.50
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 822.50 842.50 585.00 522.50 228.75 1,517.50 1,625.00 1,530.00 1,952.50 2,365.00 2,692.50
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 1,242.50 1,265.00 1,002.50 942.50 320.00 567.50 575.00 600.00 1,765.00 2,230.00 2,610.00
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 1,165.00 1,287.50 1,095.00 1,042.50 370.00 497.50 551.25 537.50 1,640.00 2,105.00 2,500.00
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 1,225.00 1,237.50 972.50 912.50 307.50 585.00 638.75 602.50 1,772.50 2,235.00 2,625.00
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 1,395.00 1,385.00 1,157.50 1,097.50 347.50 527.50 580.00 566.25 1,737.50 2,202.50 2,595.00
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 1,165.00 1,155.00 960.00 912.50 362.50 536.25 588.75 552.50 1,672.50 2,137.50 2,525.00
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 757.50 777.50 517.50 457.50 61.25 1,840.00 1,900.00 1,835.00 2,280.00 2,692.50 3,010.00
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 350.00 342.50 80.00 25.00 60.00 1,962.50 2,070.00 1,935.00 2,217.50 2,627.50 2,955.00
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 382.50 452.50 645.00 652.50 1,272.50 2,245.00 2,230.00 2,037.50 2,140.00 2,502.50 2,822.50
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 702.50 655.00 947.50 1,010.00 1,577.50 2,695.00 2,685.00 2,477.50 2,562.50 2,915.00 3,232.50
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 607.50 555.00 847.50 910.00 1,477.50 2,615.00 2,605.00 2,395.00 2,495.00 2,847.50 3,165.00
Maharashtra Satara Lonand 960.00 905.00 1,095.00 1,105.00 1,725.00 2,545.00 2,527.50 2,285.00 2,200.00 2,402.50 2,732.50
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 357.50 302.50 632.50 695.00 1,232.50 2,432.50 2,455.00 2,247.50 2,480.00 2,832.50 3,150.00
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 292.50 240.00 437.50 507.50 1,162.50 2,332.50 2,357.50 2,147.50 2,430.00 2,770.00 3,087.50
148
MPSEZL Final Report
(Rs. /ton)
State District Cargo Centers Mormugao Panjim Karwar Belekeri New Mangalore Chennai Ennore Krishnapatnam Machilipatnam Kakinada Vizag/ Gangavaram
Goa South Goa Salcette 5.00 95.00 157.50 725.00 2,127.50 2,170.00 1,920.00 2,202.50 2,615.00 3,005.00
Goa South Goa South Goa 5.00 95.00 157.50 725.00 2,127.50 2,170.00 1,920.00 2,202.50 2,615.00 3,005.00
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot -55.00 12.50 -27.50 196.25 672.50 659.38 513.13 1,082.50 1,435.00 1,765.00
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol -50.00 70.00 37.50 262.50 810.00 798.75 648.75 1,227.50 1,580.00 1,905.00
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore -15.00 -210.00 -257.50 -1,040.00 -1,072.50 -1,063.75 -1,003.75 130.00 592.50 975.00
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli -20.00 -212.50 -260.00 -1,041.25 -1,075.00 -993.75 -1,007.50 125.00 587.50 982.50
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra -165.00 -210.00 -260.00 -1,063.75 -1,128.75 -1,092.50 -1,032.50 117.50 577.50 1,015.00
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura -17.50 -210.00 -257.50 -1,050.00 -1,100.00 -1,091.25 -1,031.25 95.00 560.00 940.00
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya -10.00 -205.00 -255.00 -1,016.25 -1,021.25 -940.00 -955.00 215.00 680.00 1,072.50
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle -55.00 135.00 142.50 87.50 581.25 568.75 468.75 1,610.00 1,912.50 2,292.50
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry -55.00 80.00 87.50 177.50 655.00 660.00 561.25 1,757.50 2,105.00 2,427.50
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad -50.00 70.00 37.50 5.00 400.00 391.25 293.75 1,335.00 1,687.50 2,012.50
Karnataka Bellary Asundi -15.00 -80.00 -120.00 -481.25 -400.00 -408.75 -506.25 302.50 762.50 1,060.00
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu -20.00 -82.50 -122.50 -463.75 -350.00 -357.50 -456.25 360.00 772.50 1,100.00
Karnataka Bellary Bellary -17.50 -80.00 -120.00 -462.50 -347.50 -355.00 -453.75 362.50 775.00 1,102.50
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura -15.00 -87.50 -122.50 -448.75 -250.00 -260.00 -358.75 512.50 922.50 1,280.00
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur -17.50 -80.00 -120.00 -461.25 -347.50 -355.00 -453.75 362.50 775.00 1,102.50
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi -15.00 -82.50 -122.50 -502.50 -363.75 -372.50 -471.25 357.50 765.00 1,092.50
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli -17.50 -80.00 -120.00 -352.50 -106.25 -113.75 -208.75 685.00 1,097.50 1,425.00
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 182.50 120.00 80.00 -262.50 -147.50 -155.00 -253.75 562.50 975.00 1,302.50
Karnataka Bellary Hospet -17.50 -80.00 -120.00 -352.50 -106.25 -113.75 -208.75 685.00 1,097.50 1,425.00
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda -17.50 -80.00 -97.50 -438.75 -311.25 -332.50 -408.75 385.00 797.50 1,125.00
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola -17.50 -82.50 -122.50 -486.25 -411.25 -418.75 -517.50 285.00 697.50 1,025.00
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar -17.50 -80.00 -120.00 -461.25 -347.50 -355.00 -453.75 577.50 775.00 1,312.50
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu -17.50 -82.50 -122.50 -425.00 -242.50 -250.00 -348.75 505.00 915.00 1,242.50
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura -15.00 -182.50 -172.50 -436.25 -128.75 -138.75 -236.25 685.00 1,095.00 1,425.00
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura -15.00 -80.00 -120.00 -446.25 -295.00 -303.75 -402.50 432.50 845.00 1,172.50
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu -10.00 -227.50 -287.50 -762.50 -457.50 -403.75 -440.00 727.50 1,137.50 1,465.00
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli -17.50 -210.00 -257.50 -618.75 -340.00 -287.50 -350.00 710.00 1,120.00 1,447.50
Baikampady 22.50 -240.00 -300.00 -846.25 468.75 481.88 528.75 1,532.50 1,945.00 2,262.50
Brahmavar 22.50 -250.00 -300.00 -645.00 673.13 751.88 667.50 1,570.00 1,982.50 2,310.00
Mangalore 22.50 -237.50 -297.50 -867.50 432.50 511.25 488.75 1,512.50 1,925.00 2,252.50
Padubidri -52.50 -347.50 -407.50 -770.00 598.75 653.13 568.75 1,467.50 1,867.50 2,192.50
Panambur, Mangalore 20.00 -240.00 -300.00 -867.50 442.50 521.25 500.63 1,532.50 1,945.00 2,272.50
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad -10.00 -20.00 -60.00 264.38 956.25 963.75 813.75 1,507.50 1,920.00 2,247.50
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga -60.00 7.50 -32.50 11.88 176.88 163.75 -55.63 165.00 517.50 847.50
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed -55.00 15.00 -25.00 -34.38 55.63 50.00 -186.25 2.50 355.00 672.50
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla -60.00 7.50 -32.50 -40.63 75.63 60.63 -164.38 30.00 382.50 712.50
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam -55.00 -20.00 -62.50 -75.00 -5.63 -15.00 -241.88 -62.50 285.00 620.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi -55.00 27.50 -12.50 -14.38 148.75 137.50 -83.75 142.50 495.00 822.50
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 22.50 -240.00 -300.00 -995.00 -207.50 -128.75 -128.75 795.00 1,260.00 1,650.00
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 22.50 -240.00 -300.00 -995.00 -207.50 -128.75 -128.75 795.00 1,260.00 1,650.00
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli -17.50 -210.00 -250.00 -1,102.50 -1,296.25 -1,212.50 -1,232.50 -172.50 290.00 682.50
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli -22.50 -85.00 -122.50 -300.00 -71.25 -78.75 -176.25 735.00 1,147.50 1,472.50
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal -15.00 -132.50 -117.50 -307.50 -47.50 -56.25 -143.75 772.50 1,180.00 1,507.50
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir -17.50 -82.50 -122.50 -260.00 -2.50 -10.00 -108.75 825.00 1,237.50 1,565.00
Karnataka Koppal Koppal -17.50 -82.50 -122.50 -260.00 -10.00 -11.25 -108.75 825.00 1,237.50 1,562.50
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera -17.50 -82.50 -122.50 -55.63 330.63 315.63 169.38 772.50 1,182.50 1,507.50
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal -55.00 -47.50 -87.50 5.00 291.88 278.75 143.75 630.00 982.50 1,300.00
Karnataka Raichur Raichur -50.00 -82.50 -122.50 -145.63 -108.13 -119.38 -336.88 77.50 430.00 757.50
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 25.00 -232.50 -300.00 -632.50 600.00 707.50 615.00 1,052.50 1,462.50 1,820.00
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 20.00 -237.50 -300.00 -593.75 695.00 802.50 707.50 1,130.00 1,542.50 1,870.00
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 22.50 -240.00 -300.00 -922.50 -675.00 -667.50 -642.50 522.50 987.50 1,367.50
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 122.50 -70.00 -122.50 -795.00 -667.50 -613.75 -627.50 475.00 940.00 1,335.00
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 12.50 -252.50 -312.50 -917.50 -640.00 -586.25 -622.50 547.50 1,010.00 1,400.00
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal -10.00 -237.50 -297.50 -1,047.50 -867.50 -815.00 -828.75 342.50 807.50 1,200.00
Karnataka Tumkur Sira -10.00 -205.00 -252.50 -802.50 -628.75 -576.25 -612.50 507.50 972.50 1,360.00
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 20.00 -240.00 -300.00 -696.25 1,082.50 1,142.50 1,077.50 1,522.50 1,935.00 2,252.50
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri -7.50 -270.00 -325.00 -290.00 1,612.50 1,720.00 1,585.00 1,867.50 2,277.50 2,605.00
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 70.00 262.50 270.00 890.00 1,862.50 1,847.50 1,655.00 1,757.50 2,120.00 2,440.00
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad -47.50 245.00 307.50 875.00 1,992.50 1,982.50 1,775.00 1,860.00 2,212.50 2,530.00
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri -52.50 240.00 302.50 870.00 2,007.50 1,997.50 1,787.50 1,887.50 2,240.00 2,557.50
Maharashtra Satara Lonand -55.00 135.00 145.00 765.00 1,585.00 1,567.50 1,325.00 1,240.00 1,442.50 1,772.50
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge -55.00 275.00 337.50 875.00 2,075.00 2,097.50 1,890.00 2,122.50 2,475.00 2,792.50
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg -52.50 145.00 215.00 870.00 2,040.00 2,065.00 1,855.00 2,137.50 2,477.50 2,795.00
Here the shaded cells indicate a cost disadvantage of Mormugao with respect to that particular port and
cargo center.
149
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-8 % Reduction in Inland Freight Cost due to Reverse Cargo Availability - Scenario 2
Goa South Goa Salcette 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Goa South Goa South Goa 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 50% 50% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 50% 50% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Haruvanahalli 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Baikampady 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Brahmavar 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Mangalore 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Padubidri 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Panambur, Mangalore 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 50% 50% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 75% 75% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 75% 75% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 75% 75% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 75% 75% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 75% 75% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 50% 50% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera 50% 50% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal 50% 50% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 50% 50% 100% 100% 75% 75% 75% 75% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 75% 75% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 75% 75% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 75% 75% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 75% 75% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 75% 75% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 75% 75% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 75% 75% 100% 100% 50% 50% 50% 50% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Satara Lonand 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
150
MPSEZL Final Report
Table 18-9 Reduced Inland Freight Cost via Road - Scenario 2 (Rs./ton)
Goa South Goa Salcette 75.00 80.00 170.00 232.50 800.00 2,202.50 2,245.00 1,995.00 2,277.50 2,690.00 3,080.00
Goa South Goa South Goa 75.00 80.00 170.00 232.50 800.00 2,202.50 2,245.00 1,995.00 2,277.50 2,690.00 3,080.00
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot 342.50 315.00 697.50 657.50 881.25 1,357.50 1,344.38 1,198.13 1,767.50 2,120.00 2,450.00
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol 322.50 297.50 715.00 682.50 907.50 1,455.00 1,443.75 1,293.75 1,872.50 2,225.00 2,550.00
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore 1,480.00 1,465.00 1,270.00 1,222.50 440.00 407.50 416.25 476.25 1,610.00 2,072.50 2,455.00
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli 1,482.50 1,462.50 1,270.00 1,222.50 441.25 407.50 488.75 475.00 1,607.50 2,070.00 2,465.00
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra 1,532.50 1,367.50 1,322.50 1,272.50 468.75 403.75 440.00 500.00 1,650.00 2,110.00 2,547.50
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura 1,500.00 1,482.50 1,290.00 1,242.50 450.00 400.00 408.75 468.75 1,595.00 2,060.00 2,440.00
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya 1,442.50 1,432.50 1,237.50 1,187.50 426.25 421.25 502.50 487.50 1,657.50 2,122.50 2,515.00
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle 285.00 257.50 705.00 712.50 657.50 1,151.25 1,138.75 1,038.75 2,180.00 2,482.50 2,862.50
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry 176.25 148.75 432.50 440.00 530.00 1,007.50 1,012.50 913.75 2,110.00 2,457.50 2,780.00
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad 288.75 263.75 647.50 615.00 582.50 977.50 968.75 871.25 1,912.50 2,265.00 2,590.00
Karnataka Bellary Asundi 515.00 507.50 950.00 910.00 548.75 630.00 621.25 523.75 1,332.50 1,792.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu 495.00 485.00 907.50 867.50 526.25 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Bellary 493.75 485.00 907.50 867.50 525.00 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura 472.50 465.00 857.50 822.50 496.25 695.00 685.00 586.25 1,457.50 1,867.50 2,225.00
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur 493.75 485.00 907.50 867.50 526.25 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi 506.25 498.75 930.00 890.00 510.00 648.75 640.00 541.25 1,370.00 1,777.50 2,105.00
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli 413.75 405.00 747.50 707.50 475.00 721.25 713.75 618.75 1,512.50 1,925.00 2,252.50
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 393.75 485.00 907.50 867.50 525.00 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Hospet 413.75 405.00 747.50 707.50 475.00 721.25 713.75 618.75 1,512.50 1,925.00 2,252.50
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda 482.50 473.75 885.00 867.50 526.25 653.75 632.50 556.25 1,350.00 1,762.50 2,090.00
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola 518.75 510.00 955.00 915.00 551.25 626.25 618.75 520.00 1,322.50 1,735.00 2,062.50
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar 493.75 485.00 907.50 867.50 526.25 640.00 632.50 533.75 1,565.00 1,762.50 2,300.00
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu 458.75 450.00 835.00 795.00 492.50 675.00 667.50 568.75 1,422.50 1,832.50 2,160.00
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura 437.50 430.00 692.50 702.50 438.75 746.25 736.25 638.75 1,560.00 1,970.00 2,300.00
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura 477.50 470.00 875.00 835.00 508.75 660.00 651.25 552.50 1,387.50 1,800.00 2,127.50
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu 540.00 535.00 852.50 792.50 317.50 622.50 676.25 640.00 1,807.50 2,217.50 2,545.00
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli 486.25 477.50 762.50 715.00 353.75 632.50 685.00 622.50 1,682.50 2,092.50 2,420.00
Baikampady 855.00 877.50 615.00 555.00 8.75 1,323.75 1,336.88 1,383.75 2,387.50 2,800.00 3,117.50
Brahmavar 720.00 742.50 470.00 420.00 75.00 1,393.13 1,471.88 1,387.50 2,290.00 2,702.50 3,030.00
Mangalore 880.00 902.50 642.50 582.50 12.50 1,312.50 1,391.25 1,368.75 2,392.50 2,805.00 3,132.50
Padubidri 807.50 755.00 460.00 400.00 37.50 1,406.25 1,460.63 1,376.25 2,275.00 2,675.00 3,000.00
Panambur, Mangalore 870.00 890.00 630.00 570.00 2.50 1,312.50 1,391.25 1,370.63 2,402.50 2,815.00 3,142.50
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad 206.25 201.25 392.50 352.50 676.88 1,368.75 1,376.25 1,226.25 1,920.00 2,332.50 2,660.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga 920.63 875.63 1,235.00 1,195.00 1,239.38 1,404.38 1,391.25 1,171.88 1,392.50 1,745.00 2,075.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed 969.38 928.13 1,307.50 1,267.50 1,258.13 1,348.13 1,342.50 1,106.25 1,295.00 1,647.50 1,965.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla 965.63 920.63 1,295.00 1,255.00 1,246.88 1,363.13 1,348.13 1,123.13 1,317.50 1,670.00 2,000.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam 990.00 948.75 1,300.00 1,257.50 1,245.00 1,314.38 1,305.00 1,078.13 1,257.50 1,605.00 1,940.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi 915.00 873.75 1,247.50 1,207.50 1,205.63 1,368.75 1,357.50 1,136.25 1,362.50 1,715.00 2,042.50
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 1,205.00 1,227.50 965.00 905.00 210.00 997.50 1,076.25 1,076.25 2,000.00 2,465.00 2,855.00
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 1,205.00 1,227.50 965.00 905.00 210.00 997.50 1,076.25 1,076.25 2,000.00 2,465.00 2,855.00
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli 1,622.50 1,605.00 1,412.50 1,372.50 520.00 326.25 410.00 390.00 1,450.00 1,912.50 2,305.00
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli 402.50 391.25 720.00 682.50 505.00 733.75 726.25 628.75 1,540.00 1,952.50 2,277.50
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal 397.50 390.00 662.50 677.50 487.50 747.50 738.75 651.25 1,567.50 1,975.00 2,302.50
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir 380.00 371.25 677.50 637.50 500.00 757.50 750.00 651.25 1,585.00 1,997.50 2,325.00
Karnataka Koppal Koppal 380.00 371.25 677.50 637.50 500.00 750.00 748.75 651.25 1,585.00 1,997.50 2,322.50
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera 392.50 383.75 702.50 662.50 729.38 1,115.63 1,100.63 954.38 1,557.50 1,967.50 2,292.50
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal 458.75 431.25 870.00 830.00 922.50 1,209.38 1,196.25 1,061.25 1,547.50 1,900.00 2,217.50
Karnataka Raichur Raichur 595.00 570.00 1,107.50 1,067.50 1,044.38 1,081.88 1,070.63 853.13 1,267.50 1,620.00 1,947.50
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 650.63 669.38 635.00 567.50 235.00 1,467.50 1,575.00 1,482.50 1,920.00 2,330.00 2,687.50
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 616.88 631.88 585.00 522.50 228.75 1,517.50 1,625.00 1,530.00 1,952.50 2,365.00 2,692.50
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 931.88 948.75 1,002.50 942.50 320.00 567.50 575.00 600.00 1,765.00 2,230.00 2,610.00
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 873.75 965.63 1,095.00 1,042.50 370.00 497.50 551.25 537.50 1,640.00 2,105.00 2,500.00
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 918.75 928.13 972.50 912.50 307.50 585.00 638.75 602.50 1,772.50 2,235.00 2,625.00
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal 1,046.25 1,038.75 1,157.50 1,097.50 347.50 527.50 580.00 566.25 1,737.50 2,202.50 2,595.00
Karnataka Tumkur Sira 873.75 866.25 960.00 912.50 362.50 536.25 588.75 552.50 1,672.50 2,137.50 2,525.00
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 757.50 777.50 517.50 457.50 61.25 1,840.00 1,900.00 1,835.00 2,280.00 2,692.50 3,010.00
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri 350.00 342.50 80.00 25.00 60.00 1,962.50 2,070.00 1,935.00 2,217.50 2,627.50 2,955.00
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 382.50 452.50 645.00 652.50 1,272.50 2,245.00 2,230.00 2,037.50 2,140.00 2,502.50 2,822.50
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad 702.50 655.00 947.50 1,010.00 1,577.50 2,695.00 2,685.00 2,477.50 2,562.50 2,915.00 3,232.50
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri 607.50 555.00 847.50 910.00 1,477.50 2,615.00 2,605.00 2,395.00 2,495.00 2,847.50 3,165.00
Maharashtra Satara Lonand 960.00 905.00 1,095.00 1,105.00 1,725.00 2,545.00 2,527.50 2,285.00 2,200.00 2,402.50 2,732.50
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge 357.50 302.50 632.50 695.00 1,232.50 2,432.50 2,455.00 2,247.50 2,480.00 2,832.50 3,150.00
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg 292.50 240.00 437.50 507.50 1,162.50 2,332.50 2,357.50 2,147.50 2,430.00 2,770.00 3,087.50
151
MPSEZL Final Report
(Rs. /ton)
Goa South Goa Salcette 5.00 95.00 157.50 725.00 2,127.50 2,170.00 1,920.00 2,202.50 2,615.00 3,005.00
Goa South Goa South Goa 5.00 95.00 157.50 725.00 2,127.50 2,170.00 1,920.00 2,202.50 2,615.00 3,005.00
Karnataka Bagalkot Bagalkot -27.50 355.00 315.00 538.75 1,015.00 1,001.88 855.63 1,425.00 1,777.50 2,107.50
Karnataka Bagalkot Mudhol -25.00 392.50 360.00 585.00 1,132.50 1,121.25 971.25 1,550.00 1,902.50 2,227.50
Karnataka Bangalore Bangalore -15.00 -210.00 -257.50 -1,040.00 -1,072.50 -1,063.75 -1,003.75 130.00 592.50 975.00
Karnataka Bangalore Biswanahalli -20.00 -212.50 -260.00 -1,041.25 -1,075.00 -993.75 -1,007.50 125.00 587.50 982.50
Karnataka Bangalore Bommasandra -165.00 -210.00 -260.00 -1,063.75 -1,128.75 -1,092.50 -1,032.50 117.50 577.50 1,015.00
Karnataka Bangalore Mahadevpura -17.50 -210.00 -257.50 -1,050.00 -1,100.00 -1,091.25 -1,031.25 95.00 560.00 940.00
Karnataka Bangalore Peenya -10.00 -205.00 -255.00 -1,016.25 -1,021.25 -940.00 -955.00 215.00 680.00 1,072.50
Karnataka Belgaum Hatkalangle -27.50 420.00 427.50 372.50 866.25 853.75 753.75 1,895.00 2,197.50 2,577.50
Karnataka Belgaum Kumry -27.50 256.25 263.75 353.75 831.25 836.25 737.50 1,933.75 2,281.25 2,603.75
Karnataka Belgaum Yadwad -25.00 358.75 326.25 293.75 688.75 680.00 582.50 1,623.75 1,976.25 2,301.25
Karnataka Bellary Asundi -7.50 435.00 395.00 33.75 115.00 106.25 8.75 817.50 1,277.50 1,575.00
Karnataka Bellary Belagallu -10.00 412.50 372.50 31.25 145.00 137.50 38.75 855.00 1,267.50 1,595.00
Karnataka Bellary Bellary -8.75 413.75 373.75 31.25 146.25 138.75 40.00 856.25 1,268.75 1,596.25
Karnataka Bellary Chikkanthapura -7.50 385.00 350.00 23.75 222.50 212.50 113.75 985.00 1,395.00 1,752.50
Karnataka Bellary Dhanapur -8.75 413.75 373.75 32.50 146.25 138.75 40.00 856.25 1,268.75 1,596.25
Karnataka Bellary Halkundi -7.50 423.75 383.75 3.75 142.50 133.75 35.00 863.75 1,271.25 1,598.75
Karnataka Bellary Horovanahalli -8.75 333.75 293.75 61.25 307.50 300.00 205.00 1,098.75 1,511.25 1,838.75
Karnataka Bellary Honnarahalli 91.25 513.75 473.75 131.25 246.25 238.75 140.00 956.25 1,368.75 1,696.25
Karnataka Bellary Hospet -8.75 333.75 293.75 61.25 307.50 300.00 205.00 1,098.75 1,511.25 1,838.75
Karnataka Bellary Janikunta Tanda -8.75 402.50 385.00 43.75 171.25 150.00 73.75 867.50 1,280.00 1,607.50
Karnataka Bellary Sidaginomola -8.75 436.25 396.25 32.50 107.50 100.00 1.25 803.75 1,216.25 1,543.75
Karnataka Bellary Siriwar -8.75 413.75 373.75 32.50 146.25 138.75 40.00 1,071.25 1,268.75 1,806.25
Karnataka Bellary Thorangallu -8.75 376.25 336.25 33.75 216.25 208.75 110.00 963.75 1,373.75 1,701.25
Karnataka Bellary Varadapura -7.50 255.00 265.00 1.25 308.75 298.75 201.25 1,122.50 1,532.50 1,862.50
Karnataka Bellary Veniveerapura -7.50 397.50 357.50 31.25 182.50 173.75 75.00 910.00 1,322.50 1,650.00
Karnataka Chitradurga Mathodu -5.00 312.50 252.50 -222.50 82.50 136.25 100.00 1,267.50 1,677.50 2,005.00
Karnataka Chitradurga Paramenahalli -8.75 276.25 228.75 -132.50 146.25 198.75 136.25 1,196.25 1,606.25 1,933.75
Baikampady 22.50 -240.00 -300.00 -846.25 468.75 481.88 528.75 1,532.50 1,945.00 2,262.50
Brahmavar 22.50 -250.00 -300.00 -645.00 673.13 751.88 667.50 1,570.00 1,982.50 2,310.00
Mangalore 22.50 -237.50 -297.50 -867.50 432.50 511.25 488.75 1,512.50 1,925.00 2,252.50
Padubidri -52.50 -347.50 -407.50 -770.00 598.75 653.13 568.75 1,467.50 1,867.50 2,192.50
Panambur, Mangalore 20.00 -240.00 -300.00 -867.50 442.50 521.25 500.63 1,532.50 1,945.00 2,272.50
Karnataka Dharwad Dharwad -5.00 186.25 146.25 470.63 1,162.50 1,170.00 1,020.00 1,713.75 2,126.25 2,453.75
Karnataka Gulbarga Gulbarga -45.00 314.38 274.38 318.75 483.75 470.63 251.25 471.88 824.38 1,154.38
Karnataka Gulbarga Malkhed -41.25 338.13 298.13 288.75 378.75 373.13 136.88 325.63 678.13 995.63
Karnataka Gulbarga Mogla -45.00 329.38 289.38 281.25 397.50 382.50 157.50 351.88 704.38 1,034.38
Karnataka Gulbarga Sedam -41.25 310.00 267.50 255.00 324.38 315.00 88.13 267.50 615.00 950.00
Karnataka Gulbarga Wadi -41.25 332.50 292.50 290.63 453.75 442.50 221.25 447.50 800.00 1,127.50
Karnataka Hassan Hassan 22.50 -240.00 -300.00 -995.00 -207.50 -128.75 -128.75 795.00 1,260.00 1,650.00
Karnataka Hassan Kasabahobli 22.50 -240.00 -300.00 -995.00 -207.50 -128.75 -128.75 795.00 1,260.00 1,650.00
Karnataka Kolar Koppathimmanahalli -17.50 -210.00 -250.00 -1,102.50 -1,296.25 -1,212.50 -1,232.50 -172.50 290.00 682.50
Karnataka Koppal Bevinahalli -11.25 317.50 280.00 102.50 331.25 323.75 226.25 1,137.50 1,550.00 1,875.00
Karnataka Koppal Hirebaganal -7.50 265.00 280.00 90.00 350.00 341.25 253.75 1,170.00 1,577.50 1,905.00
Karnataka Koppal Hirebangir -8.75 297.50 257.50 120.00 377.50 370.00 271.25 1,205.00 1,617.50 1,945.00
Karnataka Koppal Koppal -8.75 297.50 257.50 120.00 370.00 368.75 271.25 1,205.00 1,617.50 1,942.50
Karnataka Raichur Ginigera -8.75 310.00 270.00 336.88 723.13 708.13 561.88 1,165.00 1,575.00 1,900.00
Karnataka Raichur Mudgal -27.50 411.25 371.25 463.75 750.63 737.50 602.50 1,088.75 1,441.25 1,758.75
Karnataka Raichur Raichur -25.00 512.50 472.50 449.38 486.88 475.63 258.13 672.50 1,025.00 1,352.50
Karnataka Shimoga Bhadravati 18.75 -15.63 -83.13 -415.63 816.88 924.38 831.88 1,269.38 1,679.38 2,036.88
Karnataka Shimoga Shimoga 15.00 -31.88 -94.38 -388.13 900.63 1,008.13 913.13 1,335.63 1,748.13 2,075.63
Karnataka Tumkur Ammasandara 16.88 70.63 10.63 -611.88 -364.38 -356.88 -331.88 833.13 1,298.13 1,678.13
Karnataka Tumkur Jodidevarahalli 91.88 221.25 168.75 -503.75 -376.25 -322.50 -336.25 766.25 1,231.25 1,626.25
Karnataka Tumkur Kibbanahalli 9.38 53.75 -6.25 -611.25 -333.75 -280.00 -316.25 853.75 1,316.25 1,706.25
Karnataka Tumkur Kunigal -7.50 111.25 51.25 -698.75 -518.75 -466.25 -480.00 691.25 1,156.25 1,548.75
Karnataka Tumkur Sira -7.50 86.25 38.75 -511.25 -337.50 -285.00 -321.25 798.75 1,263.75 1,651.25
Karnataka Udupi Nandikur 20.00 -240.00 -300.00 -696.25 1,082.50 1,142.50 1,077.50 1,522.50 1,935.00 2,252.50
Karnataka Uttara Kannada Tadri -7.50 -270.00 -325.00 -290.00 1,612.50 1,720.00 1,585.00 1,867.50 2,277.50 2,605.00
Maharashtra Kolhapur Kagal 70.00 262.50 270.00 890.00 1,862.50 1,847.50 1,655.00 1,757.50 2,120.00 2,440.00
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Jaigad -47.50 245.00 307.50 875.00 1,992.50 1,982.50 1,775.00 1,860.00 2,212.50 2,530.00
Maharashtra Ratnagiri Ratnagiri -52.50 240.00 302.50 870.00 2,007.50 1,997.50 1,787.50 1,887.50 2,240.00 2,557.50
Maharashtra Satara Lonand -55.00 135.00 145.00 765.00 1,585.00 1,567.50 1,325.00 1,240.00 1,442.50 1,772.50
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Munge -55.00 275.00 337.50 875.00 2,075.00 2,097.50 1,890.00 2,122.50 2,475.00 2,792.50
Maharashtra Sindhudurg Sindhudurg -52.50 145.00 215.00 870.00 2,040.00 2,065.00 1,855.00 2,137.50 2,477.50 2,795.00
Here the shaded cells indicate a cost disadvantage of Mormugao with respect to that particular port and
cargo center.
152

ANNEXURE - E

AMPTPL

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Mormugao Port Trust
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED SITE

SITE FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF BERTH NO.7
REPORT: 215/08 JULY 2008
REPORT ISSUE STATUS
<01> JUNE 2008 DRAFT REPORT KM SJ SM

<02> JULY 2008 FINAL REPORT KM SJ SM
Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved
Mormugao Port Trust Fugro Geotech Ltd

CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, Plot No 51, Sector 06
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE BUILDING, Sanpada
HEADLAND SADA, Navi-Mumbai – 400 705
GOA – 400 001 Maharashtra (INDIA)
Prepared by : KM Date : July 2008
Checked & Approved by: SJ/SM Report No. : 215/08

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE NO.
1.0 INTRODUCTION 5
1.1 Project Description 5
1.2 Project Objective 5
1.3 Scope of Work 5
2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION 6
2.1 Borehole Positioning 7
2.2 Boring / Drilling 7
2.3 Standard Penetration Tests 8
2.4 TCR, SCR and RQD 8
3.0 LABORATORY TESTS 8
3.1 Laboratory tests on soil samples 9
3.1.1 Sieve Analysis 9
3.1.2 Sedimentation / Hydrometer Analysis 9
3.1.3 Atterberg Limits 10
3.1.4 Moisture Content & Density 10
3.1.5 Particle Density / Specific Gravity 10
3.1.6 Triaxial Compression (Unconsolidated Undrained) 10
3.1.7 Laboratory Vane Shear Strength 10
3.1.8 Consolidation 11
3.2 Laboratory tests on rock samples 11
3.2.1 Unit Weight, Specific Gravity and Porosity of Rock 12
3.2.2 Point Load Index Test 12
3.2.3 Uniaxial Compression Test 12
4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS 12
4.1 Regional Geology 12
5.0 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITION 13
5.1 Land/Marine Borehole Logs 13
5.2 Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy 13
6.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 20
Prepared by : KM 1 Date : July 2008
Checked & Approved by: JS/SM Report No. : 215/ 08

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
6.1 Foundation Design Criteria 20
6.2 Foundation Type 21
7.0 Pile Foundation 21
7.1 Computational Method 21
7.2 Unit Skin Friction and Unit End Bearing 21
7.3 Lateral Load Capacity of Piles 23
7.4 Uplift Resistance of Pile 25
7.5 Chiseling Criteria 25
7.6 Soil Parameter used for design in section 1-1,2-2, 3-3 ,4-4 & 5-5 26
7.7 Recommended Safe Pile Capacities 29
7.8 Expected value of consolidation settlement and Time-duration for 90% consolidation of
soft clay layer in section 5-5 & 4-4 31
7.9 Foundation recommendation for Section 5-5 & 4-4 31
7.10 Filling in section 4-4 area 32
8.0 CODES 32
9.0 CONCLUSIONS 33

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
LIST OF TABLES
TITLE PAGE NO.
Table 1 Land Borehole Location 7
Table 2 Summary of Marine Borehole Locations 7
Table 3 List of I.S. Codes followed for laboratory tests on soil samples 9
Table 4 List of I.S. codes followed for laboratory tests on rock samples 11
Table 5 List of Boreholes with Sectional Details 13
Table 6 Generalized Soil/Rock Layers of Section 1-1 14
Table 7 Details of Boreholes Drilled and Thickness of Strata Encountered in Section 1-1 14
Table 8 Generalised Subsurface Soil/Rock Profile adopted in Section 1-1 15
Table 21 List of Boreholes with Sectional Details 21
Table 22 Moment and Lateral force at top of Rock 24
Table 23 Lateral load capacities of pile in section 5-5 25
Table 24 Soil Parameter used for design in Section 1-1 26
Table 29 Recommended Safe vertical downward, uplift and lateral Pile Capacity in section 1-1 29

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
ENGINEERING ILLUSTRATIONS AND SKETCHES
Vicinity Map Plate1

Plan of Field Tests Location Plate2 &2a
Sub Surface Soil Profile Plates 3 thru 6
APPENDIX – A
Bore Logs Plates- A1 thru A22
APPENDIX – B
Summary of Laboratory Tests on Soil Plates- B1 thru B2
Summary of Laboratory Tests on Rock Plate- B3
Particle Size Distribution Curve Plates-B4 thru B12
Atterberg Limit Plates-B13 thru B19
Triaxial Compression (Unconsolidated Undrained) Plates-B20 thru B71
Laboratory Vane Shear Strength Plates-B72 thru B73
Consolidation Test Results Plates-B74
APPENDIX - C
Soil Strength in Terms of Compactness and Consistency C1
Classification of Rock Material Strength C2

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
As the Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) is planning to develop Mormugao Harbour, Fugro Geotech Ltd
was commissioned to conduct detailed geotechnical investigation so as to establish the sub surface soil
and rock strata and to carry out engineering analysis to develop soil and rock data for use in design of
the various structures.
1.2 Project Objective
The broad objectives of investigation are as follows:
• To investigate geotechnical properties in soil/rock at the proposed site offshore seabed.

• To obtain the engineering properties of soil/rock and classification of soil/rock.
Fugro Geotech Ltd. (Fugro) was commissioned by MPT Work Order No CE.WKS-730/5495 dated 5th
January 2008, to carry out detailed geotechnical investigation for proposed berth no 7. The principal
objectives of the geotechnical investigation were to obtain adequate information on the sea bed
conditions, the type and strength of the soils below the seabed and other geotechnical details of
relevance to enable arriving at the design parameters for foundation of the proposed new structures.
The entire work was carried out under supervision of the MPT. The data obtained from the field as well
as laboratory investigations based on the findings of the geotechnical investigations are presented in
this engineering report (Report No. 215/08).The vicinity map is given on Plate 1.
1.3 Scope of Work
The scope of work for the geotechnical investigation campaign comprised the drilling of 1 land borehole
and 9 marine boreholes, carrying out standard penetration tests, collection of disturbed and undisturbed
samples of soils, logging visually identifiable lithological and engineering characteristics of the soil
samples, testing the samples in laboratory for their classification, index and engineering properties and
preparation and submission of engineering report. The equipment and manpower were mobilized and
the field investigations commenced for the proposed site for development of Berth No.7 on 15th
February 2008. The entire work was carried out by Fugro under the technical supervision of client’s
representatives. List of the land and marine boreholes along with their coordinates, reduced levels w.r.t.
CD and termination depths are tabulated in Table-1 and 2 respectively.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
The scope of work for the site investigation project included the following:
• Drilling of 1 land borehole and 9 marine boreholes to termination depth (TD) of -33.06 m
w.r.t CD for land boreholes and -27.56 m to -45.76 m w.r.t CD for marine boreholes.
• Logging and collection of samples.
• Carrying out standard penetration tests in soil.
• Collection of disturbed and undisturbed samples of soils encountered.
• Collection of core samples of rocks encountered.
• Logging visually identifiable lithological and engineering characteristics of soil samples.
• Testing selected soil and rock samples in laboratory for their classification, index and
engineering properties.
• Analysing the field and laboratory data to develop the design and construction
recommendations.
• Submission of engineering report.
2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation works were carried out using a pontoon mounted with drilling rig for marine
boreholes. The following activities, carried out in chronological sequence, comprised the fieldwork for
the project:
• Mobilization of pontoon mounted drill rig with water pump, testing tools, power pack and
accessories for marine boreholes
• Drilling of boreholes on land was carried out using cable percussion drilling method
• Positioning of the borehole locations using Fugro’s “DGPS”
• Floating out and shifting of the pontoon using tug and tow boats
• Boring in soil from seabed level with SPT at specified intervals with drill rig on the pontoon
• Rock coring using double/triple tube core barrel using rotary drilling and storage of cores
• Collecting undisturbed sample of cohesive soils & disturbed sample of non-cohesive soils
• Visual inspection and litho-logging of the samples obtained from the boreholes
• Packing, labeling and dispatching the samples to laboratory
• Taking photographs of the core samples
Locations of the boreholes are presented on the location map on Plate 2 & 2a.The borehole logs are
presented in Appendix A on plates A1 thru A22. The standards notations represented are: SPT-
Standard Penetration Test, BS-Bulk Samples, WS-Wash Samples, UDS-Undisturbed Samples, and DS-
Disturbed Samples.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Table 1 Land Borehole Location
Geodetic Coordinates UTM Coordinates EGL Rock TD

S BH Depth of BH w.r.t. EGL w.r.t. elevation w.r.t.
No No CD w.r.t CD CD
Latitude Longitude Northing Easting
(m) (m) (m) (m)
Land Borehole
1 LBH-1 15°24'42.8'' 73°47'50.2'' 370940 1704243 37. 50 4.44 -25.86 -33.06
C.D - Chart Datum, T.D - Termination Depth, E.G.L - Existing Ground Level
Table 2 Summary of Marine Borehole Locations
Geodetic Coordinates UTM Coordinates SBL Rock TD

S Depth of BH w.r.t. SBL w.r.t. elevation w.r.t.
BH No CD w.r.t CD CD
No
Latitude Longitude Northing Easting
(m) (m) (m) (m)
Marine Boreholes
1 MBH-A1 15°24'45.1'' 73°47'51.8'' 370989 1704311 40 .00 -5.757 -- -45.76
2 MBH-A2 15°24'43.5'' 73°47'55.2'' 371091 1704265 22 .50 -6.332 -22.86 -28.83
3 MBH-A3 15°24'44.4'' 73°47'56.4'' 371126 1704292 28 .00 -7.040 -24.04 -35.04
4 MBH-A4 15°24'46.6'' 73°47'53.5'' 371041 1704357 28 .50 -6.098 -30.10 -34.60
5 MBH-B1 15°24'46.3'' 73°47'25.0'' 370192 1704355 27 .00 -2.756 -23.99 -29.76
6 MBH-B2 15°24'50.7'' 73°47'23.0'' 370131 1704492 27 .30 -4.270 -31.33 -33.63
7 MBH-B3 15°24'54.3'' 73°47'21.3'' 370082 1704602 25 .50 -3.234 -23.79 -29.77
8 MBH-B4 15°25'05.7'' 73°47'34.1'' 370465 1704950 24 .50 -3.060 -24.08 -27.56
9 MBH-C1 15°24'37.1'' 73°48'05.5'' 371396 1704066 24.00 -6.880 -24.88 -30.88
C.D - Chart Datum, T.D - Termination Depth, S.B.L-Sea Bed Level
2.1 Borehole Positioning
The marine boreholes were positioned using Differential Geographic Positioning System. The DGPS
system was calibrated against the already fixed Benchmark provided by the client.
2.2 Boring / Drilling
The boring /drilling works were carried out at locations as given in Table-1 & 2. A hydraulically operated
drilling rig with supporting water pump was mounted on the platform. The boreholes were advanced in
soil using cable percussion/rotary method and rock by diamond coring. Clear water was generally used
as the flushing medium. Temporary steel casing supported the borehole walls. Sampling comprised
collection of undisturbed samples using thin walled Shelby tubes in cohesive soils, alternating with
disturbed bagged samples obtained from SPT split spoon sampler and shoe. Sampling frequency was
1.50 m depending on strata variability and design considerations. On reaching very hard rock strata
triple tube core barrel of Nx size fitted with diamond bits was used to advance the hole. These samples
thus obtained were then carefully retrieved from the core barrel and carefully packed using cling films
and wax. The boreholes were terminated on reaching the requisite depths on the advice of the

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
supervising engineers. The drilling accessories and tools used were in conformity with BS: 4019 or
relevant IS codes.
2.3 Standard Penetration Tests
Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were carried out using a split spoon sampler complete with a drive
shoe and drive head fitted with a non-return valve. The basis of the test consists of dropping of a
hammer of mass 63.5 kg on to a drive head from a height of 750 mm (as specified in I.S. Code of
Practice). An auto trip hammer capable of dropping the weight freely on the anvil over a fixed height of
750mm was used to assure the quality of the test. The number of such blows (N) necessary to achieve
a penetration of the split spoon sampler of 300mm (after its penetration under gravity and below the
seating drive) is regarded as the penetration resistance. The blow counts for each 75 mm penetration
were recorded. Small disturbed samples of soil were obtained from the split spoon sampler after
completion of the tests.
The borehole records with visual lithologs, SPT ‘N’ values and laboratory test results are enclosed in
Appendix-A and B.
2.4 TCR, SCR and RQD
The quantitative description of fracture state of rock masses are indicated using a number of indices as
determined from the borehole cores. Total Core Recovery (TCR) is the percentage ratio of core
recovered (whether solid, intact with full diameter, or non-intact) to the total length of core run. Solid
Core Recovery (SCR) is the percentage ratio of solid core recovered to the total length of the core run.
Rock Quality Designation (RQD) is a quantitative index based on core recovery procedure that
incorporates only those pieces of core 100mm or more in length. It is the total length of solid core
pieces, each greater than 100mm between natural fractures, expressed as a percentage of the total
length of core run. It is also a measure of drill core quality and it disregards the influence of orientation,
continuity, joint thickness and gauge.
The borehole records with visual lithologs, TCR, SCR, RQD values and laboratory test results are
enclosed in Appendix-A and B.
3.0 LABORATORY TESTS
The laboratory test programme was directed primarily towards the determination of engineering and
index properties of soils and rocks encountered at site.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
3.1 Laboratory tests on soil samples
Disturbed samples in SPT split spoon and undisturbed samples in thin walled Shelby tubes were
collected from the boreholes. The soil samples were visually identified and described, thereafter packed,
labeled, sealed and dispatched to the laboratory. The laboratory tests were carried out as per relevant
parts of Indian Standard Code of Practice. The summary of laboratory test results on soil are presented
in Appendix-B in plates-B1 and B2.
Table 3 List of I.S. Codes followed for laboratory tests on soil samples
No. of tests
S No Test Designation Applicable Standards Presented in Plates
performed
1 Sieve Analysis 32 IS:2720 (PART -4) Plates B4 thru B12
2 Hydrometer Analysis 27 IS:2720 (PART -4) Plates B4 thru B12
3 Atterberg Limit 22 IS:2720 (PART- 5) Plates B13 thru B19
4 Specific Gravity 32 IS:2720 (PART- 3) Plate B1
5 Moisture Content 15 IS:2720 (PART- 2) Plate B1
6 Wet and Dry Density 15 IS:2720 (PART- 9) Plate B1
7 Triaxial Shear Test (UU) 13 IS:2720 (PART- 11) Plates B20 thru B71
8 Lab Vane Shear Test 2 IS:2720 (PART- 30) Plates B72 thru B73
9 Consolidation Test 1 IS:2720 (PART- 15) Plate B74
3.1.1 Sieve Analysis
The Sieve Analysis was carried out on Thirty Two (32) soil samples in accordance with IS: 2720(Part-4)
by wet sieving method. Particularly in SPT samples the quantity of soil sample available for testing is
typically 100 gm. This sample quantity is considered representative of soil where grain size ranges upto
4.75 mm (Coarser sand size). This test gives indicative values of the particle size distribution, which are
shown in curves as presented in Appendix B on Plates B4 through B12.
3.1.2 Sedimentation / Hydrometer Analysis
Sedimentation analysis was performed on Twenty Seven (27) soil samples in accordance with the
hydrometer method described in IS: 2720 (PART-4). The analysis provides an estimate of the particle
size distribution for the fine fraction (<75µm) of a soil sample. The analysis was performed by monitoring
the rate of settlement of soil particles initially suspended uniformly in distilled water. The rate of
settlement, which is monitored by observing the change in fluid density with the hydrometer device, is
related to the size of particles settling out of suspension. The test results are presented in Appendix B
on Plates B4 through B12.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
3.1.3 Atterberg Limits
The Atterberg Limits comprising liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index were determined on Twenty
Two (22) soil samples in accordance with the relevant methods described in IS:2720 (PART-5). The
liquid limit has been determined using the Casagrande apparatus method. In accordance with the
Standard, soil sample preparation included removal of soil particles retained on the 425µm sieve.
Accordingly, where significant quantities of coarser particles are present, it should be recognized that
the Atterberg Limits results are representative of the relatively fine soil fraction, and not of the complete
soil sample. The test results are presented in Appendix B on Plates B13 through B19.
3.1.4 Moisture Content & Density
Moisture content, bulk density and dry densities were determined for Fifteen (15) soil samples, in
accordance with the procedures of IS:2720 (Part 2) and IS:2720 (Part 9) .The results are summarized in
Appendix-B on Plate B1.
3.1.5 Particle Density / Specific Gravity
The specific gravity was determined for Thirty Two (32) soil samples in accordance with the small
pycknometer method described in IS:2720 (Part 3). Prior to testing, samples were ground down, if
necessary, so as to pass the 2mm sieve. The test results are summarized in Appendix B on Plate B1.
3.1.6 Triaxial Compression (Unconsolidated Undrained)
Undrained shear strength parameters were determined for Thirteen (13) soil samples by rapid
unconsolidated-undrained (UU) triaxial compression testing, in accordance with the methods of IS:2720
(Part 11). Testing on undisturbed samples was carried out on test 38mm & 100mm diameter specimen
trimmed from thin-walled tube samples. Prior to loading, confining cell pressures were applied to test
specimens in the triaxial cell, without consolidation. During testing, no change in sample moisture
content is allowed, and pore pressures were monitored.Undrained shear strength parameters have
been interpreted from Mohr circles.The results are presented on Appendix B in Plates 20 through 71.
3.1.7 Laboratory Vane Shear Strength
Laboratory vane tests were carried out on Two (2) cohesive soil specimens which were very soft and
not amenable to triaxial shear testing in accordance with the method described on IS:2720 (Part 30).
The test was carried out on undisturbed sample, contained within a steel sample container, using a
vane of height 24mm and diameter 12mm. The peak and remoulded shear strengths were determined

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
using the relationship:
T
τ =
2 h d
πd ( + )
2 6
Where, τ = the vane shear strength (KPa)
T = Torque (N-mm)
h = height of Vane blade (mm)
d = diameter of Vane blade (mm)
The test records are presented on Appendix-B in Plates B 72 through B 73.
3.1.8 Consolidation
The consolidation properties of soil were determined for One (1) soil sample by vertical drainage both to
top and bottom surfaces. The consolidation tests were carried out in accordance with IS: 2720 (Part-15).
Volume change after every stress application (0.2, 0.5,1,2,4,8,4,2,1 kg/cm2) is recorded at intervals of
0, ½, 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64min; 1½, 2, 4, 8 and 24 hours. The values of coefficient of consolidation
cv and the coefficient of volume change mv were calculated. The test results are presented on Appendix-
B in Plate B74.
3.2 Laboratory tests on rock samples
Tests were carried out on rock cores obtained by drilling using triple tube core barrel, which were
necessary to be tested in the laboratory from strength consideration. The rock samples were prepared
for testing in the laboratory in accordance with IS: 9179:1979. The test results so obtained were
tabulated for engineering characterization of rock samples. Water absorption, Unit Weight, Point load
strength Index test and uniaxial compression test on the rock samples were conducted as per relevant
Indian Standards. The summary of the laboratory test results on rock are presented in Appendix-B in
Plate B3.
Table 4 List of I.S. codes followed for laboratory tests on rock samples
Test Designation Qty Applicable Standards Presented in Plates
Saturated Moisture Content 9 IS:13030-1991 Plate B3
Moisture Absorption 9 IS:13030-1991 Plate B3
Porosity 8 IS:13030-1991 Plate B3
Unit Weight 9 IS:13030-1991 Plate B3
Specific Gravity 9 IS:13030-1991 Plate B3
Point Load Index 1 IS:8764-1991 Plate B3
Uniaxial Compressive Strength 8 IS:9143-1979 Plate B3

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
3.2.1 Unit Weight, Specific Gravity and Porosity of Rock
Unit Weight, Specific Gravity and Porosity of Rock specimen were determined by using saturation and
buoyancy technique in accordance with the methods of IS: 13030. The summaries of the results are
presented on Appendix B in Plate B3.
3.2.2 Point Load Index Test
A total of One (1) point load Index test were performed on selected rock specimens in accordance with
the method suggested by IS:8764 (1991). The tests were performed on diametrically loaded, trimmed
core samples and on irregularly fractured core samples.The results of rock test are reported in summary
of rock test results as point load strength index Is(50). Uniaxial compressive strength may be predicted by
following relationship.
UCS/ Is(50) = 22
Where, Is(50)= Corrected Point load strength index. The test results are presented on Appendix B in
Plate B3.
3.2.3 Uniaxial Compression Test
Uniaxial compressive strength (saturated) for a total of Eight (8) cylindrical rock specimens was
determined in accordance with the method suggested by IS:9143 (1979). The uniaxial compressive
strength of the specimens were corrected for a height to diameter ratio of two for specimens whose
height to diameter ratio was other than two using the following relationship.
qc (corrected) = (qc 0.889)/ (0.778+ (0.222D/H))
Where qc = Uncorrected Uniaxial Compressive Strength

D = Diameter of the specimen tested
H = Height of the specimen tested
The test results are presented on Appendix B in Plate B3.
4.0 GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
4.1 Regional Geology
The Deccan traps occupy the coast and the interior north of Goa upto Rajasthan. But over a good part
of Gujarat coast, they are overlain by tertiary sediments. The coastal plain in this area consists of

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
different types of depositional land forms which are the result of the operation of different geomorphic
processes. The geology around the area of investigation basically consists of rocks of volcanic origin
known as Deccan Traps, forming a series of step like terraces. These rocks extend over an area of
about 50,000 sq.km. Thicknesses, however, vary considerably at different places. The Deccan Traps
primarily consist of Basalts.
5.0 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITION
5.1 Land/Marine Borehole Logs
Land/Marine Borehole logs were developed based on field test data, visual observation and laboratory
test results. These logs are presented on plates A -1 thru A - 20, in Appendix - A. These borehole
locations are as shown in Table 1.vicinity map is presented on Plate -1.Location plan is presented on
Plate -2.
5.2 Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy
The sub-surface stratification and the soil types encountered at this site have been described in detail in
the borehole records presented on Appendix A. There were 10 boreholes recorded. The soil has been
classified according to the IS Code of Practice. These borehole locations are as shown in the Plate-2.
For the purpose of ease of visualization, these boreholes have been divided into 5 sections as shown in
Table 5. Generalized subsurface stratigraphy of these sections is presented on Plate -3 thru 6.
Table 5 List of Boreholes with Sectional Details
Section No BOREHOLE No
1-1 MBH - A 4, MBH - A 3 , MBH - C1
2-2 MBH - B3 , MBH -B4
3-3 MBH - B1, MBH - B2, MBH - B3
4-4 MBH - A1, MBH - A2
5-5 LBH - 1
The soil layers of these sections have been shown on Table 6, 9, 12, 15 & 18.The thickness of various
strata encountered with minimum, maximum and average height of the layers shown in the boreholes is
summarized in Table 7, 10, 13, 16 & 19. Generalised subsurface soil profile adopted in section 1-1, 2-2,
3-3, 4-4 and 5-5 are given in Table 8,11,14,17& 20.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Table 6 Generalized Soil/Rock Layers of Section 1-1
S No Soil Description Designated As
1 Very soft to soft, dark grey to yellowish grey, silty CLAY with few gravel LAYER 1
2 Very stiff to very hard, dark grey to yellowish grey, silty CLAY with some sand LAYER 2
Medium dense to very dense, yellowish brown to reddish brown, fine to coarse SAND
3 LAYER 3
with few gravel
4 Hard, dark grey to grey, silty CLAY with gravel and weathered rock fragments LAYER 4
Extremely weak to strong ,greenish grey to dark grey, highly to moderately weathered,
5 LAYER 5
extremely to closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
Table 7 Details of Boreholes Drilled and Thickness of Strata Encountered in Section 1-1
BOREHOLE No
LAYER No SECTION 1-1 Min Max Avg
MBH-A4 MBH-A3 MBH-C1
Thicknessof Strata (m)
LAYER 1 7.50 4.50 10.50 4.50 10.50 7.50
LAYER 2 4.50 6.00 -- -- 6.00 3.50
LAYER 3 9.00 6.50 4.50 4.50 9.00 7.00
LAYER 4 3.00 -- 3.00 -- 3.00 2.00
LAYER 5 4.50 11.00 6.00 4.50 11.00 7.00
Total Depth (m) 28.50 28.00 24.00
For Section 1-1 comprising boreholes MBH-A4, MBH-A3 & MBH-C1 in general the subsoil comprises of
Layer 1 of Very soft to soft, dark grey to yellowish grey, silty CLAY with few gravel for depths ranging
from 4.50 to 10..50 m w.r.t. SBL with SPT N - values ranging from 1 to 4; this is followed by Layer 2 of
Very stiff to very hard, dark grey to yellowish grey, silty CLAY with some sand for depths ranging from
4.50 to 12.00 m with SPT N - values ranging from 15 to 34 ;this is followed by Layer 3 of Medium dense
to very dense, yellowish brown to reddish brown, fine to coarse SAND with few gravel for depth ranging
from 10.50 to 21.00m with SPT N - values ranging from 30 to refusal ; this is followed by Layer 4 of
Hard, dark grey to grey, silty CLAY with gravel and weathered rock fragments for depth ranging from
15.00 to 24.00m with SPT N - values ranging from 93 to refusal. The boreholes terminate in Layer 5 of
Extremely weak to strong, greenish grey to dark grey, highly to moderately weathered, extremely to
closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint for depths ranging from 17.00m – 28.50 m.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Table 8 Generalised Subsurface Soil/Rock Profile adopted in Section 1-1
Thickness
Layer SPT “N” c γb qc
Soil Layers used for Modeling of Strata Φ (°) 3 2
No. value (KPa) (KN/m ) (MN/m )
(m)
Very soft to soft, dark grey to yellowish grey, silty

1 7.50 1-4 6-15 0-3 14-15.6 --
CLAY with few gravel
Very stiff to very hard, dark grey to yellowish grey,

2 3.50 15 - 34 56 7 19.6 --
silty CLAY with some sand
Medium dense to very dense, yellowish brown to

3 7.00 30 - >100 -- -- -- --
reddish brown, fine to coarse SAND with few gravel
Hard, dark grey to grey, silty CLAY with gravel and

4 2.00 93 - >100 -- -- -- --
weathered rock fragments
Extremely weak to strong ,greenish grey to dark
grey, highly to moderately weathered, extremely to
5 7.00 -- -- -- -- 8-101
closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical
joint
C - Cohesion, Φ - Angle of internal friction, qc - Uniaxial compressive strength of rock, γ b -Bulk unit Weight of soil

Designated
S No Soil Description
As
Very loose, brownish grey, slightly clayey SAND with shell fragments / very soft ,dark grey,silty
1 LAYER 1
CLAY with some sand
2 Medium dense to very dense, brownish grey to yellowish brown, fine to medium SAND LAYER 2
3 Hard, brownish grey to yellowish grey, silty CLAY with some sand and laterite pieces LAYER 3
4 Very dense, brown, medium SAND LAYER 4

Extremely weak to moderately weak, yellowish grey to dark grey, highly to moderately
5 LAYER 5
weathered, extremely to very closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
BOREHOLE No
MBH-B3 MBH-B4
LAYER 1 7.50 -- -- 7.50 4.00

Thickness of Strata
LAYER 2 9.00 16.50 9.00 16.50 13.00

(m)
LAYER 3 3.00 1.50 1.50 3.00 2.50
LAYER 4 -- 3.00 -- 3.00 1.50
LAYER 5 6.00 3.50 3.50 6.00 5.00
Total Depth (m) 25.50 24.50

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
For Section 2-2 comprising boreholes MBH-B3 & MBH-B4 in general the subsoil comprises of Layer 1 of
Very loose, brownish grey, slightly clayey SAND with shell fragments / very soft ,dark grey,silty CLAY
with some sand for depth ranging from 0.00 to 7.50m w.r.t. SBL with SPT N - values ranging from 0 to 2;
this is followed by Layer 2 of Medium dense to very dense, brownish grey to yellowish brown, fine to
medium SAND for depth ranging from 0.00 to 16.50m with SPT N - values ranging from 27 to 83 ;this is
followed by Layer 3 of Hard, brownish grey to yellowish grey, silty CLAY with some sand and laterite
pieces for depth ranging from 16.50 to 19.50 m with SPT N - values ranging from 83 to 88 ; this is
followed by Layer 4 of Very dense, brown, medium SAND for depth ranging from 18.00 to 21.00m with
SPT N - values ranging from 88 to refusal. The boreholes terminate in Layer 5 of Extremely weak to
moderately weak, yellowish grey to dark grey, highly to moderately weathered, extremely to very closely
spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint for depths ranging from 19.50m – 25.50 m.
Thickness
(m)
Very loose, brownish grey, slightly clayey SAND
1 with shell fragments / very soft ,dark grey,silty 4.00 0-2 -- -- -- --
CLAY with some sand
Medium dense to very dense, brownish grey to
2 13.00 27-83 -- -- -- --
yellowish brown, fine to medium SAND
Hard, brownish grey to yellowish grey, silty CLAY

3 2.50 83-88 -- -- -- --
with some sand and laterite pieces
4 Very dense, brown, medium SAND 1.50 88->100 -- -- -- --
Extremely weak to moderately weak, yellowish

grey to dark grey, highly to moderately weathered,
5 5.00 -- -- -- -- 5.5
extremely to very closely spaced BASALT with
inclined and vertical joint
1 Very loose to dense, brownish grey, fine to medium SAND LAYER 1
2 Very soft to soft, dark grey ,silty CLAY with some sand LAYER 2
3 Very dense, brownish grey to yellowish grey, slightly clayey, fine to coarse SAND LAYER 3
4 Hard, yellow to yellowish grey, silty CLAY mix some gravel and sand /Residual soil LAYER 4
Extremely weak to strong, greenish grey to reddish grey, highly to moderately
5 weathered, highly fractured, extremely closely spaced to closely spaced BASALT with LAYER 5

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
BOREHOLE No
MBH-B3 MBH-B2 MBH-B1
LAYER 1 4.50 3.00 4.50 3.00 4.50 4.00
Thickness of Strata
LAYER 2 3.00 6.00 4.50 3.00 6.00 4.50

(m)
LAYER 3 9.00 15.00 1.50 1.50 15.00 8.50
LAYER 4 3.00 1.00 10.50 1.00 10.50 5.00
LAYER 5 6.00 2.30 6.00 2.30 6.00 5.00
Total Depth (m) 25.50 27.30 27.00
For Section 3-3 comprising boreholes MBH-B3 , MBH-B2 & MBH-B1 in general the subsoil comprises of
Layer 1 of Very loose to dense, brownish grey, fine to medium SAND for depth ranging from 0.00 to
4.50m w.r.t. SBL with SPT N - values ranging from 0 to 48; this is followed by Layer 2 of Very soft to
soft, dark grey ,silty CLAY with some sand for depth ranging from 3.00 to 9.00 m with SPT N - values
ranging from 2 to 5 ;this is followed by Layer 3 of Very dense, brownish grey to yellowish grey, slightly
clayey, fine to coarse SAND for depth ranging from 7.50 to 24.00 m with SPT N - values ranging from
47 to 100 ; this is followed by Layer 4 of Hard, yellow to yellowish grey, silty CLAY mix some gravel and
sand /Residual soil for depth ranging from 10.50 to 25.00m with SPT N - values ranging from 4 to
refusal. The boreholes terminate in Layer 5 of Extremely weak to strong, greenish grey to reddish grey,
highly to moderately weathered, highly fractured, extremely closely spaced to closely spaced BASALT
with inclined and vertical joint for depths ranging from 19.50m – 27.30 m.
Thickness
(m)
Very loose to dense, brownish grey, fine to medium

1 4.00 0-48 -- -- -- --
SAND
Very soft to soft, dark grey ,silty CLAY with some

2 4.50 2-5 12-17 4-5 14-16.4 --
sand
Very dense, brownish grey to yellowish grey, slightly

3 8.50 47-100 -- -- -- --
clayey, fine to coarse SAND
Hard, yellow to yellowish grey, silty CLAY mix some

4 5.00 62- >100 -- -- -- --
gravel and sand /Residual soil
Extremely weak to strong, greenish grey to reddish
grey, highly to moderately weathered, highly
5 5.00 -- -- -- -- 51.2
fractured, extremely closely spaced to closely
spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
1 Very soft to firm ,dark grey silty CLAY LAYER 1
2 Stiff to hard, yellowish brown to brownish grey, slightly sandy, silty CLAY with few gravel LAYER 2
3 Very dense, brown, silty ,coarse SAND with gravel and weathered rock fragments LAYER 3
Extremely weak to moderately weak ,greenish grey to grey, completely weathered to
4 moderately weathered ,highly fractured, very closely spaced BASALT with inclined and LAYER 4
vertical joint
BOREHOLE No
MBH-A1 MBH-A2
LAYER 1 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50
Thickness of
Strata (m)
LAYER 2 32.5 6.00 6.00 32.5 10.00
LAYER 3 -- 3.00 -- 3.00 1.50
LAYER 4 -- 6.00 -- 6.00 3.00
Total Depth (m) 40.00 22.50
For Section 4-4 comprising boreholes MBH-A1 & MBH-A2 in general the subsoil comprises of Layer 1
Very soft to firm ,dark grey silty CLAY for depth ranging from 0.00 to 7.50m w.r.t. SBL with SPT N -
values ranging from 2 to 6; this is followed by Layer 2 Stiff to hard, yellowish brown to brownish grey,
slightly sandy, silty CLAY with few gravel for depth ranging from 7.50 to 40.00 m with SPT N - values
ranging from 12 to refusal ;this is followed by Layer 3 of Very dense, brown, silty ,coarse SAND with
gravel and weathered rock fragments for depth ranging from 13.50 to 16.50 m with SPT N - values
ranging from 74 to refusal.The boreholes terminate in Layer 4 of Extremely weak to moderately weak
,greenish grey to grey, completely weathered to moderately weathered ,highly fractured, very closely
spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint for depths ranging from 16.50m – 22.50 m.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Thickness SPT
c γb qc
Layer No. Soil Layers used for Modeling of Strata “N” Φ (°) 3 2
(kPa) (kN/m ) (MN/m )
(m) value
1 Very soft to firm ,dark grey silty CLAY 7.50 2-6 10-18 4-6 13.8-17.3 --
Stiff to hard, yellowish brown to brownish grey,

2 10.00 12->100 -- -- -- --
slightly sandy, silty CLAY with few gravel
Very dense, brown, silty ,coarse SAND with

3 1.50 74->100 -- -- -- --
gravel and weathered rock fragments
Extremely weak to moderately weak ,greenish
grey to grey, completely weathered to moderately
4 3.00 -- -- -- -- 60
weathered ,highly fractured, very closely spaced
BASALT with inclined and vertical joint

Made up ground (Loose to dense, yellowish brown to reddish grey, coarse SAND and
1 LAYER 1
gravel and shell fragments)
2 Very soft , greenish grey, clayey SILT/ silty CLAY with shell fragments LAYER 2
3 Very stiff , yellowish grey to yellowish red, silty CLAY with gravel LAYER 3
4 Dense, reddish brown, GRAVEL with shell / Very dense ,red, silty SAND with few gravel LAYER 4
5 Hard, yellowish grey to dark grey, silty CLAY LAYER 5
Extremely weak to strong, dark grey, highly weathered to slightly weathered ,extremely
6 LAYER 6
closely to widely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
BOREHOLE No
LAYER No SECTION 5-5
LBH-1
LAYER 1 4.50
Thickness of
LAYER 2 6.00
Strata (m)
LAYER 3 4.50
LAYER 4 3.00
LAYER 5 12.00
LAYER 6 7.50
Total Depth (m) 37.50
For Section 5-5 comprising borehole LBH-1 in general the subsoil comprises of Layer 1 Made up ground

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
(Loose to dense, yellowish brown to reddish grey, coarse SAND and gravel and shell fragments) for
depth ranging from 0.00 to 4.50m w.r.t. EGL with SPT N - values ranging from 10 to 30; this is followed
by Layer 2 Very soft , greenish grey, clayey SILT/ silty CLAY with shell fragments for depth ranging
from 4.50 to 10.50 m with SPT N - values ranging from 2 to 5 ;this is followed by Layer 3 of Very Very
stiff , yellowish grey to yellowish red, silty CLAY with gravel for depth ranging from 10.50 to 15.00 m with
SPT N - values ranging from 27 to 31;this is followed by Layer 4 of Dense, reddish brown, GRAVEL with
shell / Very dense ,red, silty SAND with few gravel for depth ranging from 15.00 to 18.00 m with SPT N -
values ranging from 35 to 115;this is followed by Layer 5 of Hard, yellowish grey to dark grey, silty CLAY
for depth ranging from 18.00 to 30.30 m with SPT N - values ranging from 43 to refusal.The boreholes
terminate in Layer 6 of Extremely weak to strong, dark grey, highly weathered to slightly weathered
,extremely closely to widely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint for depths ranging from
30.30 to 37.50 m.
Thickness
No. value (kPa) (kN/m ) (MN/m )
(m)
Made up ground (Loose to dense, yellowish brown
1 to reddish grey, coarse SAND and gravel and 4.50 10-30 -- -- -- --
shell fragments)
Very soft to firm, greenish grey, clayey SILT/ silty
2 6.00 2-5 20-23 2 15.1-15.3 --
CLAY with shell fragments
Very stiff , yellowish grey to yellowish red, silty

3 4.50 27-31 -- -- -- --
CLAY with gravel
Dense, reddish brown, GRAVEL with shell / Very

4 3.00 35-115 -- -- -- --
dense ,red, silty SAND with few gravel
Hard, yellowish grey to dark grey, silty CLAY 12.00 432->100 -- -- -- --

5
Extremely weak to strong, dark grey, highly
weathered to slightly weathered ,extremely closely
6 7.50 -- -- -- -- 72.1
to widely spaced BASALT with inclined and
vertical joint
6.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Foundation Design Criteria
A suitable foundation for any structure must satisfy two basic independent criteria with respect to the
underlying foundation soils. First, the foundation must have an adequate factor of safety against
exceeding the bearing capacity of the foundation soils. Second, the vertical movements of the
foundation due to settlement or swelling of the foundation soils must be within tolerable limits for the
structure. We consider that the subsurface conditions at this site are suitable for supporting the
proposed structures on pile foundations.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
6.2 Foundation Type
th
We understand that jetty and various marine structures will be constructed in 7 berth area. We
consider that the subsurface conditions at this site are suitable for supporting the proposed structures
on pile foundations. Boreholes have been grouped into 5 sections as shown in Table 21.
Table 21 List of Boreholes with Sectional Details
Section No BOREHOLE No Recommended Foundation System
1-1 MBH -A4,MBH - A3 & MBH-C1 Pile Foundation (Berth)
2-2 MBH - B3 & MBH -B4 Pile Foundation (Berth)
3-3 MBH - B3 , MBH -B2 & MBH-B1 Pile Foundation (Berth)

Filling (Ground improvement with stone column/PVD
4-4 MBH-A1 & MBH-A2
and Pile Foundation)
5-5 LBH-1 Pile Foundation (Heavy Machine Structure)
7.0 Pile Foundation
We recommend bored cast in situ pile with steel liner upto rock stratum. Since it is marine condition
dense concrete is advisable for pile. The calculation of load bearing capacity of the pile is given below.
7.1 Computational Method
The ultimate compressive capacity, Q, for a given pile penetration is taken as the sum of the skin friction
on the pile wall,QS, and the end bearing on the pile tip, Qp ,so that:
Q = QS+ Qp = f AS + q Ap
Where, As = Embedded surface area

Ap = Pile end area
f =Unit skin friction
q = unit end bearing
Procedures used to compute values of f and q are discussed in the following paragraphs. When
computing ultimate tensile capacity, the end bearing term in the above equation is neglected.
7.2 Unit Skin Friction and Unit End Bearing
We computed the unit skin friction and unit end bearing in cohesive, granular soils and rock using the
procedure described in the IS 2911(Part-1) for soil and 14593:1998 for rock as follows:

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
a) Piles in cohesive soils
The ultimate bearing capacity of piles (Qu) in cohesive soil is calculated by the following equation:
Q u = C p . N c . A p + α. C s . Α s
Where,
Qu = Ultimate load capacity of piles, kN
Qs = Safe load capacity of piles, kN = Qu / Fs
Cp = Cohesion of the soil at tip of the pile, kN/m2
Nc = bearing capacity factor (equal to 9)
Cs = Average cohesion throughout the length of the pile, kN/m2
α = Adhesion factor (Governed by pile material and soil)
Fs = 2.5 (factor of safety)
Ap = Cross-sectional area of pile toe in m2
As = Surface area of pile shaft in m2 =π Dl s
Ls = Length of pile shaft in m
b) Piles in non-cohesive soils
The ultimate bearing capacity of piles (Q u l t ) in non-cohesive soil is calculated by the following equation:
Qult = ( Pd Nq + ½ B γ Nγ ) Ap + ( ∑K Pd tan δ) As
Where,
Pd = Effective overburden stress at tip of the pile, kN (Limiting value of overburden
stress=15B)
Nq = Bearing capacity factor adopted as per IS: 2911 (Part-1)
Nγ = Bearing capacity factor adopted as per 1S:6403
B = Size of the pile in m
γ = Effective unit weight of soil at pile toe
Ap = Cross-sectional area of pile toe in m2
K = Lateral earth pressure coefficient (K=1)
δ = 3/4 *Φ
Φ =Angle of internal friction
2
As = Surface area of pile shaft in m
Qs = Safe load capacity of piles, kN = Qu / Fs

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
c) Piles in Rock based on Uniaxial Compressive Strength
The safe pile capacity is calculated from the equation:
Q s = q c N j N d A p + q c π Dl s αβ
Where,
Qs = Safe load capacity of piles, tonnes
qc = Uniaxial compressive strength of rock, t/m2
Nd = Depth factor = 0.8+0.2 (Ls /D) =1.2
Nj = Empirical coefficient depending on the spacing of discontinuities = 0.1
(IS: 12070:1987)
2
Ap = Area of pile toe in m
D = Diameter of pile, in m
Ls = Socket length into the rock, in m (Ls =2D)
α, β = Correction factor = 0.1 & 0.4
Pile shall be terminated in rock stratum, with minimum uniaxial compressive strength of 10 MPa for a
minimum length of 2 pile diameter.
7.3 Lateral Load Capacity of Piles
a) Lateral capacity of piles in section 1-1, 2-2, 3-3& 4-4 (Marine piles)
Socketing of piles in rock needed to resist lateral and axial forces. Piles may have to be socketed in rock
to resist mainly the bending moment and horizontal forces. Bending moment and horizontal force
calculation is carried out for special cases (case1: moment at top of rock when horizontal force at top of
rock=0. case2: horizontal force at top of rock when moment at top of rock=0.) (Ref. Foundation Design
Manual by Dr. N. V. Nayak; page no: 3.82)
Case1: H = 0 i.e. no horizontal force

M = (L σ D/ 6)
2
Case2: M = 0 i.e. no moment

H = (L σ D/ 4)
σ = σ1 (lesser value of σc & σ1 shall be adopted)
σc =Permissible compressive strength in concrete (30,000 kN/m2)
σ1 =Permissible compressive strength in rock (10,000 kN/m2)
L=Socket length (L=2D)
D=Diameter of the pile

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
H=Horizontal force at top of rock

M=Moment at top of rock
Table 22 Moment and Lateral force at top of Rock
Lateral force at top

Moment at top of rock when lateral Lateral force(kN) at top
of rock when
Pile diameter (m) force at top of rock=0 of pile when pile
moment at top of
(kN-m) length=20m with FOS=3
rock=0 (kN)
1.0 6667 110 5000
1.2 11520 120 7200
1.4 18293 304 9800
(1) According to IS 2911(Part-IV), allowable lateral load on a vertical pile can be taken as 2 to
5 % of the allowable vertical load given in section 8.7
(2) Structural lateral capacity of marine pile considering as free standing column without any
lateral support shall be determined. This shall be compared with values recommended in section 8.7
and Table-22 and lesser of three shall be adopted.
b) Lateral capacity of piles in section 5-5 (Land piles)
The lateral load capacity of pile is calculated based on IS: 2911 (Part 1/Sec 2) (Reese and Matlock
approach) for fixed head piles with an allowable deflection of 6mm:
1 3 3
ym ax = {( P t . T ) . A y + ( M t . T ). B y }
EI
Where,
ymax = Deflection at the pile head
E = Elastic Modulus of Pile Material (30000 N/cm2)
ηh = Constant of Soil Modulus =0.146 (IS:2911(Part1/Sec2))
Relative Stiffness Factor = (EI/ηh)
1/5
T =
Pt = Lateral load at the Pile Head
Mt = Moment at the Pile Head
Ay, By = Deflection Coefficients by Reese & Matlock approach (2.435 & 1.623)

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Table 23 Lateral load capacities of pile in section 5-5

2
E (N/cm ) 3000000
η (kg/cm )
2
0.260
η (N/cm )
2
2.600
Length (cm) 3200
Diameter (cm) 100 120 140
Moment of Inertia (cm4)

4908738.521 10178760.2 18857409.9
2
EI (x10^10) (N-cm )
1.47262E+13 3.05363E+13 5.65722E+13
η)
1/5
T = (EI/η (cm)
355.3231971 411.1199557 465.0782072
Pt (kN) free head (6mm deflection)
70 95 125
Pt (kN) fixed head
80 105 135
* Reese and Matlock approach
7.4 Uplift Resistance of Pile
The ultimate uplift resistance (Q u u ) is the sum of the frictional adhesion resistance. Weight of the pile is
not considered in calculation.
Quu = Asfs
Where,
Quu = Ultimate uplift resistence
fs = Ultimate shaft-shear resistance
As = Surface area of pile shaft
7.5 Chiseling Criteria
As mentioned previously a rock socket length of 2xD (D = Pile diameter) should be provided in the
bearing stratum, the socketing zone will start when chisel penetration is less than 10 cm for a chisel
2
energy of 400 ton-m/m of pile cross section. Length of socket will be counted below the depth of last
satisfactory trial. Additional, chisel penetrations should be less than 10 cm for chisel energy of 750 ton-
2
m/m of pile cross section at the end of the 3D socketing zone. Piles can be terminated earlier if chisel
2
penetrations should be less than 10 cm for chisel energy of 2250 ton-m/m of pile cross section. Sample
calculations to calculate chisel energy are shown below.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
a) Considering a pile of 1000mm diameter
2
Area of pile = 0.785 m .
Let the weight of chisel be 1 ton.If fall of chisel is limited to 2.0 meters, Energy of each blow = 1.0 ton x
2.0 ton-meter.The energy of 1000 ton-meter/ m2 is converted into equivalent energy for 1000mm
diameter pile.
Equivalent energy = (1000 x 0.785) t/m2 = 785 t.m/m2
To achieve this number of blows required of 1.0 ton chisel with 2.0m fall = 785/2 = 39 blows.
The no. of blows is increased to account for submerged weight of chisel and wire rope tension on drum
while releasing the chisel. So the chiseling criteria for 1000mm diameter pile will be as follows:
The penetration shall be less than 10 cm for 40 blows of chisel with weight of 1 ton and falling through a
height of 2.0 meter.
Note: Generaly 100 blows can be applied within 15 minutes. While checking the chiseling criteria, the chisel shall be withdrawn
after 100 blows, hole cleaned and penetration measured.
7.6 Soil Parameter used for design in section 1-1,2-2, 3-3 ,4-4 & 5-5
Soil parameters for the cohesive soil, granular soil and rock at the site are based on soil type and SPT
values and laboratory test results. We have used the following soil parameters, as given in Table 24 to
28, for developing various pile design recommendations.
Table 24 Soil Parameter used for design in Section 1-1

Thickness of Strata
Elevation
α ( compression)
w.r.t
‘qc’ (MN/m2)
α ( Tension)
Nc for Φ =0
γ b (KN/m3)
CD
C (kPa)
Φ (°)
(m)
KS
Nq
Nγ
Soil Type
∂
From
To
Very soft to soft, dark grey to yellowish grey,

7.50 -6 -13.5 -- -- 14 0.5 0.7 -- -- -- -- -- --
silty CLAY with few gravel
Very stiff to very hard, dark grey to yellowish

3.50 -13.5 -17 56 7 19 0.25 0.3 -- -- -- -- -- --
grey, silty CLAY with some sand
Medium dense to very dense, yellowish
brown to reddish brown, fine to coarse SAND 7.00 -17 -24 -- 35 20 -- -- 26 1 -- 56 48 --
with few gravel
Hard, dark grey to grey, silty CLAY with
2.00 -24 -26 200 -- 20 0.25 0.3 -- -- -- -- -- --
Extremely weak to strong ,greenish grey to
dark grey, highly to moderately weathered,
7.00 -26 -33 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10
extremely to closely spaced BASALT with

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Thickness of Strata
α ( compression)
Elevation
‘qc’ (MN/m2)
α ( Tension)
Nc for Φ =0
w.r.t
γ b (KN/m3)
C (kPa)
CD
Φ (°)
(m)
KS
Nq
Nγ
Soil Type
∂
From
To
Very loose, brownish grey, slightly clayey SAND
with shell fragments / very soft ,dark grey,silty 4.00 -3 -7 -- -- 16 0.5 0.7 -- -- 9 -- -- --
CLAY with some sand
Medium dense to very dense, brownish grey to
13.00 -7 -20 -- 35 20 -- -- 26 1 -- 56 48 --
yellowish brown, fine to medium SAND
Hard, brownish grey to yellowish grey, silty

2.50 -20 -22.5 200 -- 20 0.25 0.3 -- -- -- -- -- --
CLAY with some sand and laterite pieces
Very dense, brown, medium SAND 1.50 -22.5 -24 -- 36 22 -- -- 27 1 -- 54 60 --
Extremely weak to moderately weak, yellowish

grey to dark grey, highly to moderately
5.00 -24 -29 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10
weathered, extremely to very closely spaced

Thickness of Strata
Elevation
α ( compression)
w.r.t
‘qc’ (MN/m2)
α ( Tension)
Nc for Φ =0
γ b (KN/m3)
CD
C (kPa)
Φ (°)
(m)
KS
Nq
Nγ
Soil Type
∂
From
To
Very loose to dense, brownish grey, fine to

4.00 -3 -7 -- -- 16 -- -- 22.5 1 -- 28 22.4 --
medium SAND
Very soft to soft, dark grey ,silty CLAY with

4.50 -7 -11.5 -- -- 14 0.5 0.7 -- -- -- -- -- --
some sand
Very dense, brownish grey to yellowish grey,

8.50 -11.5 -20 -- 36 20 -- -- 27 1 -- 54 60 --
slightly clayey, fine to coarse SAND
Hard, yellow to yellowish grey, silty CLAY mix

5.00 -20 -25 200 -- 20 0.25 0.30 -- -- -- -- -- --
some gravel and sand /Residual soil
Extremely weak to strong, greenish grey to
reddish grey, highly to moderately weathered,
highly fractured, extremely closely spaced to 5.00 -25 -30 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10
closely spaced BASALT with inclined and
vertical joint

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Thickness of Strata
α ( compression)
Elevation
‘qc’ (MN/m2)
w.r.t
α ( Tension)
Nc for Φ =0
γ b (KN/m3)
CD
C (kPa)
Φ (°)
(m)
KS
Nq
Nγ
Soil Type
∂
From
To
Very soft to firm ,dark grey silty CLAY 7.50 -6 -13.5 -- -- 14 0.5 0.7 -- -- -- -- -- --
Stiff to hard, yellowish brown to brownish grey,

10.00 -13.5 -23.5 100 -- 18 0.3 0.4 -- -- -- -- -- --
slightly sandy, silty CLAY with few gravel
Very dense, brown, silty ,coarse SAND with

1.50 -23.5 -25 -- 36 20 -- -- 27 1 -- 54 60 --
Extremely weak to moderately weak ,greenish
grey to grey, completely weathered to
moderately weathered ,highly fractured, very 3.00 -25 -28 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10
closely spaced BASALT with inclined and
vertical joint

Thickness of Strata
Elevation
α ( compression)
w.r.t
‘qc’ (MN/m2)
α ( Tension)
Nc for Φ =0
γ b (KN/m3)
CD
C (kPa)
Φ (°)
(m)
KS
Nq
Nγ
Soil Type
∂
From
To
Made up ground (Loose to dense, yellowish brown

to reddish grey, coarse SAND and gravel and shell 4.50 +4.5 0.0 -- -- -- -- -- 22.5 1 -- 28 22.4 --
fragments)
Very soft , greenish grey, clayey SILT/ silty CLAY
6.00 0.0 -6.0 20 2 15 0.5 0.7 -- -- -- -- -- --
with shell fragments
Very stiff , yellowish grey to yellowish red, silty
4.50 -6.0 -10.5 100 -- -- 0.3 0.4 -- -- -- -- -- --
CLAY with gravel
Dense, reddish brown, GRAVEL with shell / Very
3.00 -10.5 -13.5 -- 36 -- -- -- 27 1 -- 54 60 --
dense ,red, silty SAND with few gravel
Hard, yellowish grey to dark grey, silty CLAY 12.00 -13.5 -25.5 150 -- -- 0.25 0.30 -- -- -- -- -- --
Extremely weak to strong, dark grey, highly
weathered to slightly weathered ,extremely closely
7.50 -25.5 33.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10
to widely spaced BASALT with inclined and
vertical joint
Note:
1) δ is taken equal to ¾* Φ
2) Ks =1.0 (As per IS 2911 (Part/sec2)
3) γ used is the average value estimated from the laboratory determinations for cohesive soil and for
sandy soil value estimated from the average SPT N –value.
4) Values of cohesion C have been taken from lower values of laboratory tests.
5) Nc in cohesion strata is taken as 9.0

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
6) The Φ Value of 28 to 36° for silty SAND is derived using lower bound SPT”N” for this layer.
7) The end bearing of the pile should be checked for safe working stress of concrete used.
8) Very soft, silty CLAY and Loose clayey SAND/silty SAND layer is not considered for pile capacity
calculation.
9) qc =10MPa is average value estimated from the laboratory result. In section 1-1 & 2-2 the uniaxial
compressive strength value of the basalt ranges from 5.5 to 101.8 MPa.In other sections qc is more
than 10MPa
7.7 Recommended Safe Pile Capacities
Table 29 Recommended Safe vertical downward, uplift and lateral Pile Capacity in section 1-1
1 m dia pile 1.2 m dia pile 1.4 m dia pile
Elevation w.r.t CD
Pile termination
Lateral capacity
Lateral capacity
Lateral capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
downward
downward
downward
Soil Type at pile termination
Vertical
Vertical
Vertical
(m)
(KN)
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
Elevation
Medium dense to very dense,

yellowish brown to reddish brown,
-21 2000 200 60 2900 240 90 3950 280 120
fine to coarse SAND with few
gravel
Extremely weak to strong
,greenish grey to dark grey,
highly to moderately weathered,
-28 3850 1300 110 5500 1850 160 7350 2450 220
extremely to closely spaced
BASALT with inclined and vertical
joint
Elevation w.r.t CD
Pile termination
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
downward
downward
downward

Vertical
Vertical
Vertical
(m)
Lateral
Lateral
Lateral
(KN)
(kN)
(kN)
Elevation
Medium dense to very dense,

brownish grey to yellowish brown, -15 2700 310 80 3100 370 90 4200 400 120
fine to medium SAND
Extremely weak to moderately
weak, yellowish grey to dark grey,
-26 5750 3250 170 4750 4100 230 10000 5050 300
extremely to very closely spaced
joint

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Elevation w.r.t CD
Pile termination
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
downward
downward
downward
Vertical
Vertical
Vertical
(m)
Lateral
Lateral
Lateral
(KN)
(kN)
(kN)
Elevation
Very dense, brownish grey to

yellowish grey, slightly clayey, -18 4950 310 140 7100 370 210 9700 430 290
fine to coarse SAND
Extremely weak to strong,
greenish grey to reddish grey,
highly fractured, extremely closely -27 4290 1700 120 5950 2250 170 7900 2900 230
spaced to closely spaced
joint
Elevation w.r.t CD
Pile termination
Lateral capacity
Lateral capacity
Lateral capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
capacity (kN)
downward
downward
downward
(m)
Vertical
Vertical
Vertical
(KN)
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
(kN)
Elevation
Stiff to hard, yellowish brown to

brownish grey, slightly sandy, silty -20 2060 490 60 2800 580 80 3650 680 110
CLAY with few gravel
Extremely weak to moderately
weak ,greenish grey to grey,
completely weathered to
moderately weathered ,highly -27 4000 1400 120 6000 1900 180 7600 2500 220
fractured, very closely spaced
joint
Elevation w.r.t CD
Pile termination
Lateral capacity
Lateral capacity
Lateral capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
Uplift capacity
capacity (KN)
capacity (KN)
capacity (KN)
downward
downward
downward

Vertical
Vertical
Vertical
(m)
(KN)
(KN)
(KN)
(KN)
(KN)
(KN)
Elevation
Hard, yellowish grey to dark grey, silty

-20 1650 470 70 2200 570 95 2900 660 125
CLAY
Extremely weak to strong, dark grey,
highly weathered to slightly weathered
-28 4350 1650 70 6050 2300 95 8000 2850 125
,extremely closely to widely spaced

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
7.8 Expected value of consolidation settlement and Time-duration for 90% consolidation of
soft clay layer in section 5-5 & 4-4
In Section 5-5 comprising of borehole LBH-1 the subsoil comprises of Layer 1 Made up ground (Loose
to dense, yellowish brown to reddish grey, coarse SAND and gravel and shell fragments) for depth
ranging from 0.00 to 4.50m w.r.t. EGL; this is followed by Layer 2 Very soft, greenish grey, clayey SILT/
silty CLAY with shell fragments for depth ranging from 4.50 to 10.50 m. In this layer the expected value
of settlement is about 0.75 to 1.25m with 12 year duration for present load condition with out ground
improvement (For single drainage condition).
In Section 4-4 comprising of boreholes MBH-A1 & MBH-A2 the subsoil comprises of Layer 1 Very soft to
firm, dark grey silty CLAY for depth ranging from 0.00 to 7.50m w.r.t. SBL .Section 4-4 area is resorted
for filling. The expected thickness of filling is 11m (6m filling in water & 5m filling above water). In this
layer the expected value of settlement is about 1.25 to 1.75m with 100 year duration for 11m fill with out
ground improvement (For single drainage condition).
7.9 Foundation recommendation for Section 5-5 & 4-4
Section 5-5 area is resorted for heavy machine structures. The soft clay layer beneath the made up
surface layer will undergo consolidation settlement if loaded. Hence pile foundation is preferred in this
area. The negative skin friction will act on the pile due to the settlement of this soft layer, which will
reduce the pile capacity calculated in the previous sections.
In the case of shallow foundation in this area, proper treatment of the soft clay layer is to be carried out
to reduce the consolidation settlement. Different types of treatment methods preferred in the area are:
1) Stone Columns
Stone column will increase the load bearing capacity of soft clay layer. The process generally consists
of water jetting a vibrofloat into the soft clay layer to make a circular hole that extends through the clay
to firmer soil. The hole is then filled with imported gravel. After stone column is constructed; a fill
material should always be placed over the ground surface and compacted before the foundation is
constructed. The stone column tends to reduce the settlement of foundations at allowable loads. Stone
columns work more effectively when they are used to stabilize a large area where the undrained shear
strength of the subsoil is in the range of 10 to 50 kN/m2.

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
2) Prefabricated Vertical Drains
Vertical drains are installed in order to accelerate time of consolidation settlement and gain in strength
of soft cohesive soil. Without installing vertical drains bearing failure may occur during placement of the
fill and the settlement of clay soils may extend over many years.
7.10 Filling in section 4-4 area
Section 4-4 area is resorted for filling. Layer 1 in this section is very soft to firm, dark grey, silty CLAY
with thickness of 7.5m and unconfined compressive strength of 10KPa and expected thickness of filling
is 11m. Before filling this area, the soft layer shall be removed or ground improvement techniques need
to be employed. It is expected that about 5m fill can be placed in submerged condition without shear
failure. (Detailed stability calculations need to be performed to determine the thickness of fill that can be
placed with out shear failure). But here the expected filling is about 11m.Hence the soft layer of clay
should be treated by any one of the methods mentioned in the previous section.
8.0 CODES
These specifications conform to the latest Indian Standards on Soils and Foundations as below.
LIST OF INDIAN STANDARDS

1) IS:1498 - Classification and Identification of Soils for General Engineering Purposes
2) IS:1892 - Code of Practice for Site Investigations for Foundations
3) IS:2131 - Method of Standard Penetration Test for Soils
4) IS:2132 - Code of Practice for Thin Walled Tube Sampling of Soils
5) IS:2720 (1) - Methods of Test for Soil - Preparation of Dry Soil Sample for Various Test
6) IS:2720 (3) - Methods of Test for Soil- Determination of Specific Gravity
7) IS:2720 (4) - Methods of Test for Soil- Grain Size Analysis
8) IS:2720 (5) - Methods of Test for Soil- Determination of Liquid limit & Plastic limit
9) IS:2720 (11) - Methods of Test for Soil- Determination of unconsolidated undrained shear
strength parameters
10) IS:2720 (30) - Methods of Test for Soil- Laboratory vane shear test
11) IS:8764 - Method of Determination of Point Load Strength Index of Rocks
12) IS:9143 - Method of Determination of Unconfined Compressive Strength of Rock Materials
13) IS:10082- Method of Determination of Tensile Strength by indirect tests on rock specimens
14) IS:9179 - Method of Preparation for Rock Specimen in Laboratory Tests
15) IS:13030 - Method of Testing for Water Content, Porosity, Density & Related Properties of
Rock Materials

FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
9.0 CONCLUSIONS
The report contains a brief description of the scope of work, details of the field investigations
conducted, the procedures adopted, the relevant codes and standards followed to carry out the tests
and the results. The results reported here are dependent on the test locations and time at which the
tests were conducted. We have prepared this report exclusively for MPT. The conclusions and
recommendations presented in this report may not apply for different locations. We thank the
management and staff of MPT for entrusting this work to us and for their wholehearted cooperation
and support in executing the project.

ENGINEERING ILLUSTRATIONS
AND SKETCHES
VICINITY MAP
Investigated Area
Project: Geotechnical Investigation for Berth No.7 at Mormugao
Plate - 1
APPENDIX - A
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Project : GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BERTH NO.7 Borehole No. : LBH-1
Client : Mormugao Port Trust Job No. : 215/08 Co-ordinates : N-370940.1 , E-1704243.6
Drilling Method : Cable Percussion / Hydraulic Rotary Equipment : Rotary hydraulic rig R.L. (m) : 4.44 w.r.t CD
Casing size(mm) : 150/100 Casing depth (m) : 30.30 w.r.t SBL T.D. (m) : 37.50 w.r.t SBL
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 14/03/08-17/03/08
Field data Laboratory data
Sample & in situ test
Depth below EGL(m)
Depth below EGL(m)
WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 4.44 Madeup ground ( Filling of gravel, sand and clay etc)
1.50-1.95 30 1.50 2.94 Medium dense to dense, yellowish to brown, coarse grained SAND with
gravel and shell fragments (madeup ground)
2
3
3.00-3.45 10 3.00 1.44 Loose, reddish grey, coarse grained SAND with shell (madeup ground)
4.50-4.95 2 4.50 -0.06 X Very soft, greensih grey clayey SILT

X
5
X
X
6 X
6.00-6.45 24 61 14 1 64/29/79 22.6/2
7 X
X
7.50-7.95 5 -3.06 X X Very soft, greensih grey, silty CLAY with shell fragments
7.50
X
8
X
X
9 X
15 47 30 8 60/29/80 20.5/2
9.00-9.45
X
10 X
X
10.50-10.95 29 10.50 -6.06 Very stiff, yellowish grey ,silty CLAY with gravel
X
11
X
X
12 X
12.00-12.45 31 Very stiff, yellowish red, silty CLAY with gravel
12.00 -7.56
X
X
13
X
13.50-13.95 Very stiff, yellowish red ,silty CLAY with gravel
27 13.00 -8.56 X
X
14
X
X
X
15 15.00 -10.56
Abbreviations & Symbols : cu - Undrained Cohesion Water Depth (m) below CD

WL - Liquid Limit
- Rock Core φ - Angle of Internal T.D. - Termination Depth
- SPT IP - Plasticity Index Date Depth (m)
Friction EGL - Existing Ground Level
NP - Non-Plastic
- UDS - No Recovery τV - Shear Strength SBL - Sea Bed Level
MC - Moisture Content
τVR - Shear Strength of CD - Chart Datum
- DS TCR - Total Core Recovery
- Soil Sample collected using Remoulded Soil MSL - Mean Sea Level
SCR - Solid Core Recovery
- BS Core Barrel WG - Weathering Grade RL - Reduced Level
RQD - Rock Quality Designation
FI - Fracture Index
RMR - Rock Mass Rating
- WS NI - Non Intact
- Field VST
Plate-A 1
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 14/03/08-17/03/08
Depth below EGL(m)
Depth below EGL(m)
WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.45 35 15.00 -10.56 Dense, reddish brown, subanguar to subrounded, fine to medium GRAVEL
with shell
16
16.50-16.87 115 16.50 -12.06 Very dense, red, slightly clayey,silty SAND with few GRAVEL 8 39 50 3 NP
X
X
17
18
18.00-18.38 97 18.00 -13.56 Hard, reddish,silty CLAY with gravel
X
X
19
19.50-19.95 75 19.50 -15.06 X Hard, yellowish to bluish grey,silty CLAY

X
20
X
X
X
21
21.00-21.45 71 X X
X
22 X
22.50-22.95 66 22.50 -18.06 X Hard, bluish grey, silty CLAY

X
23
X
X
X
24
24.00-24.45 70
X
X
25 X
25.50-25.45 66
X
26
X
X
27 X
27.00-27.45 46 27.00 -22.56 Hard, dark grey,silty CLAY
X
X
X
28
X
X
28.50-28.95 X
43
29 X
X
X
30.00 -25.56
30 X

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 2
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 14/03/08-17/03/08
Depth below EGL(m)
Depth below EGL(m)
WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
30 30.00-30.30 >100 30.00 -25.56 X Hard, dark grey,silty CLAY 25 65 9 1 56/32/-

X
30.30-31.50 IV NI 25 0 0 30.30 -25.86 Extremely weak to weak, dark grey, highly weathered, extremely closely
spaced, BASALT
31
31.50-31.70 >100
31.70-33.00 III-IV NI 53 0 0 31.70 -27.26 Weak to moderately weak, dark grey, moderately to highly weathered, very
32 closely spaced BASALT
33
33.00-33.03 >100
33.03-34.50 33.03 -28.59 Moderately weak to moderately strong, dark grey, moderately to slightly
II-III 4 95 27 20
weathered, closely spaced BASALT with veins of zeolite
34
34.50-36.00 II 4 93 53 43 34.50 -30.06 Moderately strong to strong, dark grey, moderately to slightly weathered,
closely to medium spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
35
36
36.00-37.50 II 4 100 93 73 36.00 -31.56 Moderately strong to strong, dark grey, moderately to slightly weathered,
medium to widely spaced BASALT with inclined joint
37
37.50 -33.06
Bore hole terminated at 37.50 m from SBL
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 3
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Project : GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BERTH NO.7 Borehole No. : MBH-A1
Client : Mormugao Port Trust Job No. : 215/08 Co-ordinates : N-370989, E-1704311
Drilling Method : Cable Percussion / Hydraulic Rotary Equipment : Pontoon R.L. (m) : -5.757 w.r.t CD
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 29/02/08-04/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -5.76 Very soft, dark grey,silty CLAY

X
X
1
X
1.50-1.95 17 67 16 0 31/13/50 18.1/4
X
X
2
X
3 X
3.00-3.45 2
4 X
X
4.50-4.95 4.50 -10.26 Very soft, dark grey,silty CLAY 40 59 1 0 69/33/91 14.29/4
X
5
X
X
X
6
6.00-6.45 6 X
6.00 -11.76 Firm, dark grey,silty CLAY with gravel
X
X
7
X
7.50-7.95 21
7.50 -13.26 X Very stiff, yellowish brown,silty CLAY with gravel
8 X
X
X
9
9.00 -14.76 X Hard, yellowish red to grey,silty CLAY with gravel and laterite
9.00-9.45 36
X
X
10
X
10.50-10.95 43
X
X
11
X
12 X
12.00-12.45 68 12.00 -17.76 X Hard, grey,slightly fine sandy,silty CLAY
X
13 X
X
13.50-13.95 81
X
14
X
X
15 15.00 -20.76 X

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 4
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 29/02/08-04/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.45 79 15.00 -20.76 Hard, grey,slightly fine sandy,silty CLAY

X
X
16
X
16.50-16.95 95
X
17
X
18 X
18.00-18.20 >100 X
19
19.50-19.78 >100 X
X
20
21 X
21.00-21.23 >100 X
21.00 -26.76 Hard, dark grey, silty CLAY with some sand
X
22
X
22.50-22.58 >100 X 12 64 24 0 42/20/-
23 X
X
X
24 X
24.00-24.27 >100 24.00 -29.76 Hard, dark grey,silty CLAY with gravel
25 X
X
25.50-25.80 >100
X
26
X
X
27 X
27.00-27.23 >100
X
X
28
X
28.50-28.59 >100
X
29 X
30.00 -35.76 X
30
X

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 5
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 29/02/08-04/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
30 30.00-30.08 >100 30.00 Hard, dark grey,silty CLAY with gravel

-35.76 . X
X
31
X
31.50-31.60 >100 X
X
32
X
X
33
33.00-33.45 46 33.00 Hard, brown to grey, coarse sandy,silty CLAY with gravel
-38.76
X
X
34 X
34.50-34.95 53 34.50 Hard, dark grey,silty CLAY

-40.26 X
X
35
X
X
36 X
36.00-36.45 54 24 55 21 0 50/22/-
X
X
X
X
37
X
37.50-37.70 >100
37.50 -43.26 Hard, dark grey,silty CLAY with gravel
X
38 X
38.50-38.53 >100 38.50 -44.26 X Very dense,silty clayey GRAVEL

38.53-40.00
39 X
X
X
40.00 -45.76
40
41
42
43
44
45

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 6
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 4/03/08 - 6/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 15.00 -21.33 X Very soft, dark grey,silty CLAY

X
1 X
1.50-1.95 1.50 -7.83 X Very soft, dark grey,silty CLAY 33 64 3 0 61/28/95 9.7 & 6.1
X
2
X
X
X
3
3.00-3.45 2 X
4
X
X X
4.50-4.95 X 27 57 16 0 53/29/77 11/6
5
X
X
6 X
6.00-6.45 5 -12.33 Firm, dark grey,silty CLAY with some sand
6.00
X
X
7
X
7.50-7.95 26 X
7.50 -13.83 Medium dense, brown,silty clayey GRAVEL
X
X
9
9.00 -15.33 Stiff, dark grey,silty CLAY with some sand and shell fragments
9.00-9.45 12
10
10.50-10.95 29 10.50 -16.83 Very stiff, dark grey,silty CLAY with some sand
X
X
11
12 X
12.00-12.45 30 X 6 65 27 2 50/31/-
X
13
X
X
13.50-13.95 -19.83 Very dense, brown,silty coarse SAND with gravel and weathered rock
74 13.50 X
fragments
X
14
X
15.00 -21.33
15

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 7
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 4/03/08 - 6/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.42 101 15.00 -21.33 Very dense, brown,silty coarse SAND with gravel and rock fragments
X
X
16
X
16.50-16.53 >100 16.50 -22.83 Very dense, grey, GRAVEL and weathered rock fragments
16.53-18.00 -22.86 Extremely weak to weak, greenish grey, highly to moderately weathered,
17 IV-III NI 24 0 0 16.53
highly fractured, very closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
18
18.00-19.50 IV-III NI 49 4 0
19
19.50-21.00 III-II NI 60 7 4 19.50 -25.83 Moderately weak to moderately strong, grey, moderately fractured, slightly
weathered, very closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint filled
20 by clay
21
21.00-22.50 II NI
93 10 8
22
22.50 -28.83
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 8
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 07/03/08-09/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -7.04 Soft, dark grey,silty CLAY with gravel

X
X
1
X
1.50-1.95 2
X
X
2
X
3 X
3.00-3.45 33 60 6 1 68/37/90 13.35/3
X
X
X
4
X
4.50-4.95 4.50 -11.54 Stiff to hard, dark grey,silty CLAY with some sand 40 47 13 0 60/43/28 56.6/7
5 X
X
X
6
6.00-6.45 29 X
X
X
7
7.50-7.95 34 -14.54 Hard, yellowish to brown grey,silty CLAY with some sand
7.50 X
X X
8 X
9
9.00 -16.04 X Hard, dark grey, silty CLAY with some fine sand
9.00-9.45 32 X
10 X
X
10.50-10.95 101 10.50 -17.54 Very dense, yellowish grey, SAND with laterite pieces
11
12
12.00-12.45 84
13
13.50-13.75 -20.54 Very dense, reddish brown,coarse SAND with few gravel and quartz pieces 1 84 15
>100 13.50
14
15.00 -22.04
15

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 9
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 07/03/08-09/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.20 >100 15.00 Very dense, reddish brown,coarse SAND with few gravel and quartz pieces
-22.04
16
16.50-16.83 >100
17
17.00-18.50 II 5 96 43 38 17.00 Moderately weak to moderately strong, greenish grey, moderately fractured,
-24.04
slightly weathered, closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
18
18.50-20.00 II 14 100 35 0 18.50 Moderately weak, greenish grey, highly fractured, slightly weathered, closely
-25.54
spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
19
20
20.00-20.50 II 4 100 56 34 20.00 Moderately weak to moderately strong, greenish grey, highly fractured, slightly
-27.04
weathered, closely spaced BASALT with vertical joint
20.50-22.00 II 13 97 37 8
21
22
22.00-23.50 II 8 100 26 6 22.00 Moderately strong to strong, greenish grey, highly fractured, slightly
-29.04
weathered, very closely spaced BASALT with inclined joint
23
23.50-25.00 II 9 86 49 36 23.50 -30.54 Moderately strong to strong, greenish grey, highly fractured, slightly
weathered, closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
24
25
25.00-26.50 III-II NI Weak to moderately weak, greenish grey, highly fractured,moderately to
100 10 0 25.00 -32.04
slightly weathered, closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
26
26.50-28.00 III-II NI 83 3 0
27
28 28.00 -35.04
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 10
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 10/03/09 -13/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -6.10 Very soft, dark grey,silty CLAY

X
X
1
X
1.50-1.95 2
X
X
2
X
3 X
3.00-3.45
X
X
X
4
X
4.50-4.95 4 4.50 -10.60 Soft, dark grey, silty CLAY with some sand latrite pieces
5 X
X
X
X
6
6.00-6.45 17 69 14 0 43/24/107 6.1 & 5.3
X
X
7
X
7.50-7.95 15 -13.60 Very stiff, yellowish to dark grey, silty CLAY with gravel and some sand
7.50 X
8 X
X
X
X
9 X
9.00-9.45 20
X
10
X
X
10.50-10.95 23
11
X
X
X
12
12.00-12.45 75 -18.10 Very dense, yellowish brown,fine to medium grained SAND 1 99 0
12.00
13
13.50-13.95 80
14
15.00 -21.10
15

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 11
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 10/03/09 -13/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.45 55 15.00 -21.10 Very dense, yellowish brown, medium to coarse SAND
16
16.50-16.95 54
17
18
18.00-18.45 69 18.00 -24.10 Very dense, brownish to grey,slightly clayey, silty coarse SAND with shell
fragments and few gravel
X
19
19.50-19.85 101 X 3 32 57 8
20
X
X
21
21.00-21.45 102 21.00 -27.10 Hard, dark grey,silty CLAY
X
X
X
22
X
22.50-22.83 93
X
X
23 X
24 X
24.00-24.02 >100 X
X Moderately weak to moderately strong, dark grey, moderately to slightly
24.00-24.50 III-II NI 96 10 0 24.00 -30.10 weathered, highly fractured, extremely closely spaced BASALT with inclined
24.50-25.50 and vertical Joint
25 III-II 12 87 27 0
25.50-26.50
II 12 100 53 0
26
26.50-27.50 II 10 100 30 12
27
27.50-28.50 II NI 95 8 0
28
28.50 -34.60
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
NP - Non-Plastic
FI - Fracture Index
- Field VST
Plate-A 12
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Project : GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BERTH NO.7 Borehole No. : MBH-B1
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 14/03/08-17/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -2.76 Medium dense to dense,brown,fine SAND
1.50-1.95 30
3
3.00-3.45 48 3.00 -5.76 Dense,brown,fine SAND
4.50-4.95 2 4.50 -7.26 Soft,dark grey,silty CLAY
5 X
X
X
6
6.00-6.45 42 56 2 0 55/25/105 14.2/4
X
X
7 X
X
7.50-7.95 2 X
X
8
X
X
9 X
9.00 -11.76 Very dense,brown,clayey,medium to coarse grained SAND with shell
9.00-9.45 67
X
--
X fragments
10 --
X
10.50-10.95 4 10.50 -13.26

-- Firm to stiff,dark grey,silty CLAY
X
11 X
12 X
12.00-12.45 X 30 59 8 3 53/31/65 16.9/4
X
X
X
13
13.50-13.95 12 X
14 X
X
15.00 -17.76
15 X

WL - Liquid Limit
- UDS τV - Shear Strength NP - Non-Plastic
- No Recovery SBL - Sea Bed Level
FI - Fracture Index
- WS RMR - Rock Mass Rating
- Field VST NI - Non Intact
Plate-A 13
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 14/03/08-17/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.45 62 15.00 -17.76 Hard,yellow,silty CLAY with laterite pieces

X
16
X
X
16.50-16.95 72 16.50 -19.26 Hard,yellow,silty CLAY 43 52 5 0 81/47/-
X
17
X
X
X
18 X
18.00-18.45 80 X
X
19
X
19.50-19.85 >100 X
20 X
X
X
21
>100
21.00-21.23 21.00 -23.76 Very dense,yellow,sandy SILT with few gravel (Residual soil) 5 69 23 3
21.23-22.50 II 12 70 13 0 21.23 -23.99 Weak to moderately strong , brownish to dark grey,slightly weathered,
extremely closely spaced,highly fractured BASALT with inclined and vertical
22 joint
22.50-23.00 II 6 100 36 26
23
23.00-24.00 II 10 80 10 10
24
24.00-25.00 II 12 92 48 30
25
25.00-25.80 II 10 81 12 0
25.80-27.00 II 8 100 62 62 25.80 -28.56 Moderately strong ,brownish to dark grey,slightly weathered, very closely
26
spaced,highly fractured BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
27
27.00 -29.76 Bore hole terminated at 27.00 m from SBL
28
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 14
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 18/03/08-20/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -4.27 Medium dense,brownish grey,medium SAND
1.50-1.95 20
3
3.00-3.45 3.00 -7.27 X Very soft,dark grey,silty CLAY with some sand 25 55 20 0 31/21/46 11.5/4
X
4 X
4.50-4.95 2 X
5 X
X
X
X
6 X
6.00-6.45 6.00 -10.27 Very soft,dark grey,slightly sandy,clayey SILT 36 59 5 0 56/24/99 13/5
X
7 X
X
7.50-7.95 5 7.50 -11.77 Very soft,dark grey,silty CLAY with shell fragments
X
8
X
X
9 X
9.00 -13.27 Very dense,brown,fine to medium SAND
9.00-9.45 52
10
10.50-10.95 75 10.50 -14.77 Veey dense,brown,slightly clayey,fine to medium SAND
11
12
12.00-12.45 77
13
13.50-13.95 80
14
15.00 -19.27
15

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 15
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 18/03/08-20/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.45 84 15.00 -19.27 Very dense,brownish grey,medium SAND
16
16.50-16.95 87
17
18
18.00-18.45 96 18.00 -22.27 Very dense,brownish grey,coarse SAND with shell fragments 2 2 94 2
19
19.50-19.95 99 19.50 -23.77 Very dense,brownish grey,slightly silty,clayey ,coarse SAND
20
21
21.00-21.50 100
22
22.50-23.00 100
23
24
>100
24.00-24.02 24.00 -28.27 Very dense,grey,medium grained GRAVEL (Residual soil)
25
25.00-26.50 III NI 40 0 0 25.00 -29.27 Extremely weak to weak,greenish grey,moderately weathered,highly
fractured,extremely closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
26
26.50-27.00 III NI 80 0 0
27
27.00-27.30 III NI 30 0 0
27.30 -31.57
28
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 16
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 21/03/08-25/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -3.23 Very loose,brownish grey,slightly clayey SAND with shell fragments
1.50-1.95 0
3
3.00-3.45 1
4.50-4.95 4.50 -7.73 X Very soft,dark grey,silty CLAY with some sand
X
5
X
X
X
6
6.00-6.45 2 X 13 51 36 0 36/16/-
X
X
7
X
7.50-7.95 47 7.50 -10.73 Very dense,brownish grey,slightly clayey,coarse SAND
9
9.00-9.45 50 9.00 -12.23 Very dense,yellowish brown,medium SAND
10
10.50-10.95 53
11
12
12.00-12.45 58 12.00 -15.23 Very dense,yellowish brown,fine to medium SAND
13
13.50-13.95 65
14
15.00 -18.23
15

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 17
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 21/03/08-25/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.45 70 15.00 -18.23 Very dense,yellowish brown,fine to medium SAND
16
16.50-16.95 85 16.50 -19.73 Hard,yellowish grey,silty CLAY with some gravel and sand 14 50 22 14 39/18/-
X
X
17
X
18 X
18.00-18.45 88
X
X
X
19
19.50-19.52 >100 19.50 -22.73 Very dense,grey,medium GRAVEL (Residual soil)

19.52-21.00 IV NI 27 0 0 19.52 -22.75 Extremely weak to weak,reddish grey,moderately weathered,highly
fractured,extremely closely spaced BASALT
20
21 21.00-22.50 III NI 73 0 0 21.00 -24.23

Extremely weak to weak, grey,moderately weathered,highly
fractured,extremely closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
22
22.50-23.00 III NI 90 0 0
23 23.00-24.00 II 18 100 11 0 23.00 -26.23

Weak to moderately weak,dark grey,highly fractured,slightly
weathered,extremely closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
24 24.00-25.00 II NI 90 25 10 24.00 -27.23
25
25.00-25.50 II NI 100 0 0 25.00 -28.23 Extremely weak to weak, dark grey,highly fractured,slightly weathered,very
closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
25.50 -28.73
26 Bore hole terminated at 25.50 m from SBL
27
28
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 18
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 27/03/08-30/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -3.06 Very dense,brownish grey, fine SAND
1.50-1.95 73
3
3.00-3.45 75 6 94 0
4.50-4.95 27 4.50 -7.56 Medium dense,brownish grey,clayey,coarse SAND with shell fragments
6
6.00-6.45 33 6.00 -9.06 Dense,grey,fine SAND with shell fragments
7.50-7.95 42
9
9.00-9.45 53 9.00 -12.06 Very dense,yellowish brown,medium SAND
10
10.50-10.95 57
11
12
12.00-12.45 64 4 91 5
13
13.50-13.95 76
14
15.00 -18.06
15

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 19
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 27/03/08-30/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.45 79 15.00 -18.06 Very dense,brown,fine to medium SAND
16
16.50-16.95 83 16.50 -19.56 Hard ,yellow,silty CLAY with laterite pieces

X
X
17
X
18 X
18.00-18.45 83 18.00 -21.06 Very dense,brown,medium SAND
19
19.00-19.45 88 6 94 0
20
21.00 -24.06 Very dense,grey, medium GRAVEL(Residual soil)

21 21.00-21.02 >100
21.02-22.00 III NI 50 0 0 21.02 -24.08 Extremely weak to weak,yellowish grey to grey,highly fractured,moderately
weathered,extremely closely spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
22
22.00-23.50 II 20 83 38 8 22.00 -25.06 Moderately weak,yellowish grey to grey,moderately fractured,slightly
weathered,very closely spaced,BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
23
23.50-24.50 II 8 100 40 12 23.50 -26.56 Moderately weak,grey,moderately fractured,slightly weathered,very closely

spaced BASALT with inclined joint
24
24.50 -27.56
25
26
27
28
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 20
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Project : GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BERTH NO.7 Borehole No. : MBH-C1
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 31/03/08-02/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
0 0.00 0.00 -6.88 Very soft,yellowish grey,clayey SILT

X
X
1
X
1.50-1.95 1
X
X
2
X
3 X
3.00-3.45 38 60 2 0 67/32/100 10.6/3
X
X
X
4
X
4.50-4.95 2
5 X
X
X
X
6
6.00-6.45 35 64 1 0 78/45/97 15.43/2
X
X
7
X
7.50-7.95 4 7.50 -14.38 Soft,grey,silty CLAY

X
8 X
X
X
X
9 X
9.00-9.45 6 32 62 0 NP
10
10.50-10.95 30 10.50 -17.38 Dense,browinsh grey,silgtly clayey SAND
11
12
12.00-12.45 60 12.00 -18.88 Very dense,brown,fine SAND
13
13.50-13.95 75
14
15.00 -21.88
15

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 21
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Project : GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF BERTH NO.7 Borehole No. : MBH-C1
Core Dia (mm) : 50 Date : 31/03/08-02/03/08
Depth below SBL (m)
Depth below SBL (m)

WL / IP / MC, %
cu kN/m² / φ O
GRAVEL, %
RL wrt CD
depth (m)
τV & τv r
SAND, %
CLAY, %
Symbol
SILT, %
SPT 'N'
RQD %
SCR %
TCR %
DESCRIPTION
Type
WG
(m)
( or)
FI
15 15.00-15.20 >100 15.00 -21.88 X Very dense,dark grey,silty CLAY with gravel
X
X
15.50-16.50 III NI 55 0 0 15.50 -22.38 Extremely weak,grey,moderately weathered,highly fractured,extremely closely
spaced BASALT
16
16.50-16.70 >100 16.50 -23.38 Hard,grey,silty CLAY with gravel and weathered rock fragments
X
X
17 X X
18
18.00-19.50 III NI 53 65 0 18.00 -24.88 Extremely weak to weak,grey,moderately weathered,highly
fractured,extremely closely spaced BASALT
19
19.50-20.00 III NI 60 0 0 19.50 -26.38 Weak to moderately weak,grey,moderately weathered,highly fractured,

extremely closed spaced BASALT with inclined and vertical joint
20
20.00-21.50 III NI 30 0 0
21
21.50-23.00 III NI 80 2 0
22
23
23.00-24.00 III NI 90 6 0
24.00 -30.88
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

WL - Liquid Limit
FI - Fracture Index
Plate-A 22
APPENDIX - B
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Site for Development Of Client:MPT Mormugao Port Trust Job No : 215/08
PROJECT:
Berth No.7 Method of Testing : IS Code As per Indian Standards Date : 30.04.2008
DENSITY & MOISTURE
CLASSIFICATION TESTS Strength Parameters (kPa)
Test Depth w.r.t. EGL Test Depth w.r.t. CD CONTENT
Sample (m) (m)
BH. NO. Moisture
Type Specific Atterberg Limits(%) Particle Size Distribution(%) Density (Mg/m3) UU Triaxial Lab Vane Shear
Content
Gravity
From To From To WL WP IP Clay Silt Sand Gravel (%) Wet Dry c/φ o
τv / tvr
UDS 6.00 6.45 -1.56 -2.01 2.638 64 35 29 24 61 14 1 79 1.53 0.85 22.6/2 --
UDS 9.00 9.45 -4.56 -5.01 2.652 60 31 29 15 47 30 8 80 1.51 0.84 20.5/2 --
LBH-01
SPT 16.50 16.95 -12.06 -12.51 2.664 NP 8 39 50 3 -- -- -- -- --
SPT 30.00 30.45 -25.56 -26.01 2.648 56 24 32 25 65 9 1 -- -- -- -- --
UDS 1.50 1.95 -7.26 -7.71 2.657 31 18 13 17 67 16 0 55 1.73 1.12 18.1/4 --
UDS 4.50 4.95 -10.26 -10.71 2.642 69 36 33 40 59 1 0 91 1.38 0.72 14.29/4 --
MBH-A1
SPT 22.50 22.95 -28.26 -28.71 2.652 42 22 20 12 64 24 0 -- -- -- -- --
SPT 36.00 36.45 -41.76 -42.21 2.653 50 28 22 24 55 21 0 -- -- -- -- --
UDS 1.50 1.95 -7.83 -8.28 2.645 61 33 28 33 64 3 0 95 1.57 0.81 -- 9.7/6.1
MBH-A2 UDS 4.50 4.95 -10.83 -11.28 2.651 53 24 29 27 57 16 0 77 1.55 0.88 11.0/6 --
SPT 12.00 12.45 -18.33 -18.78 2.664 50 19 31 6 65 27 2 -- -- -- -- --
UDS 3.00 3.45 -10.04 -10.49 2.641 68 31 37 33 60 6 1 90 1.41 0.74 13.35/3 --
MBH-A3 UDS 4.50 4.95 -11.54 -11.99 2.638 60 17 43 40 47 13 0 28 1.96 1.53 56.6/7 --
SPT 13.50 13.95 -20.54 -20.99 2.668 NP 1 84 15 -- -- -- -- --
UDS 6.00 6.45 -12.10 -12.55 2.649 43 19 24 17 69 14 0 107 1.56 0.75 -- 6.1/5.3
MBH-A4 SPT 12.00 12.45 -18.10 -18.55 2.667 NP 1 99 0 -- -- -- -- --
SPT 19.50 19.95 -25.60 -26.05 2.671 NP 3 32 57 8 -- -- -- -- --
UDS 6.00 6.45 -8.76 -9.21 2.642 55 30 25 42 56 2 0 105 1.41 0.69 14.2/4 --
UDS 12.00 12.45 -14.76 -15.21 2.644 53 22 31 30 59 8 3 65 1.64 0.99 16.9/4 --
MBH-B1
SPT 16.50 16.95 -19.26 -19.71 2.649 81 34 47 43 52 5 0 -- -- -- -- --
SPT 21.00 21.45 -23.76 -24.21 2.663 NP 5 69 23 3 -- -- -- -- --
UDS 3.00 3.45 -7.27 -7.72 2.642 31 10 21 25 55 20 0 46 1.45 0.99 11.5/4 --
MBH-B2 UDS 6.00 6.45 -10.27 -10.72 2.648 56 32 24 36 59 5 0 99 1.46 0.73 13.0/5 --
SPT 18.00 18.45 -22.27 -22.72 2.667 NP 2 2 94 2 -- -- -- -- --
Format No. Revision No. Revision Date Sheet No.

FM-LAB-TEST-15 00 NIL 1 of 2
PLATE- B1
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Site for Development Of Client:MPT Mormugao Port Trust Job No : 215/08
PROJECT:
Berth No.7 Method of Testing : IS Code As per Indian Standards Date : 30.04.2008
DENSITY & MOISTURE
CLASSIFICATION TESTS Strength Parameters (kPa)
Test Depth w.r.t. EGL Test Depth w.r.t. CD CONTENT
Sample (m) (m)
BH. NO. Moisture
Type Specific Atterberg Limits(%) Particle Size Distribution(%) Density (Mg/m3) UU Triaxial Lab Vane Shear
Content
Gravity
From To From To WL WP IP Clay Silt Sand Gravel (%) Wet Dry c/φ o
τv / tvr
SPT 6.00 6.45 -9.23 -9.68 2.652 36 20 16 13 51 36 0 -- -- -- -- --
MBH-B3
SPT 16.50 16.95 -19.73 -20.18 2.653 39 21 18 14 50 22 14 -- -- -- -- --
SPT 3.00 3.45 -6.06 -6.51 2.668 NP 6 94 0 -- -- -- -- --
MBH-B4 SPT 12.00 12.45 -15.06 -15.51 2.666 NP 4 91 5 -- -- -- -- --
SPT 19.50 19.95 -22.56 -23.01 2.670 NP 6 94 0 -- -- -- -- --
UDS 3.00 3.45 -9.88 -10.33 2.648 67 35 32 38 60 2 0 100.0 1.40 0.70 10.6/3 --
MBH-C1 UDS 6.00 6.45 -12.88 -13.33 2.651 78 33 45 35 64 1 0 97.0 1.45 0.74 15.43/2 --
UDS 9.00 9.45 -15.88 -16.33 2.658 NP 6 32 62 0 -- -- -- -- --
Prepared By Checked By Approved By
AKJ BS AS

PLATE- B2
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
SUMMARY OF ROCK TEST RESULTS
Project : Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Site for Development of Berth No.7 Job No. : 215/08
Client : Mormugao Port Trust Location : Mormugao Date : 22.04.08
Depth w.r.t. SBL Depth w.r.t. C.D. Corrected

Saturated Corrected Uniaxial
(m) (m) Water Dry Unit Point Load Uniaxial
Length Diameter Moisture Porosity Specific Compressive
BH No. Absorption Weight Index Strength Compressive
(cm) (cm) Content (%) Gravity Strength (Dry)
(%) (g/cc) (Is)50 (MPa) Strength
From To From To (%) MPa
(Saturated ) MPa
LBH-1 36.00 36.20 -31.56 -31.76 11.382 5.168 0.40 0.22 1.12 2.71 2.74 -- 72.1 --
MBH-A2 22.00 22.15 -28.33 -28.48 8.785 5.160 0.70 0.60 1.26 2.70 2.73 5.72 -- --
MBH-A3 17.90 18.15 -24.94 -25.19 11.300 5.159 0.42 0.25 2.70 2.73 41.8
MBH-A3 23.70 23.90 -30.74 -30.94 11.375 5.185 0.35 0.29 1.51 2.75 2.79 -- 101.8 --
MBH-A3 24.00 24.10 -31.04 -31.14 9.025 5.172 0.39 0.18 1.25 2.70 2.73 -- 35.0 --
MBH-A4 24.50 24.57 -30.60 -30.67 6.300 5.142 1.25 6.49 2.03 2.66 2.72 -- 35.5 --
MBH-A4 26.00 26.85 -32.10 -32.95 11.244 5.114 1.23 0.42 2.50 2.64 2.71 -- 8.3 --
MBH-B1 22.50 22.70 -25.26 -25.46 11.584 5.162 0.61 0.47 1.60 2.72 2.76 -- 51.2 --
MBH-B4 24.10 24.20 -27.16 -27.26 10.995 5.298 0.90 0.56 1.67 2.69 2.73 -- 5.5 --
Prepared By : AKJ Checked By : BS Approved By : AS

Plate-B 3
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Title : Particle Size Distribution

Project : Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Site for Development of Berth No.7 Job No. 215/08
Client : Mormugao Port Trust Method of Test IS : 2720 (Part - 4) Date 22.04.08
BH. No. Depth (m) Sample ID No. BH. No. Depth (m) Sample ID No.
LBH-01 6.00-6.45 0 LBH-01 9.00-9.45 0
Sand Sand
Clay Silt Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
24 61 9 4 1 1 15 47 10 15 5 8
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
Percentage Finer (%)

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
1 10 100 0.001 0.01 Particle Diameter (mm)
0.1 1 10 100
D10 D30 D60 Cu Cc D10 D30 D60 Cu Cc

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
LBH-01 16.50-16.95 0 LBH-01 30.00-30.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
8 39 12 29 9 3 25 65 6 2 1 1
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20
20
10
10
0
0
Particle Diameter (mm) 0.001 0.01 Particle Diameter (mm)
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

0.002 0.025 0.463 201.587 0.592 -- -- -- -- --

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 1 of 9
Plate-B4
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

MBH-A1 1.50-1.95 0 MBH-A1 4.50-4.95 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
17 67 16 0 0 0 40 59 1 0 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
0.1 1 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
MBH-A1 22.50-22.95 0 MBH-A1 36-36.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
12 64 19 4 1 0 24 55 14 5 2 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 2 of 9
Plate-B5
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

MBH-A2 1.50-1.95 215M2/U2 MBH-A2 4.50-4.95 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
33 64 3 0 0 0 27 57 8 6 2 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
0.1 1 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
MBH-A2 12.00-12.45 215/M2/S9 MBH-A3 3.00-3.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
6 65 14 10 3 2 33 60 4 2 0 1
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

0.004 0.009 0.049 12.541 0.472 -- -- -- -- --

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 3 of 9
Plate-B6
1
0
9
0
8
0
7
0
6
0
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
Particle Diameter (mm)
.0.0
.11
010
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

MBH-A3 4.50-4.95 215/M3/U3 MBH-A3 13.50-13.95 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
40 47 12 0 1 0 1 5 46 33 15
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
1 10 100 0.01 0.1 Particle Diameter
1 (mm) 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- 0.568 2.133 2.023 3.561 3.962
MBH-A4 6.00-6.45 215/M4/U3 MBH-A4 12.00-12.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
17 69 13 0 1 0 1 92 7 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- 0.153 0.191 0.248 1.613 0.961

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 4 of 9
Plate-B7
1
0
9
0
8
0
7
0
6
0
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
.0.0
.11
010
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

MBH-A4 19.50-19.85 215/M4/S12 MBH-B1 6.00-6.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
3 32 11 33 13 8 42 56 2 0 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
0.1 1 10 100

0.307 0.069 1.273 4.153 0.012 -- -- -- -- --
MBH-B1 12.00-12.45 0 MBH-B1 16.50-16.95 215/MB1/S11
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
30 59 5 2 1 3 43 52 3 2 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 5 of 9
Plate-B8
1
0
9
0
8
0
7
0
6
0
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0 Particle Diameter (mm)
0
.0.0
.11
010
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

MBH-B1 21.00-21.45 215/MB1/S14
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
5 69 17 5 1 3
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
1 10 100 1 Particle Diameter
10 (mm) 100

0.293 0.054 -19.869 -67.868 -0.001
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 6 of 9
Plate-B9
1
0
9
0
8
0
7
0
6
0
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
.0.0
.11
010
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

MBH-B2 3.00-3.45 0 MBH-B2 6.00-6.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
25 55 18 2 0 0 36 59 3 1 1 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
0.1 1 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
MBH-2 18.00-18.45 215/MB3/S3 MBH-B3 6.00-6.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
2 2 38 49 7 2 13 51 25 9 2 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

0.136 0.287 0.691 5.074 0.871 -- -- -- -- --

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 7 of 9
Plate-B10
1
0
9
0
8
0
7
0
6
0
5
0
4
0
3
0
2
0
1
0
0
.0.0
.11
010
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

MBH-B3 16.50-16.95 0 MBH-B4 3.00-3.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
14 50 7 9 6 14 6 89 5 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
1 10 100 0.01 0.1 Particle Diameter
1 (mm) 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- 0.082 0.118 0.193 2.345 0.882
MBH-B4 12.00-12.45 215/MC1/U2 MBH-B4 19.50-19.95 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
4 75 11 5 5 6 80 14 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20
20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

0.091 0.143 0.243 2.657 0.926 0.109 0.185 0.255 2.332 1.232

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 8 of 9
Plate-B11
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.

Client : Mormugao Port Trust Method of Test IS : 2720 (Part - 4) Date 0
MBH-C1 3.00-3.45 0 MBH-C1 6.00-6.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
38 60 2 0 0 0 35 64 1 0 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70

60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0.001 0.01 Particle
0.1 Diameter (mm)
0.1 1 10 100

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
MBH-C1 9.00-9.45 0
Sand Sand
Gravel Clay Silt
Fine Medium Coarse
Gravel
6 32 59 3 0 0
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10
10
0
0
0.1 1 10 100
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100

0.004 0.063 0.162 40.152 6.066

AKJ BS AS

FM-LAB-TEST-06 01 17.07.2008 9 of 9
Plate-B12
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Title : Atterberg Limit
Liquid Limit (Casagrande method) and Plastic Limit
LBH-01 6.00-6.45 LBH-01 9.00-9.45
Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%) Plasticity index (%) Liquid limit Plastic limit Plasticity index
64 35 29 60 31 29
90 90
85 85
80 80
Moisture Content (%)
75 75

70 70
65 65
60
60
55
55
50
50
45
45
40
40
10 No. of Bumps 100 10 No. of Bumps 100
LBH-01 30.00-30.45
Liquid limit Plastic limit Plasticity index Liquid limit Plastic limit Plasticity index
56 24 32
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
Sample preparation
30
10 No. of Bumps 100
AS
AKJ BS

FM-LAB-TEST-01 01 17.07.2008 1 of 7
Plate-B13
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
MBH-A1 1.50-1.95 LBH-01 4.50-4.95
31 18 13 69 36 33
60 100
55 95
50 90
45 85

40 80
35 75
30 70
25
65
20
60
15
55
10
50
MBH-A1 22.50-22.95 MBH-A1 36-36.45
42 22 20 50 28 22
70 70
65 65
60 60
55 55
50 50
45 45
40 40
35 35
30 30
25 25
Sample preparation
20 20
AS
AKJ BS

FM-LAB-TEST-01 01 17.07.2008 2 of 7
Plate-B14
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
MBH-A2 1.50-1.95 MBH-A2 4.50-4.95
61 33 28 53 24 29
80 80
75 75
70 70
65 65

60 60
55 55
50 50
45
45
40
40
35
35
30
30
MBH-A2 12.00-12.45 MBH-A3 3.00-3.45
50 19 31 68 31 37
70 90
65 85
60 80
55 75
50 70
45 65
40 60
35 55
30 50
25 45
Sample preparation
20 40
AS
AKJ BS

FM-LAB-TEST-01 01 17.07.2008 3 of 7
Plate-B15
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
MBH-A3 4.50-4.95 MBH-A4 6.00-6.45
60 17 43 43 19 24
80 60
75 55
70 50
65 45

60 40
55 35
50
30
45
25
40
20
35
15
30
10
MBH-B1 6.00-6.45 MBH-B1 12.00-12.45
55 30 25 53 22 31
80 80
75 75
70 70
65 65
60 60
55 55
50 50
45 45
40 40
35 35
Sample preparation
30 30
AS
AKJ BS

FM-LAB-TEST-01 01 17.07.2008 4 of 7
Plate-B16
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
MBH-B1 16.50-16.95
81 34 47
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
10 No. of Bumps 100
Sample preparation
AS
AKJ BS

FM-LAB-TEST-01 01 17.07.2008 5 of 7
Plate-B17
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
MBH-B2 3.00-3.45 MBH-B2 6.00-6.45
31 10 21 56 32 24
60 70
55 65
50 60
45 55

40 50
35 45
30 40
25
35
20
30
15
25
10
20
MBH-B3 6.00-6.45 MBH-B3 16.50-16.95
36 20 16 39 21 18
60 70
55 65
50 60
45 55
40 50
35 45
30 40
25 35
20 30
15 25
Sample preparation
10 20
AS
AKJ BS

FM-LAB-TEST-01 01 17.07.2008 6 of 7
Plate-B18
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
MBH-C1 3.00-3.45 MBH-C1 6.00-6.45
67 35 32 78 33 45
100 100
95 95
90 90
85 85

80 80
75 75
70 70
65
65
60
60
55
55
50
50
Sample preparation
AS
AKJ BS

FM-LAB-TEST-01 01 17.07.2008 7 of 7
Plate-B19
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Unconsolidated Undrained Triaxial Compression Test
Job No. : 215/08

Project: Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Site for Development of Berth No.7
BH. No. LBH-1
Sample ID. 215/LBH1/U5
Test Depth (m) 6.00-6.45
Test Date 15/4/2008

Test method : IS:2720 : Part XI
Type of specimen: UDS Nominal diameter 38 mm
Preparation procedure
Sketch showing specimen

Specimen details Initially After test
location in original sample
Diameter D mm 38 Mass 132.24 g 20 cm
Area A0 mm2 1134.11 Dry mass 73.68 g
Length L0 mm 76 Moisture content 79 %

45 cm
Volume cm3 86.19 Dry Density 0.85 g/cm3
Mass g 132.24
7.5 cm
3
Bulk Density g/cm 1.53
Compression test
Machine no. - Rate of deformation 1.2 mm /min Cell pressure 50 kPa
Membrane thickness Force device no. Mean calibration Load Factor
0.2 mm 28996 - -
Deformation Compression of Strain (%) Axial force P Corrected area Measured deviator stress
gauge reading specimen ∆L mm € = ∆ L / L0 X 100 N A = A0 / (1-€)mm2 ( σ1 - σ3 ) = 1000 P / A kPa
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.16 0.16 0.21 12.00 1136.51 10.56
0.35 0.35 0.46 22.00 1139.36 19.31
0.55 0.55 0.72 28.00 1142.38 24.51
0.95 0.95 1.25 33.00 1148.47 28.73
1.58 1.58 2.08 37.00 1158.19 31.95
2.24 2.24 2.95 41.00 1168.56 35.09
2.85 2.85 3.75 44.00 1178.30 37.34
4.23 4.23 5.57 48.00 1200.96 39.97
5.01 5.01 6.59 51.00 1214.15 42.00
5.82 5.82 7.66 53.00 1228.17 43.15
6.43 6.43 8.46 55.00 1238.94 44.39
7.25 7.25 9.54 58.00 1253.71 46.26
8.07 8.07 10.62 61.00 1268.85 48.08
9.68 9.68 12.74 64.00 1299.65 49.24
10.66 10.66 14.03 66.00 1319.14 50.03
11.65 11.65 15.33 68.00 1339.44 50.77
12.46 12.46 16.39 69.00 1356.51 50.87
14.10 14.10 18.55 67.00 1392.45 48.12
14.92 14.92 19.63 68.00 1411.14 48.19

60
15.58
50
4.34
4.54
40
Deviator Stress (kPa)
4.74
4.94
30
5.13
20
Measured deviator stress 50.9 kPa
5.34
Membrane correction 1.73 kPa
5.55
10
Corrected deviator stress 49.1 kPa
0 Axial strain 16.4 %

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Strain (%) Shear strength C u 24.6 kPa
Tested By: G.J. Checked By: A.S.
Plate-B20
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. LBH-1
Sample No. 215/LBH1/U5
Test Date 15/4/2008


Specimen details Initially After test location in original sample
2
Area A0 mm 1134.11 Dry mass 73.50 g

45 cm
Mass g 131.47
7.5 cm
Bulk Density g/cm3 1.53
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.03 0.03 0.04 0.00 1134.56 0.00
0.20 0.20 0.26 29.00 1137.11 25.50
0.59 0.59 0.78 32.00 1142.99 28.00
1.19 1.19 1.57 36.00 1152.16 31.25
1.79 1.79 2.36 40.00 1161.47 34.44
2.40 2.40 3.16 43.00 1171.10 36.72
3.38 3.38 4.45 48.00 1186.90 40.44
4.37 4.37 5.75 52.00 1203.30 43.21
5.57 5.57 7.33 56.00 1223.81 45.76
6.17 6.17 8.12 59.00 1234.32 47.80
7.18 7.18 9.45 61.00 1252.44 48.71
8.19 8.19 10.78 64.00 1271.09 50.35
8.99 8.99 11.83 67.00 1286.27 52.09
9.78 9.78 12.87 69.00 1301.61 53.01
10.96 10.96 14.42 71.00 1325.23 53.58
11.76 11.76 15.47 72.00 1341.73 53.66
12.79 12.79 16.83 71.00 1363.59 52.07
13.99 13.99 18.41 70.00 1389.98 50.36
15.00 15.00 19.74 70.00 1413.00 49.54
60
40
16.94
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8 5.55
10
4 Corrected deviator stress 52.0 kPa

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B21
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. LBH-1
Test Date 15/4/2008


Length L0 mm 76 Moisture content 80 % 45 cm
Mass g 131.29
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.14 0.14 0.18 38.00 1136.21 33.44
0.53 0.53 0.70 44.00 1142.08 38.53
0.92 0.92 1.21 48.00 1148.01 41.81
1.70 1.70 2.24 52.00 1160.06 44.83
2.50 2.50 3.29 56.00 1172.69 47.75
3.11 3.11 4.09 59.00 1182.50 49.89
3.94 3.94 5.18 62.00 1196.12 51.83
5.35 5.35 7.04 64.00 1220.00 52.46
6.15 6.15 8.09 66.00 1233.97 53.49
7.14 7.14 9.39 68.00 1251.71 54.33
7.93 7.93 10.43 70.00 1266.24 55.28
8.93 8.93 11.75 72.00 1285.12 56.03
10.14 10.14 13.34 71.00 1308.73 54.25
11.15 11.15 14.67 68.00 1329.11 51.16
12.16 12.16 16.00 67.00 1350.14 49.62
60
40
4.15
36
50
4.34
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20 Measured deviator stress 56.0 kPa

12 5.34
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B22
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. LBH-1
Sample ID. 215/LBH1/U7
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 129.19
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.12 0.12 0.16 23.00 1135.91 20.25
0.72 0.72 0.95 30.00 1144.96 26.20
1.31 1.31 1.72 35.00 1154.01 30.33
1.93 1.93 2.54 39.00 1163.67 33.51
2.73 2.73 3.59 43.00 1176.37 36.55
3.53 3.53 4.64 46.00 1189.36 38.68
4.32 4.32 5.68 49.00 1202.47 40.75
5.52 5.52 7.26 52.00 1222.94 42.52
6.92 6.92 9.11 55.00 1247.72 44.08
8.12 8.12 10.68 57.00 1269.78 44.89
9.54 9.54 12.55 60.00 1296.91 46.26
10.53 10.53 13.86 62.00 1316.52 47.09
11.72 11.72 15.42 63.00 1340.90 46.98
12.71 12.71 16.72 63.00 1361.87 46.26
13.93 13.93 18.33 61.00 1388.64 43.93
50
15.58
45
4.34
40
4.54
35
4.74
30
4.94
25
5.13
20
15
5.34
10 5.55
5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B24
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. LBH-1
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 129.81
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.18 0.18 0.24 32.00 1136.81 28.15
0.77 0.77 1.01 37.00 1145.72 32.29
1.37 1.37 1.80 42.00 1154.93 36.37
1.98 1.98 2.61 45.00 1164.45 38.64
2.98 2.98 3.92 49.00 1180.40 41.51
3.78 3.78 4.97 53.00 1193.47 44.41
4.57 4.57 6.01 57.00 1206.67 47.24
5.18 5.18 6.82 60.00 1217.07 49.30
5.94 5.94 7.82 63.00 1230.27 51.21
6.75 6.75 8.88 65.00 1244.66 52.22
7.76 7.76 10.21 65.00 1263.08 51.46
8.78 8.78 11.55 63.00 1282.25 49.13
9.78 9.78 12.87 62.00 1301.61 47.63
10.77 10.77 14.17 56.00 1321.37 42.38
60
40
16.94
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8 5.55
10

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B25
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. LBH-1
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 131.90
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.21 0.21 0.28 37.00 1137.26 32.53
0.60 0.60 0.79 43.00 1143.14 37.62
1.19 1.19 1.57 46.00 1152.16 39.93
2.01 2.01 2.64 49.00 1164.92 42.06
2.61 2.61 3.43 53.00 1174.45 45.13
3.43 3.43 4.51 56.00 1187.72 47.15
4.46 4.46 5.87 58.00 1204.82 48.14
5.23 5.23 6.88 61.00 1217.93 50.09
6.22 6.22 8.18 63.00 1235.21 51.00
7.44 7.44 9.79 65.00 1257.19 51.70
8.24 8.24 10.84 67.00 1272.03 52.67
9.26 9.26 12.18 69.00 1291.47 53.43
10.46 10.46 13.76 70.00 1315.12 53.23
11.65 11.65 15.33 71.00 1339.44 53.01
12.65 12.65 16.64 71.00 1360.58 52.18
60
40
4.15
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
30
Deviator
16
5.13
20
12 5.34
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B26
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A1
Sample ID. 215/MBH1/U1
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 148.72
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.08 0.08 0.11 22.00 1135.31 19.38
0.49 0.49 0.64 31.00 1141.47 27.16
0.90 0.90 1.18 36.00 1147.71 31.37
1.29 1.29 1.70 41.00 1153.70 35.54
2.07 2.07 2.72 46.00 1165.87 39.46
3.07 3.07 4.04 49.00 1181.86 41.46
4.07 4.07 5.36 53.00 1198.29 44.23
5.28 5.28 6.95 55.00 1218.79 45.13
6.09 6.09 8.01 59.00 1232.91 47.85
7.12 7.12 9.37 61.00 1251.35 48.75
8.09 8.09 10.64 62.00 1269.22 48.85
9.08 9.08 11.95 62.00 1288.00 48.14
10.29 10.29 13.54 60.00 1311.71 45.74
11.51 11.51 15.14 58.00 1336.53 43.40
12.32 12.32 16.21 55.00 1353.53 40.63
60
15.58
4.34
50
4.54
40
4.74
4.94
30
5.13
20
5.34
5.55
10

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B28
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A1
Sample No. 215/MBH1/U1
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 149.33
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.16 0.16 0.21 31.00 1136.51 27.28
0.56 0.56 0.74 39.00 1142.53 34.13
0.96 0.96 1.26 47.00 1148.62 40.92
1.54 1.54 2.03 53.00 1157.57 45.79
2.13 2.13 2.80 57.00 1166.82 48.85
2.72 2.72 3.58 60.00 1176.21 51.01
3.34 3.34 4.39 64.00 1186.25 53.95
4.14 4.14 5.45 67.00 1199.45 55.86
4.95 4.95 6.51 69.00 1213.13 56.88
5.76 5.76 7.58 70.00 1227.12 57.04
6.77 6.77 8.91 70.00 1245.02 56.22
7.76 7.76 10.21 70.00 1263.08 55.42
8.77 8.77 11.54 70.00 1282.06 54.60
9.78 9.78 12.87 71.00 1301.61 54.55
10.78 10.78 14.18 71.00 1321.57 53.72
60
40
16.94
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8 5.55
10

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B29
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A1
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 148.26
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.17 0.17 0.22 33.00 1136.66 29.03
0.37 0.37 0.49 42.00 1139.66 36.85
0.56 0.56 0.74 49.00 1142.53 42.89
1.16 1.16 1.53 55.00 1151.69 47.76
1.76 1.76 2.32 62.00 1161.00 53.40
2.34 2.34 3.08 66.00 1170.14 56.40
3.15 3.15 4.14 69.00 1183.15 58.32
3.96 3.96 5.21 73.00 1196.46 61.01
5.37 5.37 7.07 77.00 1220.34 63.10
6.17 6.17 8.12 80.00 1234.32 64.81
6.95 6.95 9.14 82.00 1248.27 65.69
7.77 7.77 10.22 81.00 1263.27 64.12
8.95 8.95 11.78 83.00 1285.50 64.57
10.36 10.36 13.63 81.00 1313.11 61.69
70
40
4.15
36
60 4.34
32
4.54
50
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
40
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
Deviator
30 5.13
16
12 5.34
20
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B30
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A1
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 118.76
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 1134.41 0.00
0.11 0.11 0.14 18.00 1135.76 15.85
0.31 0.31 0.41 23.00 1138.76 20.20
0.71 0.71 0.93 26.00 1144.81 22.71
1.32 1.32 1.74 30.00 1154.16 25.99
1.93 1.93 2.54 34.00 1163.67 29.22
2.74 2.74 3.61 37.00 1176.53 31.45
3.93 3.93 5.17 39.00 1195.96 32.61
5.12 5.12 6.74 42.00 1216.04 34.54
5.92 5.92 7.79 44.00 1229.92 35.77
6.74 6.74 8.87 46.00 1244.48 36.96
7.76 7.76 10.21 48.00 1263.08 38.00
8.96 8.96 11.79 50.00 1285.69 38.89
10.37 10.37 13.64 51.00 1313.31 38.83
11.57 11.57 15.22 52.00 1337.77 38.87
12.57 12.57 16.54 52.00 1358.86 38.27
13.79 13.79 18.14 50.00 1385.51 36.09
45
15.58
40
4.34
35
4.54
30
4.74
25
4.94
20 5.13
15
5.34
10 Membrane correction 1.37 kPa

5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B32
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A1
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 119.11
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.13 0.13 0.17 13.00 1136.06 11.44
0.37 0.37 0.49 32.00 1139.66 28.08
0.98 0.98 1.29 41.00 1148.93 35.69
1.58 1.58 2.08 45.00 1158.19 38.85
2.57 2.57 3.38 48.00 1173.81 40.89
3.35 3.35 4.41 51.00 1186.41 42.99
3.96 3.96 5.21 53.00 1196.46 44.30
5.37 5.37 7.07 55.00 1220.34 45.07
6.19 6.19 8.14 56.00 1234.68 45.36
6.79 6.79 8.93 57.00 1245.38 45.77
7.99 7.99 10.51 57.00 1267.35 44.98
9.18 9.18 12.08 57.00 1289.92 44.19
10.18 10.18 13.39 56.00 1309.52 42.76
11.18 11.18 14.71 56.00 1329.72 42.11
50
40
16.94
45
36
4.34
40
32
4.54
35
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
30
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
25
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12
15
5.34
108 5.55
54

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B33
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A1
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 119.87
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.22 0.22 0.29 10.00 1137.41 8.79
0.50 0.50 0.66 38.00 1141.63 33.29
0.91 0.91 1.20 46.00 1147.86 40.07
1.54 1.54 2.03 52.00 1157.57 44.92
2.76 2.76 3.63 55.00 1176.85 46.73
3.77 3.77 4.96 58.00 1193.31 48.60
4.97 4.97 6.54 60.00 1213.47 49.45
5.97 5.97 7.86 63.00 1230.80 51.19
7.18 7.18 9.45 66.00 1252.44 52.70
8.39 8.39 11.04 67.00 1274.85 52.56
9.40 9.40 12.37 67.00 1294.19 51.77
10.61 10.61 13.96 65.00 1318.13 49.31
11.61 11.61 15.28 64.00 1338.60 47.81
12.41 12.41 16.33 62.00 1355.44 45.74
60
40
4.15
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B34
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A2
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 134.76
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.29 0.29 0.38 20.00 1138.46 17.57
0.90 0.90 1.18 26.00 1147.71 22.65
1.52 1.52 2.00 28.00 1157.26 24.20
2.10 2.10 2.76 30.00 1166.34 25.72
2.91 2.91 3.83 33.00 1179.27 27.98
3.70 3.70 4.87 33.00 1192.15 27.68
4.70 4.70 6.18 36.00 1208.87 29.78
5.49 5.49 7.22 39.00 1222.42 31.90
6.31 6.31 8.30 42.00 1236.80 33.96
7.32 7.32 9.63 44.00 1254.99 35.06
8.52 8.52 11.21 46.00 1277.31 36.01
9.51 9.51 12.51 48.00 1296.33 37.03
10.51 10.51 13.83 50.00 1316.12 37.99
11.50 11.50 15.13 50.00 1336.32 37.42
12.53 12.53 16.49 48.00 1358.01 35.35
40
15.58
35
4.34
30 4.54
25 4.74
4.94
20
5.13
15
5.34
10
5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B36
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A2
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 133.78
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.15 0.15 0.20 28.00 1136.36 24.64
0.55 0.55 0.72 33.00 1142.38 28.89
1.13 1.13 1.49 37.00 1151.23 32.14
1.73 1.73 2.28 41.00 1160.53 35.33
2.53 2.53 3.33 44.00 1173.17 37.51
3.13 3.13 4.12 47.00 1182.83 39.74
4.13 4.13 5.43 50.00 1199.29 41.69
4.95 4.95 6.51 53.00 1213.13 43.69
5.76 5.76 7.58 56.00 1227.12 45.64
6.56 6.56 8.63 58.00 1241.25 46.73
7.56 7.56 9.95 60.00 1259.39 47.64
8.76 8.76 11.53 62.00 1281.87 48.37
9.78 9.78 12.87 64.00 1301.61 49.17
10.79 10.79 14.20 66.00 1321.77 49.93
12.00 12.00 15.79 63.00 1346.76 46.78
60
40
16.94
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8 5.55
10

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B37
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A2
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 133.07
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 1134.26 0.00
0.12 0.12 0.16 17.00 1135.91 14.97
0.33 0.33 0.43 39.00 1139.06 34.24
0.53 0.53 0.70 46.00 1142.08 40.28
0.95 0.95 1.25 51.00 1148.47 44.41
1.55 1.55 2.04 56.00 1157.73 48.37
2.35 2.35 3.09 60.00 1170.30 51.27
3.53 3.53 4.64 64.00 1189.36 53.81
4.54 4.54 5.97 69.00 1206.17 57.21
5.74 5.74 7.55 73.00 1226.77 59.51
6.76 6.76 8.89 74.00 1244.84 59.45
7.55 7.55 9.93 77.00 1259.21 61.15
8.76 8.76 11.53 79.00 1281.87 61.63
10.35 10.35 13.62 80.00 1312.91 60.93
11.77 11.77 15.49 81.00 1341.94 60.36
13.19 13.19 17.36 79.00 1372.28 57.57
14.20 14.20 18.68 79.00 1394.70 56.64
15.19 15.19 19.99 76.00 1417.41 53.62
70
40
4.15
36
60 4.34
32
4.54
50
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
40
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
Deviator
30
16
5.13
12 5.34
20
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B38
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A3
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 120.58
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.09 0.09 0.12 9.00 1135.46 7.93
0.29 0.29 0.38 15.00 1138.46 13.18
0.89 0.89 1.17 19.00 1147.55 16.56
1.29 1.29 1.70 23.00 1153.70 19.94
1.50 1.50 1.97 27.00 1156.95 23.34
2.10 2.10 2.76 30.00 1166.34 25.72
2.71 2.71 3.57 33.00 1176.05 28.06
3.31 3.31 4.36 36.00 1185.76 30.36
3.92 3.92 5.16 38.00 1195.79 31.78
4.53 4.53 5.96 39.00 1206.00 32.34
5.11 5.11 6.72 40.00 1215.87 32.90
5.85 5.85 7.70 41.00 1228.69 33.37
6.60 6.60 8.68 42.00 1241.97 33.82
7.45 7.45 9.80 42.00 1257.37 33.40
8.22 8.22 10.82 41.00 1271.65 32.24
40
15.58
35
4.34
30 4.54
25 4.74
4.94
20
5.13
15
5.34
10
5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B40
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A3
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 121.47
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.17 0.17 0.22 22.00 1136.66 19.35
0.77 0.77 1.01 27.00 1145.72 23.57
1.37 1.37 1.80 30.00 1154.93 25.98
2.07 2.07 2.72 34.00 1165.87 29.16
2.96 2.96 3.89 37.00 1180.08 31.35
3.78 3.78 4.97 39.00 1193.47 32.68
4.98 4.98 6.55 41.00 1213.64 33.78
5.97 5.97 7.86 43.00 1230.80 34.94
6.99 6.99 9.20 46.00 1248.99 36.83
7.98 7.98 10.50 48.00 1267.17 37.88
8.79 8.79 11.57 50.00 1282.44 38.99
9.82 9.82 12.92 50.00 1302.40 38.39
10.83 10.83 14.25 50.00 1322.58 37.80
11.84 11.84 15.58 49.00 1343.40 36.47
12.82 12.82 16.87 44.00 1364.24 32.25
45
40
16.94
36
40
4.34
32
35
4.54
28
30
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
25
4.94
20
Deviator
20 5.13
16
15
12 5.34

5.55

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B41
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A3
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 122.21
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 1134.26 0.00
0.12 0.12 0.16 19.00 1135.91 16.73
0.33 0.33 0.43 26.00 1139.06 22.83
0.53 0.53 0.70 33.00 1142.08 28.89
0.95 0.95 1.25 37.00 1148.47 32.22
1.55 1.55 2.04 39.00 1157.73 33.69
2.35 2.35 3.09 42.00 1170.30 35.89
3.53 3.53 4.64 46.00 1189.36 38.68
4.54 4.54 5.97 48.00 1206.17 39.80
5.74 5.74 7.55 50.00 1226.77 40.76
6.76 6.76 8.89 52.00 1244.84 41.77
7.55 7.55 9.93 54.00 1259.21 42.88
8.76 8.76 11.53 56.00 1281.87 43.69
10.35 10.35 13.62 57.00 1312.91 43.41
11.77 11.77 15.49 57.00 1341.94 42.48
13.19 13.19 17.36 57.00 1372.28 41.54
14.20 14.20 18.68 56.00 1394.70 40.15
15.19 15.19 19.99 52.00 1417.41 36.69
50
40
4.15
45
36
4.34
40
32
4.54
28
35
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
30
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
25
Deviator
16
5.13
20
12
15
5.34
108 5.55
5
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B42
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A3
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 168.87
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.13 0.13 0.17 17.00 1136.06 14.96
0.32 0.32 0.42 34.00 1138.91 29.85
0.73 0.73 0.96 64.00 1145.11 55.89
1.33 1.33 1.75 82.00 1154.32 71.04
1.72 1.72 2.26 94.00 1160.38 81.01
2.32 2.32 3.05 106.00 1169.83 90.61
2.93 2.93 3.86 118.00 1179.59 100.03
3.74 3.74 4.92 126.00 1192.81 105.63
4.34 4.34 5.71 136.00 1202.80 113.07
4.95 4.95 6.51 145.00 1213.13 119.53
5.75 5.75 7.57 155.00 1226.94 126.33
6.34 6.34 8.34 161.00 1237.33 130.12
7.14 7.14 9.39 168.00 1251.71 134.22
8.54 8.54 11.24 180.00 1277.69 140.88
9.55 9.55 12.57 186.00 1297.11 143.40
10.36 10.36 13.63 189.00 1313.11 143.93
12.54 12.54 16.50 196.00 1358.22 144.31
13.35 13.35 17.57 194.00 1375.78 141.01
14.15 14.15 18.62 194.00 1393.58 139.21

160
15.58
140
4.34
120 4.54
100 4.74
4.94
80
5.13
60
5.34
40
5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B44
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A3
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 168.76
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.17 0.17 0.22 26.00 1136.66 22.87
0.79 0.79 1.04 48.00 1146.03 41.88
1.39 1.39 1.83 65.00 1155.24 56.27
1.99 1.99 2.62 98.00 1164.61 84.15
2.60 2.60 3.42 116.00 1174.29 98.78
3.40 3.40 4.47 136.00 1187.23 114.55
4.19 4.19 5.51 148.00 1200.29 123.30
4.77 4.77 6.28 159.00 1210.06 131.40
5.37 5.37 7.07 168.00 1220.34 137.67
6.18 6.18 8.13 178.00 1234.50 144.19
6.97 6.97 9.17 185.00 1248.63 148.16
7.59 7.59 9.99 191.00 1259.94 151.59
8.40 8.40 11.05 199.00 1275.04 156.07
9.40 9.40 12.37 204.00 1294.19 157.63
10.40 10.40 13.68 206.00 1313.91 156.78
11.39 11.39 14.99 206.00 1334.05 154.42
12.19 12.19 16.04 207.00 1350.77 153.25
13.21 13.21 17.38 208.00 1372.71 151.52
14.02 14.02 18.45 211.00 1390.65 151.73

180
40
16.94
36
160
4.34
32
140
4.54
28
120
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
100
4.94
20
Deviator
80 5.13
16
60
12 5.34

8 5.55
4

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Strain
Strain(%)
(%) Shear strength C u 78.1 kPa
Plate-B45
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-A3
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 169.46
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.20 0.20 0.26 31.00 1137.11 27.26
0.41 0.41 0.54 41.00 1140.27 35.96
0.61 0.61 0.80 65.00 1143.29 56.85
1.10 1.10 1.45 86.00 1150.77 74.73
1.42 1.42 1.87 100.00 1155.71 86.53
1.82 1.82 2.39 112.00 1161.94 96.39
2.42 2.42 3.18 128.00 1171.42 109.27
3.03 3.03 3.99 143.00 1181.21 121.06
3.63 3.63 4.78 154.00 1191.00 129.30
4.24 4.24 5.58 164.00 1201.13 136.54
5.05 5.05 6.64 173.00 1214.84 142.41
5.82 5.82 7.66 183.00 1228.17 149.00
6.43 6.43 8.46 192.00 1238.94 154.97
7.22 7.22 9.50 208.00 1253.17 165.98
8.04 8.04 10.58 217.00 1268.29 171.10
8.85 8.85 11.64 221.00 1283.59 172.17
9.67 9.67 12.72 224.00 1299.45 172.38
10.47 10.47 13.78 227.00 1315.32 172.58
11.27 11.27 14.83 227.00 1331.57 170.48

200
40
4.15
180
36
4.34
160
32
4.54
28
140
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
120
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
100
Deviator
5.13
16
80
12
60
5.34
8
40 5.55
4
20
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Strain
Strain (%)
Plate-B46
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B1
Sample ID. 215/MBHB1/U4
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 120.42
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.17 0.17 0.22 21.00 1136.66 18.48
0.91 0.91 1.20 30.00 1147.86 26.14
1.52 1.52 2.00 34.00 1157.26 29.38
2.13 2.13 2.80 37.00 1166.82 31.71
2.73 2.73 3.59 40.00 1176.37 34.00
3.54 3.54 4.66 42.00 1189.52 35.31
4.33 4.33 5.70 46.00 1202.63 38.25
5.34 5.34 7.03 47.00 1219.82 38.53
6.12 6.12 8.05 48.00 1233.44 38.92
7.31 7.31 9.62 48.00 1254.81 38.25
8.53 8.53 11.22 48.00 1277.50 37.57
9.54 9.54 12.55 47.00 1296.91 36.24
10.55 10.55 13.88 45.00 1316.92 34.17
11.55 11.55 15.20 43.00 1337.36 32.15
12.71 12.71 16.72 43.00 1361.87 31.57
13.72 13.72 18.05 43.00 1383.96 31.07
45
15.58
40
4.34
35
4.54
30
4.74
25
4.94
20 5.13
15
5.34

5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B48
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B1
Sample No. 215/MBHB1/U4
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 121.06
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.12 0.12 0.16 15.00 1135.91 13.21
0.55 0.55 0.72 36.00 1142.38 31.51
0.94 0.94 1.24 44.00 1148.32 38.32
1.54 1.54 2.03 48.00 1157.57 41.47
2.14 2.14 2.82 51.00 1166.97 43.70
2.97 2.97 3.91 54.00 1180.24 45.75
3.78 3.78 4.97 55.00 1193.47 46.08
4.79 4.79 6.30 56.00 1210.40 46.27
5.78 5.78 7.61 57.00 1227.47 46.44
6.59 6.59 8.67 58.00 1241.79 46.71
7.39 7.39 9.72 58.00 1256.27 46.17
8.40 8.40 11.05 56.00 1275.04 43.92
9.43 9.43 12.41 56.00 1294.77 43.25
10.65 10.65 14.01 55.00 1318.94 41.70
11.66 11.66 15.34 55.00 1339.64 41.06
12.47 12.47 16.41 54.00 1356.72 39.80
13.27 13.27 17.46 58.00 1374.03 42.21
14.07 14.07 18.51 57.00 1391.78 40.95
50
40
16.94
45
36
4.34
40
32
4.54
35
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
30
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
25
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12
15
5.34
108 5.55
54

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B49
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B1
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 122.56
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.17 0.17 0.22 31.00 1136.66 27.27
0.78 0.78 1.03 43.00 1145.88 37.53
1.39 1.39 1.83 52.00 1155.24 45.01
1.99 1.99 2.62 56.00 1164.61 48.08
2.78 2.78 3.66 59.00 1177.17 50.12
3.57 3.57 4.70 62.00 1190.01 52.10
4.76 4.76 6.26 64.00 1209.89 52.90
5.79 5.79 7.62 66.00 1227.64 53.76
6.60 6.60 8.68 67.00 1241.97 53.95
7.62 7.62 10.03 68.00 1260.50 53.95
8.62 8.62 11.34 68.00 1279.20 53.16
9.61 9.61 12.64 68.00 1298.28 52.38
10.41 10.41 13.70 69.00 1314.11 52.51
11.43 11.43 15.04 69.00 1334.87 51.69
12.45 12.45 16.38 67.00 1356.30 49.40
13.66 13.66 17.97 66.00 1382.62 47.74
14.67 14.67 19.30 64.00 1405.39 45.54
60
40
4.15
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
30
Deviator
16
5.13
20
12 5.34
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B50
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B1
Test Depth (m) 12.00 - 12.45
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 140.52
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.12 0.12 0.16 21.00 1135.91 18.49
0.32 0.32 0.42 28.00 1138.91 24.58
0.91 0.91 1.20 33.00 1147.86 28.75
1.71 1.71 2.25 37.00 1160.22 31.89
2.52 2.52 3.32 41.00 1173.01 34.95
3.74 3.74 4.92 44.00 1192.81 36.89
4.47 4.47 5.88 47.00 1204.99 39.00
5.28 5.28 6.95 50.00 1218.79 41.02
6.26 6.26 8.24 52.00 1235.92 42.07
7.02 7.02 9.24 54.00 1249.53 43.22
8.00 8.00 10.53 56.00 1267.54 44.18
8.89 8.89 11.70 57.00 1284.35 44.38
9.88 9.88 13.00 58.00 1303.58 44.49
10.89 10.89 14.33 59.00 1323.80 44.57
11.89 11.89 15.64 58.00 1344.45 43.14
12.80 12.80 16.84 58.00 1363.81 42.53
13.69 13.69 18.01 56.00 1383.29 40.48
50
15.58
45
4.34
40
4.54
35
4.74
30
4.94
25
5.13
20
15
5.34
10 5.55
5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B52
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B1
Test Depth (m) 12.00 - 12.45
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 142.94
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 1134.26 0.00
0.19 0.19 0.25 34.00 1136.96 29.90
0.58 0.58 0.76 42.00 1142.84 36.75
1.18 1.18 1.55 50.00 1152.00 43.40
1.79 1.79 2.36 55.00 1161.47 47.35
2.58 2.58 3.39 59.00 1173.97 50.26
2.78 2.78 3.66 60.00 1177.17 50.97
3.78 3.78 4.97 61.00 1193.47 51.11
4.81 4.81 6.33 61.00 1210.74 50.38
6.01 6.01 7.91 61.00 1231.50 49.53
7.02 7.02 9.24 62.00 1249.53 49.62
8.02 8.02 10.55 62.00 1267.91 48.90
9.20 9.20 12.11 60.00 1290.31 46.50
10.41 10.41 13.70 59.00 1314.11 44.90
11.64 11.64 15.32 60.00 1339.23 44.80
60
40
16.94
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8 5.55
10

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B53
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B1
Test Depth (m) 12.00 - 12.45
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 140.89
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.15 0.15 0.20 36.00 1136.36 31.68
0.35 0.35 0.46 45.00 1139.36 39.50
0.75 0.75 0.99 52.00 1145.42 45.40
1.56 1.56 2.05 56.00 1157.88 48.36
2.16 2.16 2.84 60.00 1167.29 51.40
2.77 2.77 3.64 62.00 1177.01 52.68
3.35 3.35 4.41 64.00 1186.41 53.94
3.95 3.95 5.20 66.00 1196.29 55.17
4.74 4.74 6.24 68.00 1209.55 56.22
5.53 5.53 7.28 69.00 1223.11 56.41
6.54 6.54 8.61 71.00 1240.90 57.22
7.34 7.34 9.66 73.00 1255.36 58.15
8.35 8.35 10.99 74.00 1274.10 58.08
9.35 9.35 12.30 74.00 1293.21 57.22
10.15 10.15 13.36 73.00 1308.93 55.77
11.14 11.14 14.66 72.00 1328.90 54.18
12.14 12.14 15.97 70.00 1349.71 51.86
70
40
4.15
36
60 4.34
32
4.54
50
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
40
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
Deviator
30 5.13
16
12 5.34
20
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B54
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B2
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 124.87
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.13 0.13 0.17 21.00 1136.06 18.48
0.51 0.51 0.67 25.00 1141.78 21.90
0.92 0.92 1.21 29.00 1148.01 25.26
1.49 1.49 1.96 31.00 1156.79 26.80
2.08 2.08 2.74 33.00 1166.03 28.30
2.91 2.91 3.83 35.00 1179.27 29.68
3.51 3.51 4.62 37.00 1189.03 31.12
4.27 4.27 5.62 38.00 1201.63 31.62
5.07 5.07 6.67 39.00 1215.18 32.09
6.27 6.27 8.25 40.00 1236.09 32.36
7.04 7.04 9.26 41.00 1249.89 32.80
7.84 7.84 10.32 42.00 1264.56 33.21
8.58 8.58 11.29 43.00 1278.44 33.63
9.37 9.37 12.33 44.00 1293.60 34.01
10.37 10.37 13.64 45.00 1313.31 34.26
11.79 11.79 15.51 46.00 1342.36 34.27
12.78 12.78 16.82 47.00 1363.38 34.47
13.77 13.77 18.12 44.00 1385.07 31.77
14.86 14.86 19.55 41.00 1409.76 29.08

40
15.58
35
4.34
30 4.54
25 4.74
4.94
20
5.13
15
5.34
10
5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B56
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B2
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 124.51
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.08 0.08 0.11 29.00 1135.31 25.54
0.47 0.47 0.62 36.00 1141.17 31.55
1.27 1.27 1.67 39.00 1153.39 33.81
1.87 1.87 2.46 41.00 1162.72 35.26
2.65 2.65 3.49 43.00 1175.09 36.59
3.45 3.45 4.54 45.00 1188.05 37.88
4.25 4.25 5.59 47.00 1201.29 39.12
5.04 5.04 6.63 49.00 1214.67 40.34
5.81 5.81 7.64 51.00 1227.99 41.53
6.64 6.64 8.74 53.00 1242.69 42.65
7.64 7.64 10.05 53.00 1260.87 42.03
8.83 8.83 11.62 52.00 1283.20 40.52
10.02 10.02 13.18 54.00 1306.35 41.34
11.42 11.42 15.03 57.00 1334.67 42.71
12.44 12.44 16.37 57.00 1356.08 42.03
45
40
16.94
36
40
4.34
32
35
4.54
28
30
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
25
4.94
20
Deviator
20 5.13
16
15
12 5.34

5.55

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B57
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B2
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 124.68
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.22 0.22 0.29 34.00 1137.41 29.89
0.63 0.63 0.83 37.00 1143.59 32.35
1.23 1.23 1.62 39.00 1152.77 33.83
1.83 1.83 2.41 42.00 1162.10 36.14
2.43 2.43 3.20 46.00 1171.57 39.26
3.21 3.21 4.22 48.00 1184.13 40.54
3.80 3.80 5.00 51.00 1193.81 42.72
4.60 4.60 6.05 54.00 1207.18 44.73
5.21 5.21 6.86 56.00 1217.58 45.99
6.01 6.01 7.91 58.00 1231.50 47.10
6.61 6.61 8.70 60.00 1242.15 48.30
7.63 7.63 10.04 62.00 1260.68 49.18
8.63 8.63 11.36 64.00 1279.39 50.02
10.01 10.01 13.17 65.00 1306.15 49.76
11.21 11.21 14.75 65.00 1330.34 48.86
12.22 12.22 16.08 63.00 1351.41 46.62
60
40
4.15
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B58
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B2
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 126.11
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1134.11 0.88
0.11 0.11 0.14 15.00 1135.76 13.21
0.28 0.28 0.37 24.00 1138.31 21.08
0.67 0.67 0.88 26.00 1144.20 22.72
1.29 1.29 1.70 28.00 1153.70 24.27
2.10 2.10 2.76 30.00 1166.34 25.72
2.89 2.89 3.80 31.00 1178.95 26.29
3.69 3.69 4.86 33.00 1191.99 27.68
4.51 4.51 5.93 35.00 1205.66 29.03
5.52 5.52 7.26 38.00 1222.94 31.07
6.75 6.75 8.88 42.00 1244.66 33.74
7.97 7.97 10.49 45.00 1266.98 35.52
8.97 8.97 11.80 47.00 1285.88 36.55
10.18 10.18 13.39 50.00 1309.52 38.18
11.19 11.19 14.72 53.00 1329.93 39.85
12.22 12.22 16.08 53.00 1351.41 39.22
13.44 13.44 17.68 53.00 1377.76 38.47
45
15.58
40
4.34
35
4.54
30
4.74
25
4.94
20 5.13
15
5.34

5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B60
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B2
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 125.87
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.10 0.10 0.13 10.00 1135.61 8.81
0.29 0.29 0.38 22.00 1138.46 19.32
0.69 0.69 0.91 24.00 1144.51 20.97
1.31 1.31 1.72 27.00 1154.01 23.40
1.91 1.91 2.51 31.00 1163.35 26.65
2.52 2.52 3.32 34.00 1173.01 28.99
3.33 3.33 4.38 40.00 1186.08 33.72
4.33 4.33 5.70 46.00 1202.63 38.25
5.13 5.13 6.75 49.00 1216.21 40.29
6.13 6.13 8.07 53.00 1233.62 42.96
7.15 7.15 9.41 56.00 1251.89 44.73
8.17 8.17 10.75 59.00 1270.72 46.43
8.98 8.98 11.82 62.00 1286.07 48.21
9.99 9.99 13.14 65.00 1305.75 49.78
11.20 11.20 14.74 65.00 1330.13 48.87
12.19 12.19 16.04 63.00 1350.77 46.64
60
40
16.94
36
4.34
50
32
4.54
28
40
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
30
Deviator
5.13
16
20
12 5.34
8 5.55
10

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B61
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-B2
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 125.44
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.10 0.10 0.13 35.00 1135.61 30.82
0.51 0.51 0.67 38.00 1141.78 33.28
1.12 1.12 1.47 44.00 1151.08 38.23
1.92 1.92 2.53 48.00 1163.51 41.25
2.73 2.73 3.59 54.00 1176.37 45.90
3.72 3.72 4.89 59.00 1192.48 49.48
4.52 4.52 5.95 65.00 1205.83 53.90
5.30 5.30 6.97 66.00 1219.13 54.14
6.71 6.71 8.83 69.00 1243.94 55.47
7.72 7.72 10.16 72.00 1262.34 57.04
8.94 8.94 11.76 75.00 1285.31 58.35
9.93 9.93 13.07 77.00 1304.57 59.02
11.14 11.14 14.66 79.00 1328.90 59.45
12.33 12.33 16.22 78.00 1353.74 57.62
13.54 13.54 17.82 79.00 1379.97 57.25
14.74 14.74 19.39 79.00 1407.00 56.15
70
40
4.15
36
60 4.34
32
4.54
50
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
40
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
Deviator
30 5.13
16
12 5.34
20
8
5.55
10
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B62
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-C1
Sample ID. 215/MBHC1/U2
Test Depth (m) 3.00 - 3.45
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 121.88
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.11 0.11 0.14 15.00 1135.76 13.21
0.51 0.51 0.67 18.00 1141.78 15.76
1.10 1.10 1.45 21.00 1150.77 18.25
1.69 1.69 2.22 24.00 1159.91 20.69
2.49 2.49 3.28 26.00 1172.53 22.17
3.08 3.08 4.05 28.00 1182.02 23.69
3.89 3.89 5.12 30.00 1195.30 25.10
4.91 4.91 6.46 32.00 1212.45 26.39
5.70 5.70 7.50 33.00 1226.07 26.92
6.71 6.71 8.83 34.00 1243.94 27.33
7.50 7.50 9.87 35.00 1258.29 27.82
8.70 8.70 11.45 36.00 1280.72 28.11
9.70 9.70 12.76 37.00 1300.04 28.46
10.71 10.71 14.09 38.00 1320.15 28.78
11.51 11.51 15.14 38.00 1336.53 28.43
12.52 12.52 16.47 37.00 1357.79 27.25
13.51 13.51 17.78 34.00 1379.30 24.65
35
15.58
30 4.34
4.54
25
4.74
20
4.94
15 5.13
5.34
10
5.55
5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B64
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-C1
Sample No. 215/MBHC1/U2
Test Depth (m) 3.00 - 3.45
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 120.78
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.13 0.13 0.17 19.00 1136.06 16.72
0.72 0.72 0.95 25.00 1144.96 21.83
1.51 1.51 1.99 28.00 1157.10 24.20
2.11 2.11 2.78 29.00 1166.50 24.86
3.13 3.13 4.12 31.00 1182.83 26.21
3.95 3.95 5.20 33.00 1196.29 27.59
4.76 4.76 6.26 36.00 1209.89 29.75
5.76 5.76 7.58 39.00 1227.12 31.78
6.76 6.76 8.89 41.00 1244.84 32.94
7.54 7.54 9.92 42.00 1259.02 33.36
8.77 8.77 11.54 42.00 1282.06 32.76
9.78 9.78 12.87 42.00 1301.61 32.27
10.79 10.79 14.20 42.00 1321.77 31.78
11.79 11.79 15.51 42.00 1342.36 31.29
12.98 12.98 17.08 42.00 1367.70 30.71
13.97 13.97 18.38 45.00 1389.53 32.38
40
40
16.94
36
35
4.34
32
30 4.54
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
25 4.74
24
Deviator Stress
4.94
20
20
Deviator
5.13
16
15
12 5.34
10
8 5.55

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B65
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-C1
Test Depth (m) 3.00 - 3.45
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 119.98
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.17 0.17 0.22 31.00 1136.66 27.27
0.78 0.78 1.03 34.00 1145.88 29.67
1.57 1.57 2.07 36.00 1158.04 31.09
2.57 2.57 3.38 39.00 1173.81 33.23
3.17 3.17 4.17 40.00 1183.48 33.80
4.35 4.35 5.72 43.00 1202.97 35.74
5.15 5.15 6.78 46.00 1216.55 37.81
5.96 5.96 7.84 47.00 1230.62 38.19
7.17 7.17 9.43 47.00 1252.26 37.53
8.16 8.16 10.74 48.00 1270.53 37.78
9.17 9.17 12.07 48.00 1289.73 37.22
10.34 10.34 13.61 48.00 1312.71 36.57
11.55 11.55 15.20 46.00 1337.36 34.40
12.75 12.75 16.78 48.00 1362.73 35.22
45
40
4.15
36
40
4.34
32
35
4.54
28
30
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
25
20
4.94
Deviator
20 5.13
16
15
12 5.34

5.55
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Plate-B66
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-C1
Sample ID. 215/MBHC1/U4
Test Depth (m) 6.00 - 6.45
Test Date 15/4/2008



45 cm
Mass g 121.88
7.5 cm
3
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.12 0.12 0.16 18.00 1135.91 15.85
0.52 0.52 0.68 24.00 1141.93 21.02
0.92 0.92 1.21 27.00 1148.01 23.52
1.53 1.53 2.01 29.00 1157.42 25.06
2.15 2.15 2.83 32.00 1167.13 27.42
2.74 2.74 3.61 35.00 1176.53 29.75
3.54 3.54 4.66 37.00 1189.52 31.10
4.08 4.08 5.37 39.00 1198.45 32.54
4.91 4.91 6.46 41.00 1212.45 33.82
5.92 5.92 7.79 43.00 1229.92 34.96
6.94 6.94 9.13 44.00 1248.08 35.25
8.15 8.15 10.72 46.00 1270.34 36.21
9.36 9.36 12.32 48.00 1293.41 37.11
10.76 10.76 14.16 50.00 1321.16 37.85
11.56 11.56 15.21 51.00 1337.57 38.13
12.57 12.57 16.54 50.00 1358.86 36.80
13.38 13.38 17.61 50.00 1376.44 36.33
45
15.58
40
4.34
35
4.54
30
4.74
25
4.94
20 5.13
15
5.34

5.55

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B68
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-C1
Test Depth (m) 6.00 - 6.45
Test Date 15/4/2008


2

45 cm
Mass g 120.78
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.19 0.19 0.25 21.00 1136.96 18.47
0.39 0.39 0.51 25.00 1139.96 21.93
0.79 0.79 1.04 28.00 1146.03 24.43
1.17 1.17 1.54 34.00 1151.85 29.52
1.79 1.79 2.36 37.00 1161.47 31.86
2.79 2.79 3.67 41.00 1177.34 34.82
3.60 3.60 4.74 44.00 1190.51 36.96
4.71 4.71 6.20 46.00 1209.04 38.05
5.66 5.66 7.45 48.00 1225.37 39.17
7.06 7.06 9.29 50.00 1250.26 39.99
8.27 8.27 10.88 52.00 1272.59 40.86
9.27 9.27 12.20 54.00 1291.66 41.81
10.49 10.49 13.80 56.00 1315.72 42.56
11.50 11.50 15.13 56.00 1336.32 41.91
12.52 12.52 16.47 53.00 1357.79 39.03
45
40
16.94
36
40
4.34
32
35
4.54
28
30
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
Deviator Stress
25
4.94
20
Deviator
20 5.13
16
15 Measured deviator stress 42.6 kPa

12 5.34

5.55

0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Plate-B69
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Job No. : 215/08

BH. No. MBH-C1
Test Depth (m) 6.00 - 6.45
Test Date 15/4/2008


Mass g 119.98
7.5 cm
Compression test
0.2 mm 28996 - -
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1134.11 0.00
0.22 0.22 0.29 36.00 1137.41 31.65
0.61 0.61 0.80 39.00 1143.29 34.11
1.21 1.21 1.59 42.00 1152.46 36.44
2.00 2.00 2.63 45.00 1164.77 38.63
2.80 2.80 3.68 47.00 1177.50 39.92
3.59 3.59 4.72 50.00 1190.34 42.00
4.39 4.39 5.78 52.00 1203.64 43.20
5.21 5.21 6.86 54.00 1217.58 44.35
6.23 6.23 8.20 56.00 1235.38 45.33
7.23 7.23 9.51 58.00 1253.35 46.28
8.24 8.24 10.84 59.00 1272.03 46.38
9.44 9.44 12.42 60.00 1294.96 46.33
10.65 10.65 14.01 61.00 1318.94 46.25
11.88 11.88 15.63 58.00 1344.24 43.15
50
40
4.15
45
36
4.34
40
32
4.54
35
28
(kPa)
Stress (kPa)
4.74
24
30
Deviator Stress
20
4.94
25
Deviator
16
5.13
20
12
15 5.34
10 8 5.55
5
0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
0 2 2 4 64 8 6 10 12 8 14 1016 18 12 20 14
22
Strain
Strain (%)
Plate-B70
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Lab Vane Shear Test
PROJECT: Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Site for Development Job No. : 215/08
of Berth No.7 BH. No. MBH-02
Client : Mormugao Port Trust Sample No. 215/M2/U2
Test Date 21/04/2008

Test method : IS: 2720 (Part 30)
Specimen details
Diameter D mm 38 Water Content % 95.0
Area A0 mm2 1134 Dry Density Mg/m3 0.81
Length L0 mm 76
Volume cm3 86.19
Mass g 135.47
Wet Density Mg/m3 1.572
Equipment Details
Width of Vane mm 12 Spring factor N-mm 200
Length of the Vane mm 24 Other details -
Vane Test
Sample Undisturbed Remoulded
Initial angle (in degrees) 10 10
Final angle (in degrees) 65 45
Maximum angular rotation(in degrees) 55 35
Torque applied,M(in N-mm) 61.11 38.9
Vane shear strength,τv(in kPa) 9.66 6.14
Result
Vane shear strength of soil,τv (in kPa) 9.7
Vane shear strength of remoulded soil,τvr (in kPa) 6.1
Tested By : G.K.J Prepared By : A.K.J Approved By : A.S.
Plate-B72
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
Lab Vane Shear Test
PROJECT: Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Site for Development Job No. : 215/08
of Berth No.7 BH. No. MBH-04
Client : Mormugao Port Trust Sample No. 215/M2/U4
Test Date 21/04/2008

Test method : IS: 2720 (Part 30)
Specimen details
Diameter D mm 38 Water Content % 107.0
Area A0 mm2 1134 Dry Density Mg/m3 0.75
Length L0 mm 76
Volume cm3 86.19
Mass g 134.40
Wet Density Mg/m3 1.559
Equipment Details
Width of Vane mm 12 Spring factor N-mm 200
Length of the Vane mm 24 Other details -
Vane Test
Sample Undisturbed Remoulded
Initial angle (in degrees) 10 10
Final angle (in degrees) 45 40
Maximum angular rotation(in degrees) 35 30
Torque applied,M(in N-mm) 38.89 33.3
Vane shear strength,τv(in kPa) 6.14 5.27
Result
Vane shear strength of soil,τv (in kPa) 6.1
Vane shear strength of remoulded soil,τvr (in kPa) 5.3
Tested By : G.K.J Prepared By : A.K.J Approved By : A.S.
Plate-B 73
FUGRO GEOTECH LTD.
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Job No. 215/08
BH-No MBH-A2
: Diameter of Specimen(cm) 6.0 cm Cc : 0.594
2 2.006
Depth 1.50-1.95 m Area of Specimen, A 28.27 cm e0 :
Wt. of Dry Soil 49.85 gm Specific Gravity of Sample 2.65
Dial Gauge L.C. 0.002 mm Initial Height of Sample (Ho) 20 mm
Date 28.07.2007
: Height of Solids (Hs) 6.65 mm Test Method : IS:2720 (PART - 15)
Cumulative Coefficient of Coefficient of Coefficient of Volume
Applied Pressure Final Dial Dial Specimen Height Height of voids Void Ratio
Compression Consolidation Compressibility Change
2 2 2
σ (kN/m2) Reading Change ∆H (mm) (H=H1+∆H) (mm) H-Hs (mm) e=(H-Hs)/Hs CV (cm /min) av (m /kN) mv=(∆e/1+eo)/∆σ (m /kN)
0 3500 -82 -0.16 20.000 13.35 2.006
20 3418 -104 -0.21 19.836 13.18 1.981 4.70E-03 1.233E-03 4.1000E-04
50 3314 -134 -0.27 19.628 12.97 1.950 8.40E-03 1.042E-03 3.4953E-04
100 3180 -194 -0.39 19.360 12.71 1.910 1.21E-02 8.056E-04 2.7308E-04
200 2986 -240 -0.48 18.971 12.32 1.851 6.50E-03 5.845E-04 2.0087E-04
400 2746 -595 -1.19 18.492 11.84 1.779 8.40E-03 3.601E-04 1.2628E-04
800 2151 21 0.04 17.302 10.65 1.601 1.06E-02 4.472E-04 1.6088E-04
400 2172 32 0.06 17.344 10.69 1.607 1.578E-05 6.0687E-06
200 2204 34 0.07 17.408 10.75 1.617 4.810E-05 1.8450E-05
0 2238 17.476 10.82 1.627 1.9531E-05
σ Curve
e - logσ
2.300
2.200
2.100
2.000
1.900
Void ratio 'e'
1.800
1.700
1.600
1.500
1.400
1.300
10 100 1000
Pressure kN/m2
Tested By Checked By Approved By
NA BS AS
Plate-B74
APPENDIX - C
SOIL STRENGTH IN TERMS OF COMPACTNESS AND CONSISTENCY
Descriptive Term for SPT “N” Values

Soil Type Compactness/Relative (Blows/300mm
Density penetration)
Very Loose
0-4
Loose
4 - 10
Medium Dense
Sands and Gravel 10 - 30
Dense
30 - 50
Very Dense
> 50
SPT “N” Undrained
Descriptive Term for Values Shear
Soil Type
Consistency (Blows/300mm Strength
penetration (KPa)
Very Soft
<2 < 25
Soft
2-4 25 - 50
Firm
4-8 50 - 100
Silts and Clays
Stiff
8 - 15 100 - 200
Very stiff
15 - 30 200 - 400
Hard
> 30 > 400
Plate-C1
CLASSIFICATION OF ROCK MATERIAL STRENGTH
Approximate Point
Load Strength Index
Uniaxial Compressive
Descriptive Term values
Strength (MPa)
Is (50) for Volcanic
Rocks (MPa)
Extremely weak
< 0.50
Very weak
0.50-1.25 Generally not applicable
Weak
1.25-5
Moderately weak
5-12.5 0.2-0.5
Moderately strong
12.5-50 0.5-2
Strong
50-100 2-4
Very strong
100-200 4-8
Extremely strong
>200 >8
Plate-C2
ANNEXURE - F

AMPTPL

Mormugao Port Trust Executive Summary Report for EIA Study
for development of second coal terminal at
Mormugao Port
EXEUTIVE SUMMARY REPORT

1. GENERAL
The Mormugao port located in Goa, is a premier iron ore exporting port on the west
coast of India. This port lies midway between the ports of Mumbai and New
Mangalore. The power projects using imported coal in various hinterland states are
expected to receive coal through Mormugao Port only, since, they are geographically
closer to the port and to make it cost effective. Considering this, it is expected that
there will be significant increase in coal demand in future. Thus, it is proposed to
connect a second coal berth at Mormugao Port, Goa.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LAYOUT
The project shall comprise of the following components:

• Unloading Cranes
• System of Mobile Hoppers
• Conveying System
• Stacker-cum-Reclaimers
• Rapid-in-motion On line Wagon Loading system
• Truck Loading system
The layout map is enclosed as Figure-1.
2.2 WATER REQUIREMENT
During construction phase water requirements shall be met from the Goa Public
Works Department Supply. The port has also two sump wells and a few bore wells.
During the operation stage, water will be required for consumption, however major
requirement will be towards dust suppression. The port is presently supplying treated
sewage water to SWPL for the purpose of dust suppression. This facility can be
extended to berth no. 7 also. About 500 m 3 of treated sewage from the existing
sewage treatment plant can be supplied to berth no.7 for dust suppression.
2.3 POWER REQUIREMENT
The power requirement during construction stage will be maximum 500 KW. The port
should be able to meet this requirement. During the operation stage, power
requirement will be in the order of 1.5 MW. This requirement has to be met from the
Goa Electricity Department.
2.4 SEWAGE AND OILY WASTE WATER DISPOSAL
For efficient sewage, oily waste water and ordinary sewage water disposal, following
facilities are proposed:
● Drainage pits in workshop areas will be connected to oily waste water tank.
● All water and oil content will be collected in the oily waste water tank and
passed through an oil separator. From here waste oil will be segregated and
water led to the septic tank.
WAPCOS Centre for Environment 1

Mormugao Port
● Ordinary waste water from toilets, bathrooms, kitchens etc. will be led to the
septic tank.
3. ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STATUS
3.1 METEOROLOGY
Climatically, the calendar year in the project area can be divided into four main
seasons. The winter season lasts from December to February followed by pre-
monsoon season from March to May. The monsoon season begins in June and
continues upto mid-October. The period from mid-October to November constitutes
the post-monsoon season.
The temperature rises rapidly after March and the month of May is the hottest month
of the year with mean daily maximum temperature rising upto 31.3oC. The months of
December and January are the coldest months of the year, and mean daily minimum
temperature goes to 21.4oC.
The annual rainfall in the project area is about 2612 mm and the annual mean
number of rainy days are about 99.6. The relative humidity was observed to be high
during the monsoon months from June to September. The relative humidity was
lower in other months of the year, with the lowest being recorded in the months of
December and January.
3.2 LANDUSE PATTERN

The landuse pattern of the study area has also been assessed using satellite data.
The IRS 1C-LISS III digital satellite was procured from National Remote Sensing
Agency (NRSA), Hyderabad for assessing the landuse pattern of the study area.The
landuse pattern is summarized in Table-1.
TABLE-1
Landuse pattern of the study area as per Satellite Data

Category Area (ha) Percentage of total
study area
Dense vegetation 2293.48 7.30
Open vegetation 2000.43 6.37
Bushes/Grass land 2032.14 6.47
Exposed Rock 84.08 0.27
Water Body 23183.68 73.80
Built-up Area 1821.72 5.80
Total 31415.53 100.00
The major landuse category is water body accounting for about 73.80% of the total
study area. The area under dense and open vegetation is 7.30% and 6.37 % of the
total study area. The built-up area is only 5.80%
3.3 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
As a part of field studies, ambient air quality monitored at various locations in the
study area by WAPCOS from December 2007 to March 2008. The average

Mormugao Port
concentration of SPM at various stations ranged from 133 to 176 µg/m3, which is
below the prescribed limit of 200 µg/m3 specified for residential, rural and other
areas. The average concentration of RPM at various stations monitored ranges from
55.4 to 61 µg/m3 were below the prescribed limits for limit of 100 µg/m3 specified for
residential, rural and other areas. The average concentration of SO2 at various
stations in the study area was much below the prescribed limits of 80 µg/m3 specified
for residential, rural and other areas. During the study period, NOx concentration at
various sampling stations was well below the prescribed limit of 80 µg/m3 specified
residential, rural and other areas.
3.4 NOISE ENVIRONMENT
Baseline noise data has been measured using A weighted sound pressure level
meter. The day time equivalent noise level ranged from a minimum of 43.2 dB (A) to
a maximum of 44.5 dB (A). The night time equivalent noise level ranged from a
minimum of 34.9 dB (A) to a maximum of 36.0 dB (A). The day and night time
equivalent noise level at various sites located close to residential areas were
compared with Ambient Noise Standards and were observed to be well below the
permissible limit specified for residential area.
3.5 MARINE WATER QUALITY
The status of marine ecology before the project and the impacts on marine ecology
due to the construction and operation of the proposed project are the important
aspects of this project. The baseline data on marine ecology has been collected
through a ecological survey conducted in the month of March 2008. The temperature
of surface and bottom water samples ranged varies from 25.0-25.6oC and 24.5 to
25.0oC with a difference of less than 1 oC between the surface and bottom waters.
The pH of seawater at surface water samples ranged from 8.3 to 8.4, while in bottom
water samples, it ranged from 8.1 to 8.2. The variation in pH is within normal limits.
The DO level in surface and bottom water samples ranged from 6.0 to 6.7 mg/l, 5.2
to 5.6 mg/l respectively . The DO levels indicate the absence of pollution sources.
The BOD values in surface and bottom water samples ranged from 3.7 to 4.1 and
3.2 to 4.6 mg/l respectively.
3.6 SEDIMENTS
Sediment of the proposed project area is predominantly clayey .Physico chemical

characteristics of the sediment did not show the presence of any pollutants or high
levels of heavy metals harmful to the aquatic fauna. Nutrient content of the sediment
was slightly higher than that of the water.
3.7 MARINE ECOLOGY
The Net Primary Productivity of the water ranged from 0.11 to 0.13 mgC/ m3/d. This
seems to be due to the very high turbidity and very low light penetration. Values of
Chlorophyll a and phaeophytin were low. Oxidisable particulate organic carbon
content was higher (2965 -3219 mg/m3).

Mormugao Port
Phytoplanktons
A total of 7 genera of phytoplanktons were recorded in the study area. The total
phytoplankton density ranged from 218 to 274 no./l.
Zooplanktons
In the Mormugao port area, zooplankton fauna was represented by 16 different

groups. The Zooplankton biomass at various stations ranged from 4.0 to 6.2 mg(Wet
wt.)/l. Foraminifera was the dominant group followed by Copepoda.
Meio-fauna
The population density of macro-fauna in the study area ranged from 180 to 220
no./100 cm2. About 7 groups were recorded in the area. Nemotodes was the
dominant group.
Macro-fauna
Seven groups of macro-fauna were observed in the study area. The density ranged
from 92 to 118 No./100 cm2.
3.8 FISHERIES
The Vasco fishing centre, where the proposed fishing harbour is to be developed is
situated within the Mormugao port limits, opposite to Berths no. 10 and 11. The
landings of marine fish at Vasco bay is more than 20,000 tonnes/year. The major fish
species landing at the Vasco Bay includes meckerets, oil sardines, silver belly, soles,
caranx, prawns, etc. As per Department of Fisheries, state government of Goa,
about 188 MFVs, 32 migratory MFVs are operating from Vasco Bay. The commonly
observed fin fishes and shell fishes in Goa are given in Table-2.
TABLE-2
Most common fin fishes and shell fishes found in Goa
Fin fishes
Chirocentrus
Gerrus filamentosus
Harpodon neherius
Katsuwonus pelamis
Rastreliger kanagurta
Sphyraena jello
Thryssasetirostris
Trichiurus lepturus
Trichiurus savala
Sardines
Pomfret
Anchovies
Silver bellies
Prawns
Metapenaeus dobsoni

Mormugao Port
Metapeneus affinis
Peneaeus sp
Crabs
Portunus pelagicus
Portunus sanguinolentus
3.9 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS
The project area comes under taluk Mormugao Taluka Tiswada of South Goa district
in the state of Goa. The study area mainly comprises of urban area i.e. Mormugao
and Chicalim and rural area including villages namely Chicolna, Issorcim, Pale, Sao
Jacinto Island, Sao Jorge Island and a part of village Sancoale. The population of the
study area is 224739. The number of females per 1000 males is 903. The average
family size is 4.5. The literacy rate in the study area is 76%. The male and female
literacy rates are 80.6% and 70.5% respectively.
4. PREDICTION OF IMPACTS
4.1 IMPACTS ON LAND ENVIRONMENT
a) Construction phase
Impacts due to construction activities
Pre-construction activities generally do not cause significant damage to environment.

Preparatory activities like the use of existing access road, construction of storage
sheds, etc. being spread over a large area, would have no further significant impact
once the land is acquired and its existing use changes. Clearing, stripping and
leveling of sites, construction of bunds for protection from flooding, earth filling and
excavation for foundations, will lead to some disturbance to the habitat. Since, the
proposed project site lies within, the Mormogao port area, and t level of construction
activities in the proposed project is not of such level and nature, to cause any
significant adverse impact on this account.
b) Operation phase
Generation of garbage at the coal terminal
The problem envisaged during operation phase could be the disposal of garbage or
solid waste generated from various sources. The various sources of solid waste
generated from coal terminal area and the project office. The solid waste generated
from the coal terminal area shall mainly comprise of floating materials, packaging,
polythene or plastic materials, etc. Therefore, a system shall be devised whereby
undue quantity of garbage is not permitted to accumulate in the coal terminal area
and the same could be disposed off at designated sites in a proper manner.
4.2 WATER ENVIRONMENT

Mormugao Port
Impacts due to effluents from labour camps
The average and peak labour strength likely to be deployed during construction
phase of the proposed coal terminal will be about 150 and 250 respectively. These
are quite a few villages situated in vicinity of the Mormugao port. It is assured that
the labour force engaged by the contractor could come from outside areas. It is
assumed that about 50% i.e. 125 labourers will stay in labour site camps close to the
site. The balance labour population would come from nearby settlements. The total
water requirement shall be 26.25 m3/day. About 250 labour would stay at the
construction site, only during working hours. The water requirement for such labour
shall be 11.25 m3/day @ 45 lpcd. Thus, total water requirement works out to (26.25 +
11.25) about 38 m3/day. The sewage generated shall be 31 m3/day. The domestic
water normally contains high BOD, which needs proper treatment and disposal,
otherwise, it can have an adverse impact on the DO levels of the receiving body.
Impacts due to construction

Pile driving, deposition of rubble, compaction and other construction work, is water
course resuspension of sediments resulting in increase in turbidity. It also reduces
sunlight penetrating into the marine water body. The vessels involved in construction
and related activities are a possible cause of oil spills, garbage discharge, etc.
Runoff from construction site water is also another source of pollution. The impacts
on this account are not expected to be significant. However, mitigation measures
have been recommended as a part of the Environmental Management Plan to
ameliorate even the marginal impacts.
Water requirement for domestic use
The water requirement for domestic use includes requirement for drinking, cleaning,
etc. in the coal terminal area. Assuming a population of 100 in the coal terminal area
at peak hours and per capita water requirements of 75 lpcd, the total water
requirement works out to 7.5 m3/day. The sewage generation shall be of the order of
6 m3/day. Suitable measures for treatment of sewage shall be commissioned.
Water Pollution due to ship movement
The discharge from ships that could be source of water pollution include bilge water,
ballast water, oily wastes, sewage, garbage and other residues from the ship. Spills
of oil, fuel, etc. can also be the source of pollution. Appropriate measures have been
recommended to control water pollution from ships in the Environmental
Management Plan.
4.3 IMPACTS ON NOISE ENVIRONMENT
(a) Construction phase
The major sources of noise during construction phase are due to operation of
various construction equipment. At a distance of 100 m and 200 m from the

Mormugao Port
construction site, the increase in noise levels will be about 10 dB(A) and 15 dB(A)
respectively.
The other source of noise during construction phase will be due to movement of
trucks, which will transport the construction material. The increase in noise level due
to vehicular movement is not expected to be significant during construction phase.
The increase in ambient noise level at a distance of 30 m, 50 m, 100 m and 200 m is
16 dB(A), 12 dB(A), 7 dB(A) and 3 dB(A) respectively. These noise levels have been
assessed considering that there will be no attenuation due to various sources.
However, if we consider the attenuation due to air, barrier, vegetation etc. then the
increase in noise levels will be even less. The nearest residential areas are at a
distance of about 1 km from the proposed project site. Hence, no adverse impacts
are anticipated on noise levels due to the proposed project.
4.4 IMPACTS ON AIR ENVIRONMENT
Impacts due to fugitive emissions
The major pollutant in the construction phase is SPM being air-borne due to various
construction activities. The vehicular movement generates pollutants such as NOx,
CO and HC. But, the vehicular pollution is not expected to lead to any major impacts.
The soils in the project area are sandy in texture, and are likely to generate dust as a
result of vehicular movement. However, the fugitive emissions generated due to
vehicular movement are not expected to travel beyond a distance of 200 to 300 m.
The impact on air environment during construction phase is not expected to be
significant, since, there are habitation in the vicinity of the site.
Impacts due to construction equipment
The combustion of diesel in various construction equipment could be one of the

possible sources of incremental air pollution during the construction phase. The
major pollutant likely to be emitted due to construction of diesel in various
construction equipment shall be SO2. The short-term increase in SO2 concentration
has been predicted using Gaussian plume dispersion model. The maximum short-
term increase in SO2 is observed as 0.00119 µg/m3, which is at a distance of 200 m
from the emission source. The incremental concentration is quite low and does not
require any specific control measure. Thus, the operation of construction equipment
is not expected to have any major impact on the ambient air quality as a result of the
project.
(b) Operation phase
Impacts due to coal handling
It is a well known fact that coal handling operations lead to entrainment of dust,
which can have an adverse impact on ambient air quality. In the proposed project,
the coal from the terminal will be unloaded through unloaders which will be sent

Mormugao Port
through closed conveyor belt. Thus, entrainment of coal dust during barge unloading
and conveyor belt movement shall be minimal.
4.5 IMPACTS ON ECOLOGY
The direct impact of construction activity for any project is generally limited in the
vicinity of the construction sites only. The construction sites include berthing, storage
and infrastructure facilities. The proposed project site lies within the existing
Mormugao port area. There is no forest with tree cover in the vicinity of the project
site. The study area has no major forest cover. Hence, no significant impacts are
envisaged on terrestrial flora as a result of the proposed project.
4.6 IMPACTS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
In the construction stage the peak labour force, skilled and unskilled labourers, is
estimated at about 250. About 125 labour population are likely to come from nearby
sites. The balance, i.e. 125 labour and their family members are likely to stay near
construction sites. Thus, it is necessary to develop adequate infrastructure facilities,
so that the requirements of the immigrating labour population are met.
5. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
5.1 LAND ENVIRONMENT
The construction material required for the project shall be procured from the nearby
quarries. The impacts of the construction phase on the environment would be
transient in nature lasting only till the construction activities continue. The surface
roads, which are proposed to be utilized during construction, shall be black topped to
avoid entrainment of fugitive dust. These measures will reduce the entrainment of
fugitive emissions to a large extent. Adequate provisions shall be made for timely
repair of roads. For the proposed coal terminal, it is recommended that construction
material extracted from the quarries/borrow areas which are already under operation.
Attempt shall be made so that no new quarries be opened specially for the coal
terminal.
5.2 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL

During construction and operation phases, the municipal solid waste so generated
will contain mainly vegetable matter followed by paper, cardboard, packaging
materials, wood boards, polythene, etc. The total solid waste to be generated during
construction phase would be of the order of 1.0 t/day. Likewise, in the project
operation phase, about 0.5 t/day of solid waste will be generated from domestic
sources. Adequate facilities for collection and conveyance of municipal wastes
generated at the disposal site shall be developed.
During project construction phase, the solid waste generated from labour camps,
shall be disposed at designated landfill sites identified in consultation with the district
administration. The solid waste from labour camps of coal terminal be disposed
along with the solid waste being disposed at present by the Mormugao Port Trust.

Mormugao Port
During project operation phase, the solid waste generated from the coal terminal
area shall be disposed alongwith the solid waste generated by the Mormugao Port
Trust. The solid waste collected in the form of sweepings consists mostly of spilled
solids and organic matter of natural origin, and does not contain any toxic material.
These sweepings will be used as landfill material after proper grading. There will be
no solid waste for disposal. Thus there is no environmental impact envisaged due to
solid wastes. A covered truck will be required to transport the solid waste from the
coal terminal area to the disposal.
Construction phase
The major source of water pollution in the construction phase is the sewage
generated by the workers and employees. During construction phase about 31
m3/day of sewage is expected to be generated. It is proposed to construct twenty
(20) community toilets within the labour camps. The sewage can be treated in septic
tank and disposed off into the existing sewage network of Mormugao Port Trust. It is
proposed to construct one septic tank for treatment of sewage generated during
construction phase. The community toilets and septic tanks shall be used in project
operation phase as well. As a part of control of water pollution. 25 `Community
toilets’ and 1 septic tank need to be constructed.
The effluent from workshops, oil storage, etc. will contain oil and grease particles
which shall be treated in an oil skimmer and suitably disposed after treatment. The
oil skimmers should be made available at the berthing quay. The collected oily
matter can be stored in cans, etc. and disposed off at designated landfill sites
finalized in consultation with the district administration. An amount of Rs.0.5 million
has been earmarked for this purpose.
Operation Phase
Sewage generation
During project operation phase major source of water pollution shall be the sewage
generated by the labour/staff involved in project related activities. Adequate number
of toilets shall be constructed in the terminal and the office area as a part of the
project. The sewage from the community toilets shall be treated in the septic tank,
which is proposed to be constructed during project construction phase. The treated
sewage from septic tanks shall be disposed into the existing sewage network of
Mormugao Port area.
Effluent from coal stock yard
The coal stock yard in the terminal area shall be cleaned immediately once a phase
of coal handling operations is completed. The water can be channeled from various
area, and can then be settled in a settling tank. It is likely that considerable quantity
of coal slurry settles within the drain, before reaching the settling pond. Thus, at
regular intervals of drain length sumps can be installed adjacent to the drain to allow
the bulk of the solids to settle in these sumps with overflow water being channeled to

Mormugao Port
the settling pond. The solids which settle out in the sumps can be cleaned out by a
front end loader or back hoe and the material can be returned to the respective stock
pile area.
5.4 AIR ENVIRONMENT
Control of fugitive dust from stock piles
The Dry Fog Dust Suppression System controls fine dust in the form of respirable
and fugitive dust. The system utilizes water and air to create an ultra fine droplet
sized fog that achieves dust suppression through agglomeration. No chemical is
required and the water addition to the process is restricted to 0.1% by weight of
material being handled. The Dry Fog Dust Suppression system controls virtually all
types of respirable and larger airborne dust and mists. Momentum and coverage of
the water spray is adjusted to optimize penetration and enshrouding of the dust,
while droplet size and turbulence is adjusted to allow contact and removal of
particulate with a minimum of water.
Control of Pollution due to increased vehicles
The major source of air pollution in the proposed project is the increased vehicular
movement in the project construction and operation phases. The movement of other
vehicles is likely to increase, as the commissioning of the project would lead to
significant development in the area. Thus, as a control measure, vehicles emitting
pollutants above the standards should not be allowed to ply either in the project
construction or in the operation phases. Vehicles and construction equipment should
be fitted with internal devices i.e. catalytic converters to reduce CO and HC
emissions.
All the roads in the vicinity of the project site and the roads connecting the quarry
sites to the construction site should be paved or black topped to minimize the
entrainment of fugitive emissions. If any of the roads stretches cannot be black
topped or paved due to some reason or the other, then adequate arrangements must
be made to spray water on such stretches of the road.
Other measures for air pollution control
• The stackers can operate from a distance with brooms to keep the stack pile
surface to a minimum. This reduces the area contributing to dust entrainment.
The stackers can be provided with face masks to minimize their exposure to
coal dust.
• All regularly used roadways around the site must be swept daily with a tank
mounted road sweeper and washed by a truck mounted cart.
• All transport shall be properly covered at the bottom and top with perfect
sealing of plastic/tarpaulin sheets, so that no coal dust spills and spreads out
during present operation.
• The coal stack yard should be covered with screens/walls. The screens
should be made of a permanent brick wall of height of at least 7 to 8 m,
covering the entire threes sides of coal stock yard.
• Regular cleaning of roads.

Mormugao Port
• Removal of the accumulated dust from roadsides.
5.5 CONTROL OF NOISE
The construction and operation phases are likely to increase the vehicular traffic in
the area, which can lead to increase in the ambient noise levels mainly along the road
alignment. It is proposed to develop a greenbelt along the road stretches near to the
habitation sites. Three rows of trees will be planted The various measures that could
be implemented are as follows:
• Noise from air compressors could be reduced by fitting exhaust mufflers and
intake mufflers.
• Chassis and engine structural vibration noise can be dealt by isolating the
engine from the chassis and by covering various sections of the engines.
• Noise levels from the drillers can be reduced by fitting of exhaust mufflers and
the provision of damping on the steel tool.
• Exposure of workers near the high noise levels areas can be minimized. This
can be achieved by job rotation/automation, use of ear plugs, etc.
5.6 GREENBELT DEVELOPMENT
It is proposed to develop greenbelt around in coal terminal area, office internal and
approach roads which will go a long way to achieve environmental protection and
mitigation of pollution levels in the area. The plantation will be at a spacing of 2.5 x
2.5 m. The width of the greenbelt will be 30 m. About 1,600 trees per hectare will be
planted. The maintenance of the plantation area will also be done by the project
proponents.
5.7 ELIMINATION OF FIRE HAZARD
Following measures are proposed to be recommended for control of fire hazards

from coal stock yards during project operation phase:
• 3 no. of mobile fire tender will be placed at the coal stock pile area.
• Autogenous combustion of coal stock is to be prevented by limiting the coal
stock height to not more than 6 m.
• Continuous compaction to ensure avoidance of air passage by chimeng draft
effect which may induce construction of coal.
• Lump size of coal to be restricted to 20 mm, which will not lead to formation of
air voids, eliminating the possibility of combustion.
6. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME
The summary of Environmental Monitoring Programme for implementation during

project construction and operation phases is given in Tables-3 and 4.

Mormugao Port
TABLE-3
Summary of Environmental Monitoring Programme for implementation during
project construction phase
S. Aspects Parameters to be Frequency of Location
No. monitored monitoring
1. Marine water
Physico-chemical pH, Salinity, EC, Once in three 3 to 4 sites
parameters TDS, Turbidity, months
Phosphates,
Nitrates, Sulphates,
Chlorides.
Biological Light penetration, Once a year 3 to 4 sites
parameters Chlorophyll,
Primary
Productivity,
Phytoplanktons,
Zooplanktons
2. Sediments
Physico-chemical Texture, pH, Once in three 3 to 4 sites
parameters Sodium, months
Potassium,
Phosphate,
Chlorides,
Sulphates
Biological Benthic Meio- Once in a year 3 to 4 sites
parameters fauna, Benthic
Macro-fauna
3. Ambient air quality SPM, RPM, SO2 - Summer, Close to
and NOx Post- construction
monsoon site(s)
and Winter
seasons.
- Twice a
week
for four
consecutive
weeks per
season.
4. Noise Equivalent Noise During peak Construction

Level construction Site(s)
activities

Mormugao Port
TABLE-4
project operation phase
1. Marine water
Phosphates,
Chlorides.
Primary
Productivity,
Phytoplanktons,
Zooplanktons
2. Sediments
Potassium,
Phosphate,
Chlorides,
Sulphates
Macro-fauna
3. Ambient air quality SPM, RPM, SO2 & - Summer, Villages
NOx Post-
monsoon &
Winter
seasons.
- Twice a
week
for four
consecutive
weeks per
season.
4. Noise Equivalent Noise Once per month Project area
Level and sites
within 1 km
of the
project area
5. Greenbelt Rate of survival Once per month Various
Development and growth of plantation
various species sites.

Mormugao Port
7. COST ESTIMATES
7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP)
The cost estimates for implementing EMP shall be Rs.4.64 million. The details are
given in Table-5).
TABLE-5
Summary of cost estimate for implementing
Environmental Management Plan (EMP)
S. Parameter Cost
No. (Rs. million)
1. Covered truck for transportation of solid waste 1.50
2. Sanitary facilities at labour camps 1.30
3. Treatment of effluent from workshops 0.50
4. Greenbelt development 0.30
5. Purchase of noise meter 0.08
6. Implementation of Environmental Monitoring Programme 1.96
during construction phase (Refer Table-6)
Total 4.64
7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME
The cost required for implementation of Environmental Monitoring Programe during

construction phase is Rs.1.96 million. The details are given in Table-6.
TABLE-6
Summary of cost estimates required for implementation during
S. No. Parameter Cost (Rs. million)
1. Marine Ecology 1.58
2. Ambient air quality 0.38
Total 1.96

operation phase is Rs.0.93 million/year. The details are given in Table-7.
TABLE-7
Summary of cost estimate for implementing Environmental Monitoring
Programme during operation phase
S. No. Parameter Cost (Rs. million/year)
1. Marine water quality 0.75
2. Ambient air quality monitoring 0.18
Total 0.93

Mormugao Port Trust EIA Study for development of second
coal terminal at Mormugao Port
CONTENTS
CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL 1-1
1.2 LOCATION 1-1
1.3 NEED FOR THE PROJECT 1-2
1.4 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK 1-3
1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE EIA STUDY 1-4
1.6 METHODOLOGY FOR THE EIA STUDY 1-5
1.7 OUTLINE OF THE REPORT 1-12
CHAPTER-2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 EXISTING PORT FACILITIES 2-1

2.2 HINTERLAND CONNECTIVITY 2-6
2.3 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 2-9
2.4 PLANT LAYOUT 2-12
2.5 WATER REQUIREMENT 2-15
2.6 POWER REQUIREMENT 2-16
2.7 STORM WATER DRAINAGE 2-16
2.8 SEWAGE AND OILY WASTE WATER DISPOSAL 2-17
2.9 STORAGE OF COAL 2-17
CHAPTER-3 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STATUS

3.1 GENERAL 3-1
3.2 METEOROLOGY 3-2
3.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY 3-4
3.4 LANDUSE PATTERN 3-5
3.5 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY 3-5
3.6 NOISE ENVIRONMENT 3-11
3.7 VEGETATION 3-13
3.8 MARINE WATER QUALITY 3-14
WAPCOS Centre for Environment i

3.9 SEDIMENTS 3-17

3.10 MARINE ECOLOGY 3-18
3.11 FISHERIES 3-21
3.12 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS 3-22
CHAPTER-4 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION 4-1
4.2 IMPACTS ON LAND ENVIRONMENT 4-1
4.3 WATER ENVIRONMENT 4-2
4.4 IMPACTS ON NOISE ENVIRONMENT 4-5
4.5 IMPACTS ON AIR ENVIRONMENT 4-8
4.6 IMPACTS ON ECOLOGY 4-10
4.7 IMPACTS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 4-10
CHAPTER-5 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

5.1 GENERAL 5-1
5.2 LAND ENVIRONMENT 5-1
5.3 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 5-2
5.4 WATER ENVIRONMENT 5-3
5.5 AIR ENVIRONMENT 5-5
5.6 CONTROL OF NOISE 5-8
5.7 GREENBELT DEVELOPMENT 5-9
5.8 ELIMINATION OF FIRE HAZARD 5-10
CHAPTER-6 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME

6.1 THE NEED 6-1
6.2 AREAS OF CONCERN 6-1
6.3 MARINE WATER & SEDIMENT QUALITY 6-2
6.4 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY 6-4
6.5 NOISE 6-5
6.6 GREENBELT DEVELOPMENT 6-5
6.7 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME 6-5
WAPCOS Centre for Environment ii

CHAPTER-7 COST ESTIMATES

7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP) 7-1
7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME 7-1
ANNEXURES
Annexure-I National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Annexure-II Ambient Noise Standards
WAPCOS Centre for Environment iii

CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
The Mormugao port located in Goa, is a premier iron ore exporting port on the west
coast of India. This port lies midway between the ports of Mumbai and New
Mangalore. The port was commissioned in 1885 and is one amongst the 12 major
ports of the country. The port is mainly an iron ore port and handling largest quantum
of ore exports amongst all the Indian Ports. Recently coal traffic through the port too
is steadily picking up. Although a coal terminal already exists at the port, there is a
need for a second coal terminal to meet the demand for coal in the hinterland of
Moromugao Port.
1.2 LOCATION
The coordinates of Mormugao port are latitude 15° 25’ North and longitude 73° 47’
East. The location of the Mormugao Port is given as Figure-1.1.
MORMUGAO
PORT
Figure 1.1 – Location of Mormugao Port
WAPCOS Centre for Environment 1-1

1.3 NEED FOR THE PROJECT
Mormugao Port currently handles coal / coke traffic at berths 5A and 6A and also
the general cargo at berths 10 and 11. Berths 5A and 6A were licensed to ABG Goa
Port Ltd . Presently known as South West Ports Ltd (SWPL) on a BOOT basis for 30
years in 1999 and commenced operations from June 2004. The license agreement
allows SWPL to handle any bulk cargo at the berths. However, the principal cargo
remains to be coal and coke a large part of which is meant for its group company
JSW Steel Limited at Tornagallu in Karnataka. In the year 2007-08 Mormugao port
handled about 5.3 million MT of coal/coke imports.
At present there are 9 fully commissioned coal based thermal power plants in
Maharashtra in which 2 are privately owned. One ultra mega power project is placed
at Sindhu Durg with an installed capacity of 4,000 MW. Also two private sector
projects of Tata Power and Central India Power are proposed to be commissioned
with an installed capacity of 1,000 MW in Raigad district and 1,082 MW in
Chandrapur disctrict respectively.
There are 2 fully commissioned coal based thermal power plants in Karnataka out of
which 1 is owned by JSW Energy Ltd (JSWEL). JSWEL has planned another unit of
600 MW in Bellary. Two coastal coal based thermal power plants are also proposed
to be set up with capacities of 1015 MW and 4000 MW in Tadri and Mangalore
respectively.
There is only one fully commissioned power plant in Goa, that of Reliance
Salgaocaor Power Corporation Ltd, however, some is using naphtha as fuel. Due to
high costs of Naphtha, the company has proposed to convert its boiler to run on
imported coal. The plant has a capacity of 48 MW.

The power projects using imported coal in each of these states are expected to
receive coal through Mormugao Port only, since, they are geographically closer to
the port and to make it cost effective. Considering this, it is expected that the listed
power projects likely to use Mormugao port for receiving imported coal is given in
Table-1.1.Therefore, there is expected to be significant increase in coal demand in
future. Thus, it is proposed to connect a second coal berth at Mormugao Port, Goa.
TABLE-1.1
List of Thermal Power Projects likely to use Mormugao Port for import of Coal
Location Capacity Coal Requirement

(MW) (MTPA)
Tadri Ultra Mega Uttara Kannada, 4,000 12
Project Karnataka
Tata Power Company Raigad District, 1,000 3
Maharashtra
Ultra Mega Project Sindhu Durg, 4,000 12
Sindhu Durg Maharashtra
JSW Energy Ltd Bellary, Karnataka 860 2.6
Reliance Salgaocar Goa 48 0.15
Power (RSPCL)
1.4 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report is prerequisite for obtaining
Environmental Clearance. Mormugao Port Trust (MPT) has awarded the assignment
of work for Environmental Impact Assessment Study for the proposed coal terminal
at Mormugao Port to WAPCOS Limited, A Government of India Undertaking under
the Ministry of Water Resources.
The Principal Environmental Regulatory Agency in India is the Ministry of
Environment and Forests (MOEF), Government of India. MOEF formulates
environmental policies and accords environmental clearance for the projects. The

State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) accords No Objection Certificate (NOC)
Consent for Establishment and consent for Operation for the projects.
As per the guidelines pertaining to Environmental clearance issued by Ministry of
Environment and Forests (MoEF) dated September 14, 2006, the Terms of
Reference (TOR) for the EIA study is to be approved by MoEF. In this connection
Form-I alongwith TOR in the prescribed format was submitted to MoEF vide in
February 2008. The same was received by the Environmental Appraisal Committee
for Infrastructure Projects of MoEF. A presentation was made by Experts from
Mormugao Port Trust and WAPCOS which was attended by the experts of
Environmental Appraisal Committee for Infrastructure projects of Ministry of
Environment and Forests for TOR Clearance. The TOR was cleared by MoEF vide
their letter dated 4th April 2008.
The present document outlines the findings of the EIA study for the proposed coal
terminal at Mormugao Port, Goa.
1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The objective of the Environmental Impact Assessment Study is to examine the likely
effect of the second coal terminal will have on the existing quality of land, marine
water, noise, air quality, marine as well as terrestrial ecology and socio-economic
environment during construction and operation phases of the proposed coal terminal.
These impacts will be ascertained by superimposing the impacts due to the planned
activities on the baseline environmental status. An important objective of this
analysis is to highlight the environmental benefits of the post project, which are likely
to accrue as a result of handling of coal by mechanized plant and covered conveyor
system. Mitigation measures in the form of an Environmental Management Plan

(EMP) have also been outlined as a part of the EIA report. The key components of
the EIA study are as follows:
- assessment of the existing status of physico-chemical, ecological (terrestrial

and marine) and socio-economic aspects of environment
- identification of potential impacts on various environmental components due
to activities envisaged during construction and operational phases of the
proposed coal terminal.
- prediction of significant impacts on major environmental aspects.
- delineation of Environmental Management Plan (EMP) outlining measures to
minimize adverse impacts during construction and operational phases of the
proposed coal terminal.
- formulation of environmental quality monitoring programme for construction
and operation phases.
1.6 METHODOLOGY FOR THE EIA STUDY
The purpose of this section is to enumerate the methodology adopted to conduct the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study. The same is briefly described in the
following paragraphs.
Scoping Matrix
A list of all likely impacts likely to accrue as a result of operation and construction of
the proposed coal terminal has been prepared. As a next step, a manageable
number of attributes which are likely to be affected as a result of the proposed
project were selected. The various criteria applied for the selection of the important
impacts are as follows:
- magnitude of impact
- extent of impact
- significance of impact
- special sensitivity of impact
Based on the preliminary site visit and applying the above mentioned criteria a
“Scoping Matrix” was prepared for identification of impacts from as many sources
possible on the different environmental aspects.
The scoping matrix derived for the present EIA study is delineated in Table-1.2.

TABLE-1.2
Scoping matrix for the proposed coal terminal

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. No. Activity Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Actions affecting coastal marine ecology
1. Impacts on marine Reduction in primary

Ecology productivity
2. Disposal of dredging Impacts on fisheries

spoil in fisheries
reproduction zones
3. Disposal of dredging spoil Loss of fragile/precious marine

ecology
4. Oil spill/leakage within terminal area Damage to marine ecology
5. Disposal of dredging spoil Impacts on marine ecology
B. Actions affecting Recreational/Resort/Beach along the Coastal Zone
1. Location of coal terminal Visible turbidity

close to the recreational or discoloring of
areas beach waters
2. Escape of liquid and solid Silt deposition

wastes from the coal terminal along the shoreline
3. Disposal of reclamation Waste deposition

material which reaches the along shoreline
shoreline
C. Actions affecting physico-chemical aspects
1. Ship movement and Noise pollution, and adverse impacts

construction activities on aquatic fauna
Increase in noise levels

leading to distress to the locals
Increased chances of spills due to

increase in maritime traffic
2. Groundwater abstraction Increase in salt water intrusion

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. No. Activity Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Disposal of sewage Water pollution and adverse
and solid wastes impacts on marine ecology
4. Increase in vehicular traffic Air and noise pollution leading to

discomfort to the population in the
adjoining area
D. Factors affecting the socio-economic environment
1. Increased ship traffic Boost to local economy

in the area
Improvement in employment
potential
Upgradation of infrastructure
facilities
Occupational health problems
2. Land acquisition Loss of agricultural land and

other properties
Acquisition of other
infrastructural facilities
Impact on historical/culture/religious
monuments/sites, if any
3. Increase in traffic Traffic congestion

Disruption of transit patterns
Pedestrian hazards due to increased

traffic movement
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above mentioned “Scoping Matrix” has been used as a guideline for collection of
data for various aspects of Environment to ascertain the baseline status as a part of
the EIA study.
Environmental Baseline Status
Before the start of the project, it is essential to ascertain the baseline levels of
appropriate environmental parameters which could be significantly affected by the

implementation of the project. The planning of baseline survey emanated from short
listing of impacts prepared during identification. The baseline study involved both
field work and review of existing documents, which is necessary for identification of
data which may already have been collected for other purposes.
As per the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MOEF) guidelines, the Study Area for
the EIA study has been considered as the 10 km radius keeping the proposed coal
terminal site at the centre. The baseline data on various environmental parameters
like land use pattern, water quality, noise, meteorology, air quality, demography and
socio-economics, terrestrial ecology and marine ecology was collected through field
studies, review working plans of the area by the Forest Department.
The methodology adopted for various aspects of data collection is briefly described
in the following paragraphs:
• Marine Ecology
The marine ecological survey was conducted in the month of March 2008. The
surface as well bottom water samples were collected using mechanized vessels.
Each location was fixed on benchmark and after reaching the site, the vessel was
anchored. Parameters like temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen were
estimated by an YSI temperature, salinity oxygen meter respectively at the site itself.
Plankton samples were collected by filtering a known volume of water by a plankton
net of <60 µ mesh size bolting silk. Surface water was collected using a clean bucket
without causing any disturbances. Likewise, the bottom water samples were
collected by Nansen bottle. Sediment samples were collected by a grab sampler
operated from the vessel.
The data on various aspects like major aquatic floral and faunal species, rare and
endangered species, fisheries, crabs, prawns, mangroves, etc. was also collected as

a part of primary data collection. Apart from this, the secondary data/information as
available from the reported literature have been appropriately utilized in the EIA
report.
• Terrestrial ecology
The major activities will be concentrated near water front and marine ecology has
been given more emphasis for data collection and impact analysis. However, the
data on major species of flora and fauna within the study area has been also
collected from the Working Plan of the area prepared by the Forest Department.
• Ambient Air quality
Ambient air quality monitoring was conducted at various locations in the study area
as a part of the field work from December 2007 to March 2008. The data for the
same has been incorporated in the present EIA study conducted for the coal
terminal. The frequency of monitoring was twice a week for 12 consecutive weeks.
The parameters monitored were RPM, SPM, SO2 and NOx.
• Noise Environment
Noise levels in the study area were recorded with A-weighted noise level meter at
various sampling locations in the study area in the month of March 2008. The
readings were taken during day and night time and equivalent noise levels were
estimated and used in the EIA report.
• Socio-economic Aspects
The data on demography, socio-economics was collected from secondary data
sources like Census handbook, Statistical handbook, and revenue records, etc.
• Landuse pattern
The landuse pattern of the study area has been studied using digital satellite data,
which was procured from National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA), Hydarabad in

the form of CD-ROM for IRS-1C, LISS III. Detailed ground truth studies were
conducted for formulation of signature data set. A supervised classification was then
conducted using the GIS & IMAGINE processing software packages available in
house at WAPCOS Centre for Environment. The landuse pattern has been also
studied with use of revenue data (Census handbook).
The summary of data collected from various sources as a part of the EIA study is
outlined in Table-1.3.
TABLE-1.3
Summary of data collection from various sources

Aspect Mode of Parameters Frequency Source(s)
Data monitored
collection
Meteorology Secondary Temperature, - India Meteorological
humidity, rainfall Department
Water quality Primary Physico-chemical Once Field studies
biological
parameters
Ambient air Primary RPM, SPM, SO2, Twice a week Field studies
quality Nox for twelve
consecutive
weeks
Noise Primary Hourly noise and Once Field studies
equivalent noise
level
Landuse Primary and Landuse pattern - NRSA and Ground
Secondary truth studies
Terrestrial Secondary Inventory of major Forest Department
Ecology sources floral and faunal and literature review
species Rare and
endangered
species, if any
Marine Primary and Presence and Once Field studies, and
Ecology Secondary abundance of literature review
various species
Socio- Secondary Demographic and - Revenue
economic data socio-economic, Department and
aspects Public health Literature review
cultural aspects

Assessment of Impacts
With knowledge of the baseline conditions, project characteristics, the intensity of
construction and operation activities and current critical conditions, detailed
projections were made for the influence of the proposed coal terminal on physico-
chemical, biological and social environment in the area. The impacts on environment
due to construction and operation activities of the proposed coal terminal were
identified.
The various aspects of the environment covered as a part of the Impact Assessment
were:
• Land Environment
• Air Environment
• Noise Environment
• Terrestrial Environment
• Aquatic Ecology
• Socio-Economic Aspects.
As a part of the EIA study, emphasis was made to predict quantitatively to the extent
possible. However, for non-tangible impacts, qualitative assessment has been done.
Environmental Management Plan
The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) was delineated to ensure that the
adverse impacts likely to accrue are altogether removed or minimized to the extent
possible. After selection of suitable and feasible environmental mitigation measures,
the cost required for implementation of various environmental management
measures has been estimated to have an idea of their cost-effectiveness.
Environmental Monitoring Programme
An environmental monitoring programme for implementation during project
construction and operation phases has been suggested to oversee the
environmental safeguards, to ascertain the agreement between prediction and reality
and to suggest the remedial measures not foreseen during the planning stage but

during the operation phase and to generate data for further use. The monitoring
equipment, cost required for the implementation of environmental monitoring
programme have also been covered as a part of the EIA Report.
1.7 OUTLINE OF THE REPORT
The contents of the EIA report are arranged as follows:
Chapter 1: The chapter gives an overview of the need for the project, objectives and
need for EIA study etc.
Chapter 2: A brief write-up on various project appurtenances in this Chapter.
Chapter 3: Baseline environmental conditions including physical, biological and
socio-economic parameters, resource base and infrastructure have been described
in this chapter. Before the start of the project, it is essential to ascertain the baseline
conditions of appropriate environmental parameters which could be significantly
affected by the implementation of the project. The planning of baseline survey
emanated from short listing of impacts prepared during identification. The baseline
study involves both field work and review of existing documents, which is necessary
for identification of data which may already have been collected for other purposes.
Chapter 4: Anticipated positive and negative impacts as a result of the construction
and operation of the proposed coal terminal project were assessed in the Chapter.
An attempt has been made to predict future environmental conditions quantitatively
to the extent possible. But for certain parameters which cannot be quantified, the
general approach is to discuss such intangible impacts in qualitative terms so that
planners and decision-makers are aware of their existence as well as their possible
implications.

Chapter 5: An Environmental Management Plan has been presented in this
Chapter. for amelioration of anticipated adverse impacts likely to accrue as a result
of the proposed coal terminal.. The approach for formulation of an Environmental
Management Plan (EMP) is to maximize the positive environmental impacts and
minimize the negative ones. After selection of suitable environmental mitigation
measures, cost required for implementation of various management measures is
also estimated.
Chapter 6: Environmental Monitoring Programme for implementation during project
construction and operation phases has been delineated in this Chapter. The
objective of the Environmental Monitoring Programme is to assess the adequacy of
various environmental safeguards and to compare the predicted and actual scenario
during construction and operation phases to suggest remedial measures not
foreseen during the planning stage but arising during these phases and to generate
data for further use.
Chapter 7: Cost required for implementation of the Environmental Management Plan
(EMP) and the Environmental Monitoring Programme has been summarized in this
Chapter.

Mormugao Port Trust EIA Study for development of
second coal terminal at Mormugao Port
CHAPTER-2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 EXISTING PORT FACILITIES
A satellite view of major existing facilities of the port is shown below in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 - Satellite view of Mormugao Port
2.1.1 Navigational Facilities
a) Approach Channel
The approach channel of the port comprises an outer
channel 5200 m long and an inner channel 2300 m
long. The channel is 250 m wide. The harbour basin
has two turning circles of 480 m diameter. The outer
channel is dredged up to - 14.4 m CD. The inner
channel and the turning circles are dredged to -14.1 m CD. The channel is one way
navigation channel.
2-1
b) Breakwater
The port has a 522 m long breakwater aligned slightly east of north at the western end
of the port / berthing facilities. A mole of 270 m long runs from near the tip of the
breakwater in an easterly direction. The breakwater and the mole give protection to
the berths from western and north-eastern waves during the monsoons.
2.1.2 Berthing Facilities
Quay walls and jetties
The TABLE-2.1 list of available berthing facilities at Mormugao Port is given in Table-
2.1.
TABLE-2.1
Berthing Facilities at MPT
Berth Type of berth Designed/ Quay Max. size of vessel that
no. actual depth length can be accommodated
(m) (m)
Length DWT
overall (m)
5A Dry Bulk Cargo 13.10 200 100 50,000
6A Dry Bulk Cargo 14.10 250 225 70,000
7 Barge berth 3.50 100 100 -
8 Liquid bulk 13.10 116 260 125,000

298*
9 Iron Ore 14.10 222 335 275,000
358*
10 General cargo 12.00 250 225 55,000
11 General cargo 13.10 270 225 65,000
West no.1 13.10 - 185 -
dolphins
West no. 1 & 2 13.10 380* 225 70,000
dolphins
West no.2 & 3 13.10 380* 225 70,000
dolphins
* Length between extreme mooring dolphins
2-2
Shipyard
The Mormugao port has a shipyard facility developed by M/s Western India Shipyard
Limited which was commissioned in 1995 The port
has leased out 31,000 m2 of land area and 50,000 m2
of water area for this purpose. The shipyard facilities
include a floating dry dock and a finger jetty for
carrying out wet repairs.
Port Crafts Jetty
The port has a port crafts jetty consisting two berths,
constructed in June 2006. This jetty is situated between
berth no 8 and berth no 9. The port craft jetty is of RCC
piles and deck construction.
Mooring Dolphins
Apart from these berthing facilities, there are three mooring dolphins in the port with a
draft availability of 13.1 m CD. These mooring dolphins
are used for accommodating iron ore vessels and
loading them from the barges using ship’s own gear.
The distance between two of the mooring dolphins is
380 m. Vessels of LOA upto 225 m and DWT 70,000
can be accommodated here. The mooring dolphins are generally more in use during
monsoon season when the MOHP and mid-stream loading operations through
transhippers are closed.
2.1.3 Storage Facilities
Storage facilities comprise of covered storage areas in the form of transit sheds,
warehouses and open storage areas and tanks for liquid cargo. However, there are no
Container Freight Stations or Port based SEZ in the port area. The details of storage
facilities for general cargo are shown in Table 2.2.
2-3
TABLE 2.2
Details of Storage Facility in MPT
Description No of Area Storage
plots/Sheds (sq. m) capacity
Port Owned
Covered
(i) Transit Shed 1 7700 -
(ii) Ware Houses 3 13810 -
(iii) Container Freight Station - - -
Open 2 167000 600
(TEUs)
Others
Covered
(i) Transit Shed - - -
(ii) Ware Houses 5 16680 -
(iii) Container Freight Station 1 3286 -
Open - - -
Stackyard at MOHP (at Berth No.9) 3 rows of 80,000 10,00,000
varying (T)
length and
width
Source- MPT Annual Report (2006-07)
For the storage of Iron Ore, the stock pile yard is arranged in three rows of varying
length and width. For the storage of liquid bulk, two oil tankages are located adjacent
to the port area, one for Indian Oil Corporation and the second for Hindustan
petroleum Corporation [HPCL]. Other oil companies such as Bharat Petroleum
Corporation Ltd [BPCL] use these tankages for storage of liquid products. The Zuari
Industries Ltd previously known as `Zuari Agro’ has a tank farm adjacent to port area
with three phosphoric acid tanks, with a total capacity of 13,670 KL. For other liquid
bulk cargo, i.e. molasses, edible oil, etc. there are small tanks with a total capacity of
approx, 10,600 kL located behind berths 5A and 6A. The details are given in Table-
2.3.
TABLE-2.3
Storage facilities for liquid cargo
Commodity No. of Tanks Capacity
POL Product 26 150637 kL
Phosphoric Acid 3 13554 kL
Furnace Oil, Caustic Soda, Molasses 8 18025 kL
Other Liquid products 2 10000 tonnes
Ammonia 1 5000 tonnes
2-4
Source- MPT Annual Report (2006-07)
2.1.4 Dredging Requirements
Annual maintenance dredging of about 3.5 million cubic metres is carried out every
year after monsoons during the months from August to September Mormugao Port
Trust does not have its own dredgers and the maintenance dredging is tendered and
the contract is awarded every year. The dredged material is disposed on designated
spoil ground located north of outer approach channel.
2.1.5 Utilities
a) Power Supply
The electrical power for working the port facilities was purchased from Goa State
Government through neighbouring State electricity boards, namely Maharashtra and
Karnataka State Electricity Boards. (MSEB & KSEB). Since 1999, Reliance Energy
Limited (REL), a private organisation and Goa State Government are supplying the
required electric power to the port. The power is received from REL at the main
receiving substation near the MOHP yard through 33 kV supply line and is
transformed to 3.3 kV for distribution to the ore handling equipment and drive houses
for their large capacity motors and to supply two other substations in the port area.
Power is transformed to 415 volts for low voltage supply and lighting systems in the
port residential areas, workshop, hospital etc.
b) Water Supply
The current fresh water demand of the port is met by Public Works Department
(PWD), Goa supply and port’s own resources like borewells and wells. The present
demand of is about 3000 cum / day. However, PWD is supplying about 1500 -1800
cum/day. PWD supply originates from Selaulim Dam in Goa situated at about 60 km
from Vasco. The supply line from PWD is 300 mm dia pipeline. The current PWD
supply line is received at 2 water tanks viz. Steamer tank – 550 cum capacity located
at Midland Sada and one more tank 800 cum capacity near MPT’s new hospital
complex at Headland Sada.
2-5
Water is pumped from these two main receiving tanks to four main distribution tanks of
the Port. Out of the four, three are ( 1 over head tank of 325 cum, 1 Under Ground of
440 Cum and one surface tank of 560 cum) located behind the Primary School
Building and one over head tank of 500 cum capacity is located at CISF colony.
2.2 Hinterland Connectivity
2.2.1 Road Connectivity
Mormugao Port is well connected to the hinterland by road, rail and inland waterways.
The hinterland connections related to road transport are briefly discussed in the
following paragraphs for both external roads outside port and internal roads within port
area.
External Roads
An extensive road network exists in the Goa region, providing an important
transportation link with the rest of the country. Goa is connected with all major towns
of not only Maharashtra and Karnataka, but the rest of India as well via NH4A, NH17,
NH17A and partially built NH 17B. The existing road network of Goa is shown in
Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2 - Important

Panaji NH4A
Road Network of Goa
NH17
Mormugao
NH4A
NH17
A Ponda
NH17
Project B
Location NH17
B
NH17
Madgoa
n
Figure-2.2 Existing road network of Goa
2-6
The details of these roads are presented in the following paragraphs.
Internal Roads
The freight traffic from inland areas enters the port premises through Gate No 9, Gate
No 1 and Gate No 2. Gate No 9 provides access to almost 95% of truck traffic
movement and the rest of the traffic enters through Gate No 1. All the important
loading/unloading points related to road transport i.e container terminal, cruise
terminal, and other general cargo are located close to Gate No 9 while Gate No 1 is
used for ammonia tanker movement and the trucks bound for old tankages of IMC and
coal terminal at berths 5 and 6.
Gate No 9 and Gate No 1 are connected by 2 lane road outside port premises along
port boundary. Inside the port area, there are no major roads providing access to all
the facilities inside the port. A short stretch of 2 lane concrete road is present at Gate
No 9 for truck movement. Rest of the roads have either 2 lane narrow or single lane
carriageways which are not suitable for heavy truck movement. Movement of traffic
takes place through barge unloading area, MOHP, and other port facilities.
Though all the internal roads are not used for cargo traffic movement, they need to be
improved to bring the port to international standards. It is important to develop a road
with atleast 2 lane along the boundary wall from Gate No 9 to Gate No 1 and connect
rest of the facilities with this road.
2.2.2 Rail Connectivity
External Rail Connectivity
Present scenario of railway connectivity to MPT is been linked to hinterland districts of
Belgaum, Dharwad, Bellary and Uttarkannad in Karnataka State from where major
share of iron ore reaches to the port and equal quantities of coal /coke are proposed
to be dispatched from port by rail route from Vasco-da-Gama.
The existing rail connection to Goa is shown in the following Figure 2.3.
2-7
Figure 2.3 - Rail Network of Goa
2.2.3 Inland waterways
Goa is bestowed with an excellent system of interconnected and navigable inland
waterways which are instrumental in transporting bulk of the iron ore from the Goan
mines to Mormugao Port and near by Panjim port for export. The river system in Goa
consist of the rivers Mandovi, Zuari, Tiracol, Chapora, Talpona, Sal and Galgibaga
rivers. The two main rivers, the Zuari and Mandovi are navigable for as much as 60
km in land from their mouths and are mainly utilized for barge transport of iron ore, the
iron ore being loaded in to the barges at riverside terminals. Almost all of the iron ore
handled at the Mormugao port and nearby Panjim Port is shipped to the port through
barges on waterways. There are more than 30 barge loading jetties located along the
rivers in mining areas.
The economy afforded by this mode of transport has made the Goan iron ore
competitive in the international market, as it more than compensates for the higher
shipping costs incurred due to slower turnarounds.
2-8
Earlier river Mandovi carried the bulk of the barges, with over 70% of the traffic coming
to Mormugao. At present, the share of ore transport through Mandovi and Zuari River
is equal at 50%.
Presently there are about 250 barges of capacity ranging from1500 tons to 2500 tons
plying in Goan waters for the transport of this iron ore from the mines. These barges
carry a total of about 40 MT of iron ore to Mormugao Port and nearby Panjim port.
2.3 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
2.3.1 Navigational and Operational Requirements
As a prerequisite for planning the required facilities, it is essential to set the basic
criteria like operational aspects to handle different type of vessels likely to call at the
terminal for loading / unloading operations. These conditions are related to the marine
environment conditions at the location of the terminal. They comprise the following
aspects.
● Vessel type and dimension
● Operational criteria
● Protection against prevailing waves and winds
● Vessel minimum speed and stopping distance
Vessel Type, Parcel size and dimensions
The berth has been designed for receiving cape size vessels of 1,60,000 DWT.
However, at present vessels of upto 70,000 DWT will be berthed. Cape size vessels of
1,60,000 DWT typically draw a draft of 16 m. Hence the approach channel needs to be
deepened from the existing -14.40 m. The dimensions of bulk carriers are given in
Table-2.4.
TABLE-2.4
Dimensions of bulk carriers
Dead weight Length Width Height Fully Laden
Tonnage Overall (m) (m) (m) Draft (m)
4000 100 15.4 7.0 6.3
6000 118 16.6 8.3 6.9
8000 130 17.6 9.5 7.4
10000 140 18.5 10.5 7.9
12000 150 19.4 11.2 8.5
15000 163 20.7 12.0 9.0
20000 180 22.8 13.0 9.7
2-9
Dead weight Length Width Height Fully Laden

Tonnage Overall (m) (m) (m) Draft (m)
25000 194 24.7 13.8 10.3
30000 205 26.5 14.3 10.7
40000 223 29.7 15.4 11.1
50000 235 32.5 16.2 11.6
60000 245 35.0 17.1 12.0
80000 259 39.2 18.8 12.6
100000 268 42.5 20.4 13.0
160000 280 45.0 16.0
2.3.2 Operational Criteria
In planning facilities for handling of cargo, the operational criteria for vessels handling
and ship to shore transfer of cargo need to be taken into account. Vessel handling and
/ or ship shore transfer of cargo operations can be interrupted due to any one of the
following reasons.
● Pilots not being able to board vessel due to rough sea conditions.
● Tugs unable to assist in manoeuvring the vessels due to rough weather
conditions.
● Motion of moored vessels too high.
However none of these aspects are critical as far Mormugao Port is concerned.
Other land based reasons that could occur are;

● Breakdown of crane operation due to mechanical failure
● Power cut
● Worker’s suspension of work.
2.3.3 Dimensions of berthing area
The size of berthing area and the berth will depend upon the dimensions of the largest
ship and the number of ships to use the terminal. The following aspects needs to be
considered;
● Size of the port basin for manoeuvring
● Satisfactory arrival and departure of ships to and from the harbour.
● Whether the ships are equipped with stern and bow thrusters
● Availability of tugs, direction and magnitude of wind, waves and current.
As per standards, the length of dredged area in front of the berth for ships with tug
assistance should not be less than 1.2 times the length of the largest vessel to use the
berth and that without the tug assistance not less than 1.5 times the length. The width
2-10
of the dredged berth should at least be 1.25 times the beam of the largest vessel to
use the berth.
For a 70,000 DWT vessel, the LOA will be about 250 m. This poses no problem for
berthing with tug assistance, as adequate clearance will be available as far as the
length of the berth and width of the dredged area is concerned.
However, berthing of Capesize vessel could pose a problem in case the adjacent
berths are occupied. The port is planning to shift the existing POL handling operations
from Berth No. 8 to Berth No.11. In the long run the port is planning to shift the POL
berth to Vasco bay. Cape size vessels are likely to call at berth no.7 only if adequate
draft is available for berthing a fully loaded cape size vessel. Hence although berth
no.7 is designed for cape vessels, for the time being it will keep handling only
Panamax vessels and cape vessels will start calling only after the approach channel is
dredged to -17.0m.
The port is also planning a dedicated iron ore berth at Vasco Bay. In the long run, the
port needs to deepen the channel to -17.00 m. for capesize vessels. The deepened
channel will serve the existing berths 5A & 6A, proposed berth no. 7 and proposed
iron ore berth at Vasco bay. With the proposed berth no.7 and iron ore berth at Vasco
bay becoming operational, coal and iron ore is likely to constitute more than 95% of
the throughput of Mormugao Port. Thus it makes good economic sense to handle
capesize vessels at these berths to take advantage of the freight benefit. The port will
also realise better throughput rates and improve efficiency gains.
2.3.4 Berthing Requirements
In order to work out the berthing requirements to meet the projected traffic, it is
necessary to define the following governing parameters.

● Vessel size / parcel size
● Productivity (handling rate of commodity)
● Effective working hours per day
● Available port working hours per day
● Accepted levels of berth occupancy
2-11
Productivity is a key element which needs to be worked out very carefully. Unlike most
Ports, Mormugao port has severe restrictions when it comes to land availability. The
proposed berth no.7 is sandwiched between berth no.8 & 9 on one side and berths 5A
& 6A on the other side. All the area in the immediate vicinity has been occupied for
stockpile areas for coal and iron ore. So the first task is identifying suitable stockpile
area for the proposed facility. Secondly proper equipments needs to be installed. Both
these aspects are described in the following paragraphs.
i) Identification of plots
Three plots have been identified for storage of cargo as follows.
Plot A - This constitutes the area immediately behind the proposed berth no.7.
About 28,000 m2 of water area is to be reclaimed. The existing land area available in
this location will be about 29,800 m2. The area available for stockpiling of cargo will be
about 18,300 m2.
Plot B & C - This constitutes the area occupied by the MOHP workshop,
shipping office and rest rooms, MOHP civil site office and the scrap yard area. All the
buildings will have to be demolished and suitably relocated. The existing railway lines
and pipelines will also have to be suitably realigned. The total area available in this
location will be about 65,000 m2.
Hence the total area available for the project will be about 90,300 m2 out of which
effective stock pile area available will be about 70,000 m2.
2.4 PLANT LAYOUT
(a) Unloading Cranes
These can either be Harbour Mobile Cranes or Rail Mounted Grab unloaders.
(b) System of Mobile Hoppers
These would be selected to match the capacity of the unloading cranes.
2-12
(c) Conveying System
A system of toughing conveyors of appropriate capacity will transfer the unloaded
cargo to the stacker for stacking on the two different plots earmarked for stacking the
coal.
A system of toughing conveyors of appropriate capacity will transfer the reclaimed
cargo from the plots to the wagon handling system and truck loading system for
transport via rail and road respectively.
(d) Stacker-cum-Reclaimers
These will be used for stacking the coal in the stackyard and for reclaiming the same
from the stackyard for loading it into the rail wagons
(e) Rapid-in-motion On line Wagon Loading system
The wagon loading system comprising of a Silo, with a capacity of storing a full rake
would ensure faster loading of the wagons and would allow evacuation of the coal by
rail.
(f) Truck Loading system
The truck loading system would comprise a Silo of adequate capacity so as to load
trucks at the maximum rate of 1000T/Hr to allow evacuation of coal by road.
Unloading Cranes
The Ship Unloading Cranes will have to unload from handimax and panamax size
vessels for which the average unloading per day is considered as 35,000 tpd.
(a) System of Mobile Hoppers
The cargo unloaded from the ship will be transferred to the mobile hoppers by the
unloading cranes. The mobile hoppers will have feeders conveyor to discharge the
cargo at the rate of 1500 tph on the conveyors installed on the berth. The design of the
mobile hoppers should include a Dry Fog Dust Suppression System to suppress the
flying coal dust generated during the discharging operation of the grabs into the
2-13
hopper. The discharge system needs to have the flexibility of unloading the cargo on
either of the two streams of toughing conveyors installed on the berth.
(b) Conveying System
Considering the discharge rate of 1500 tph of the 3 nos. unloading cranes, a
conveying capacity of 4500 tph will be required. However, this will require 3 nos.
stackers of capacity of 4500 tph which would be a costly investment. Therefore a
better option would be to design two streams of 3000 T capacity with a conveying belt
of 1600 mm on the berth so as to match the unloading capacity of two Harbour mobile
cranes, to account for all the surges during the unloading operations and to avoid
spillage which is a prime dust generation factor. A Stacker/Reclaimer of 3000 T
stacking capacity and 1500 T reclaiming capacity would be a more economical option.
The two streams should have flexibility of selecting the stackyard for stacking coal.
This can be achieved by having a movable discharge pulley gate system for the berth
and connecting conveyors. At every transfer point of the conveying system, adequate
dust suppression facilities need to be provided so as to ensure suppression of the coal
dust throughout the conveying system.
(d) Stacker-cum-Reclaimers
These machines are to be utlilized for stacking and reclaiming the cargo from the
plots. These machines should have a stacking capacity of 3000 tph and reclaiming
capacity of 1500 tph. The stacking capacity of 3000 tph is to cater for unloading
capacity of two harbour mobile cranes, the reclaiming capacity is considered as 1500
tph assuming that rail loading will be done with the Rapid-in-motion Loading System
which will complete the loading operation within 1- 1.15 hours wherein 100% of the
rake capacity will be stored in a silo constructed for loading the rail wagons.
2-14
(e) Wagon Loading System
The system is to be designed for faster loading of the rakes and loading need to be
completed within a span of 1- 1.15 hours so that the rake can come, get loaded and
return to its destination after its arrival without undue delay. The system design should
include a silo of capacity 3600 t(1 rake capacity). Discharging in two bins of loading
system. The bins should have a weighing system and a suitable gate system to
discharge the cargo into the wagons alternatively, to ensure continuous loading of the
rakes.
(f) Truck Loading System
Since the present coal activity handled at Berth No. 10 & 11 will be shifted to this
facility, an automatic loading system for the trucks, for evacuation of the cargo by road
needs to be created. The truck loading facility should have a silo of 900-1000T which
will get filled by operating the Reclaimers for an hour. A short conveyor tapped from
conveyors installed for the wagon loading system will feed the above Silo. The silo
should have bins with weighment facility to ensure that weighment of the trucks is
done within this facility. The full operation needs to be automated by specially
designed hydraulic/electric controls of gates and swing chutes to have uniform loading
profile.
The layout map is enclosed as Figure-2.4.
2.5 WATER REQUIREMENT
During construction phase water requirements shall be met from the Goa Public
Works Department Supply. The port has also two sump wells and a few bore wells.
There is a wide flotation in the quantity of water supplied by the Goa PWD. It varies
from 800 to 2000 cubic meters. The port receives water from the PWD at a rate of
Rs.32/- per cubic meter. From other sources such as sump well and bore wells, the
port gets about 600 to 800 cubic meters of water. The daily requirement of water for
2-15
the port is about 3000 cubic meters. Subject to availability of water, the port supplies
water to ships which are about 500 cubic meters per day on an average. When there
is shortage of water, water supply to the ships is met through private water tankers.
During the construction stage contingency arrangement have to be made for receiving
water through private water tankers if such a need should arise.
During the operation stage, water will be required for consumption, however major
requirement will be towards dust suppression. The port is presently supplying treated
sewage water to SWPL for the purpose of dust suppression. This facility can be
3
extended to berth no. 7 also. About 500 m of treated sewage from the existing
sewage treatment plant can be supplied to berth no.7 for dust suppression.
2.6 POWER REQUIREMENT
The power requirement during construction stage will be maximum 500 KW. The port
should be able to meet this requirement. During the operation stage, power
requirement will be in the order of 1.5 MW. This requirement has to be met from the
Goa Electricity Department.
A sub-station needs to be constructed with transformers of 5 MVA capacity. It would
also be advisable to have back up power supply in case of Govt. power supply failure
so that operations at the terminal are not hampered. To begin with 2 D.G. sets of 1500
KW each may be installed.
2.7 STORM WATER DRAINAGE
The terminal being situated below the Headland hill, there will a fair amount of storm
water flowing to the yards. This water has to be disposed as efficiently as possible. In
order to intercept the flow of water peripheral drainage systems may be constructed
which can be connected to the main drain. Proper slopes have to be provided for the
entire storage area so that the water flows smoothly.
In order to avoid oil contamination of the storm water led to the harbour basin, the
following design features needs to be applied;
2-16
● Fuels tanks will be surrounded by spill basin and storm water collected inside
the basin will only be led to the storm water drains after inspection and testing
against oil content. Appropriate treatment will be given in case of oil
contamination.
● Fuel loading areas and refuelling bays for equipment will be furnished with fuel
spill monitoring pits, from where clean storm water can be led to the drains and
contaminated water to the treatment plant.
● Equipment washing areas will be provided with drain systems leading storm
water to the ordinary storm water drains when no equipment washing takes
place and to the oily waste water tank during washing.
2.8 SEWAGE AND OILY WASTE WATER DISPOSAL
For efficient sewage, oily waste water and ordinary sewage water disposal, following
facilities are proposed.
● Drainage pits in workshop areas will be connected to oily waste water tank.
● All water and oil content will be collected in the oily waste water tank and
passed through an oil separator. From here waste oil will be segregated and
water led to the septic tank.
● Ordinary waste water from toilets, bathrooms, kitchens etc. will be led to the
septic tank.
2.9 STORAGE OF COAL
Freshly mined high volatile coal when stored in bulk undergoes low temperature
atmospheric oxidation due to the presence of methane and other volatile matter on the
surface. The exothermic oxidation causes the rise in temperature of the coal and if the
heat is not removed, a stage comes when coal begins to burn on its own. This is
called spontaneous combustion.
If the temperature rise due to oxidation does not exceed a critical value, spontaneous
combustion does not take place but the quality of coal is affected depending on the
degree of oxidation. Spontaneous oxidation can cause;
2-17
● Decrease in calorific value

● Decrease in carbon and hydrogen content and increase in oxygen percentage.
● Size grading may get reduced (due to crumbling, lumps get broken down into
small pieces)
● Fire, if the temperature exceeds the critical value.
As the maturity of coal increases, its tendency to catch fire during storage decreases.
As a thumb rule, for every 10 degree centigrade increase of storage temperature, the
rate of oxidation gets doubled.
Ways to avoid self ignition
● Cooling by ventilation or by water spraying to avoid increase of coal stack
temperature.
● Storing the coal in smaller lots.
● Reducing access to air, i.e by storage in compressed piles (packing coal tightly
and compacting by running dozer / loader compactor over stock pile) or storage
in closely covered air tight enclosure.
● Reducing the fine powder content in coal.
● Getting coal which was mined at least 6 months back.
● The storage location shall be such that any external source of heat is to be
avoided.
● Water hydrant points to be provided near to the pile. When fire is noticed in pile
with small emanation of smoke, large volume of water shall be sprayed.
2-18
CHAPTER-3
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE STATUS
3.1 GENERAL
The assessment of baseline environmental setting is an essential component of any EIA
study. As a part of the study, a Scoping Matrix was prepared, based on which, various
parameters to be covered for assessment of baseline environmental setting were
identified. The assessment of environmental impacts due to construction and
commissioning of the proposed coal terminal requires a comprehensive and scientific
consideration of various environmental aspects and their interaction with natural
resources, namely, physico-chemical parameters i.e. meteorology, geology, soil, land
use and water quality, biological parameters i.e. terrestrial flora and fauna, marine flora
and fauna, fish species, etc. and socio-economic parameters i.e. demography,
occupational profile, etc. As a part of the study, a large quantum of related data as
available with various departments was collected. Various departments contacted as a
part of the EIA study were Forest Department, Fisheries Department, and Directorate of
Economics & Statistics. Field studies for primary data generation on various aspects too
were conducted as a part of the EIA study.
As mentioned earlier in Chapter-1, study area or the core area for the EIA study has
been considered as the area coming under circle of a radius of 10 km considering the
Mormugao Port as centre. The study area map is enclosed as Figure-3.1. Major portion
of the study area is under water, i.e. Arabian sea.
As a part of the EIA study, the Baseline Status has been ascertained for the following
aspects:
WAPCOS CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 3-1

• Meteorology
• Ambient air quality
• Noise environment
• Landuse pattern
• Water Environment
• Sediments
• Terrestrial Ecology
• Marine Ecology
• Demography & Socio-economics
3.2 METEOROLOGY
Climatically, the calendar year in the project area can be divided into four main seasons.
The winter season lasts from December to February followed by pre-monsoon season
from March to May. The monsoon season begins in June and continues upto mid-
October. The period from mid-October to November constitutes the post-monsoon
season.
Temperature : The temperature rises rapidly after March and the month of May is the
hottest month of the year with mean daily maximum temperature rising upto 31.3oC.
With the withdrawal of monsoons by the end of August and September, there is sharp
decrease in temperature. The months of December and January are the coldest months
of the year, and mean daily minimum temperature goes to 21.4oC. The monthwise
temperature variations in the project area district are given in Figure-3.2.
Rainfall : The annual rainfall in the project area is about 2612 mm and the annual mean
number of rainy days are about 99.6. The highest rainfall occurs in the months of June
and July. Majority of rainfall (94%) is received under the influence of south-west
monsoons from June to October. February is generally the driest month of the year.
The rainfall as received in various months of the year in the project area district is given
in Figure-3.3.

Humidity : The relative humidity was observed to be high during the monsoon months
from June to September. The relative humidity was lower in other months of the year,
with the lowest being recorded in the months of December and January.
Winds : The mean wind speed varies from 5 to 10 knots (9.25 to 18.5 km/hr) with the
maximum occurring during the monsoon months from June to September. Considerable
changes in the wind direction occur in coastal areas as a result of cooling in night and
warming of land masses during day time. The frequency of depressions/cyclonic storms
is very low along the Goa coast. Out of the 206 depressions/cyclonic storms severe
cyclonic storms which have occurred in the Arabian sea during a period of 103 years
(1891-1994) only six have affected the Goa coast.
Cloud cover : The cloud cover is maximum during the monsoon months i.e. about 5.4
to 6.4 Octas. In the other months, cloud cover is less. It is lowest in the month of
January to February and the rainfall is also minimum in these months.
The average meteorological conditions for the project area is summarized in Table-3.1.
TABLE-3.1
Average meteorological conditions of the project area
o
Month Temperature ( C) Rainfall No. of Relative humidity (%)
Maximum Minimum (mm) rainy days 8:30 hrs. 17:30 hrs.
January 29.7 21.4 1.8 0.1 66 62
February 29.0 21.9 0.0 0 72 66
March 30.0 23.9 0.4 0 73 69
April 30.9 26.1 20.3 0.8 72 69
May 31.3 26.9 81.3 3.5 73 72
June 29.4 24.7 777.8 22.0 83 83
July 28.0 24.0 905.1 26.5 86 88
August 27.8 23.9 412.9 21.9 87 86
September 28.1 23.8 225.9 15.2 87 84
October 29.8 23.9 138.7 6.9 82 78
November 31.0 22.8 42.6 2.4 69 65
December 30.5 23.7 4.9 0.3 62 60
Total 2611.7 99.6
Annual mean 29.6 23.7 76 73
Source : Mormugao observatory

3.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY
The coast of Goa is full of creeks, estuaries formed by rivers which provide good shelter
for the boats, barges, ships and other crafts. The coastline of district is uneven and
consists of inlets and outlets which give rise to small bays and capes. In general,
coastline of Goa, from Tiracol to Kali river consists of beaches, sea cliffs, estuaries,
spits, dunes, weathering rocks and wave cut platforms. The prominent landform is the
laterite capped masses often extending 25 to 30 km inland. The average height of the
cliffs varies from 40 to 100 m from the mean sea level. The laterite beds are reported in
the estuaries of Chapora, Mondovi and Zuari at 20, 27 and 34 m respectively below the
chart datum. The seabed off Goa mostly consists of silty clay till 50 m to 100 m water
depth, clayey silt from 100 to 150 m to 200 m water depth. Beach sediments mainly
consists of quartz along with feldspars and other heavy minerals.
The study area district has a hilly terrain especially on its eastern side where the
southern ends of Sahyadri range are observed. The Chadranath in Quepem taluka and
Dudsagar in Sanguem taluka are some of the important mountain peaks. The mountain
after skirting a considerable portion of the north-eastern and south-eastern boundaries
branch off westwards across district with many spurs and ridges. The terrain is
intersected by a number of rivers flowing westwards and meet the Arabian sea. These
rivers provide a network of internal waterways. The important rivers of the area are
Zuari, Sal, Talpona and Galgibag which are navigable. The Zuari river joins the sea
forming a large bay, and it encloses submerged Amee shoals over the entrance of the
Mormugao Bay. At the entrance of the Mormugao Bay, on the southern side, the

Mormugao port is situated. Adjacent to the port wharves, Vasco Bay is presently used
as anchorage by the mechanized fishing boats.
3.4 LANDUSE PATTERN
The landuse pattern of the study area has also been assessed using satellite data. The
IRS 1C-LISS III digital satellite was procured from National Remote Sensing Agency
(NRSA), Hyderabad for assessing the landuse pattern of the study area. The raw
satellite imagery of the study area is shown in Figure-3.4. The classified imagery of the
study area is enclosed as Figure-3.5. The landuse pattern is summarized in Table-3.2.
TABLE-3.2
Landuse pattern of the study area as per Satellite Data

Category Area (ha) Percentage of total
study area
Dense vegetation 2293.48 7.30
Open vegetation 2000.43 6.37
Bushes/Grass land 2032.14 6.47
Exposed Rock 84.08 0.27
Water Body 23183.68 73.80
Built-up Area 1821.72 5.80
Total 31415.53 100.00
The major landuse category is water body accounting for about 73.80% of the total
study area. The area under dense and open vegetation is 7.30% and 6.37 % of the total
study area. The built-up area is only 5.80%
As a part of field studies, ambient air quality monitored at various locations in the study
area by WAPCOS from December 2007 to March 2008. The location of ambient air
quality monitoring stations is given in Figure-3.6. The ambient air quality was monitored
as a part of the EIA study. The ambient air quality monitoring has been carried out with

a frequency of two samples per week at four locations for a period of twelve consecutive
weeks from April to June 2006. The parameters monitored as a part of the study are
listed as below:
• Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM)

• Respirable Particulate Matter (RPM)
• Sulphur dioxide (SO2)
• Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx).
Respirable Dust Samplers APM-451 of Envirrotech Instruments are being used for
monitoring Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM), Respirable fraction (<10 microns) and
gaseous pollutants like SO2 and NOx. The location of ambient air quality monitoring
stations is given in Table-3.3.
TABLE-3.3
Details of ambient air quality monitoring stations

Stations Remarks
AQ1 Project site
AQ2 Verna
AQ3 Consua
AQ4 Pale
The results of ambient air quality survey conducted during the period from December
2007 to March 2008 are given in Table-3.4. The ambient air quality standards specified
by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) are enclosed as Annexure-I.
TABLE-3.4
Ambient air quality status in the study area (Unit : µg/m3)

S. No. SPM RPM SO2 NOx
Project Site
1. 140 66 8.4 11.3
2. 145 70 9.2 11.5
3. 126 58 9.1 11.2
4. 120 56 10.3 12.7


5. 122 57 10.2 12
6 130 63 10.7 11.5
7. 128 60 10.2 12.1
8. 122 57 8.5 11.2
9. 102 48 11.6 18
10. 126 59 7.6 17.7
11. 120 56 8.2 15.9
12. 122 58 13.2 17.8
13. 130 62 12.4 18.3
14. 119 55 7.3 19.5
15. 124 58 12 20.2
16. 110 51 10.2 18.3
17. 122 57 10.2 17.5
18. 130 61 9.1 17.7
19. 113 53 11.2 13.1
20. 105 49 9.2 10.5
21. 124 58 11.4 10.6
22. 110 51 10.1 10.8
23. 122 57 11 12.5
24. 130 61 8.7 13.5
Verna
1. 120 56 8.9 14
2. 129 61 7.1 13.8
3. 109 51 9 14.5
4. 105 48 10.2 13.9
5. 133 63 9.3 14.3
6 127 60 9.5 15.5
7. 132 61 6.8 18
8. 129 59 7.4 14.8
9. 109 50 8.6 19.1
10. 105 48 9.2 16.3
11. 133 61 10 17.5
12. 127 59 9.7 17.3
13. 132 61 12 17
14. 108 50 9.4 15.1
15. 127 63 10.2 16.1
16. 131 58 9.3 14
17. 127 59 6.5 16.1


18. 123 57 9.6 12.1
19. 100 45 12 9.3
20. 105 48 11.5 18.5
21. 119 56 10.2 13.5
22. 107 50 9.8 12.3
23. 110 51 9.8 12.3
24. 119 55 9.6 16
Consua
1. 121 57 6.7 13.8
2. 146 69 6.9 15
3. 132 61 6.1 16.2
4. 109 52 6.2 12.8
5. 113 54 6.4 15
6 141 67 6.7 14.5
7. 144 68 6.8 14.7
8. 121 55 6.7 15.2
9. 121 57 6.6 14.5
10. 115 53 6.3 15.3
11. 127 59 6.9 13.8
12. 135 64 6.4 17.5
13. 136 66 6.6 17.7
14. 147 69 6.9 18.3
15. 123 58 6.8 15.6
16. 121 57 6.7 14
17. 146 66 6.6 14.7
18. 132 61 6.1 12.8
19. 135 64 6.4 13.5
20. 136 64 6.4 13.9
21. 147 69 6.9 15.2
22. 123 58 6.4 14
23. 121 58 6.4 13.3
24. 127 60 7.0 14.5
Pale
1. 129 57 8.9 16.3
2. 123 54 10 15
3. 121 51 8.3 14.2
4. 123 55 7.4 13


5. 117 50 8.7 13.8
6 123 53 9.2 13.5
7. 121 52 8.8 13.9
8. 105 46 8.2 14.7
9. 118 51 10.8 16.2
10. 131 56 10 15
11. 125 54 9.4 13.1
12. 133 57 10.2 13
13. 131 56 13 14.7
14. 123 54 12.8 15.8
15. 134 56 10.6 14
16. 151 66 12.9 14.8
17. 156 66 11 13.9
18. 162 70 10.2 15.7
19. 129 56 10.3 13.5
20. 133 57 12 16.2
21. 145 63 10.4 14.8
22. 141 62 12.5 14
23. 131 56 8.7 13.7
24. 137 58 7.4 15.4
Observations on ambient SPM level
The summaries of ambient SPM levels observed are given in Table-3.5.
TABLE-3.5
Ambient air quality status – SPM (Unit: µg/m3)

Station Maximum Minimum Average
Project site 145 102 122.6
Verna 133 100 119.4
Consua 147 109 130.0
Pale 176 105 130.9
It is observed from Table-3.5 that the average concentration of SPM at various stations
ranged from 133 to 176 µg/m3, which is below the prescribed limit of 200 µg/m3
specified for residential, rural and other areas. (Refer Annexure-I)

Observations on RPM levels
The average concentration of RPM at various stations monitored ranges from 55.4 to 61
µg/m3 were below the prescribed limits for limit of 100 µg/m3 specified for residential,
rural and other areas (Refer Annexure-I). The details are given in Table-3.6.
TABLE-3.6
Ambient air quality status-RPM (Unit : µg/m3)

Project site 70 48 57.4
Verna 63 45 55.4
Consua 69 52 61.0
Pale 70 46 56.5
Observations on ambient SO2 levels
The summary of ambient SO2 level as monitored during field studies is given in Table-
3.7.
TABLE-3.7
Ambient air quality status – SO2 (Unit:µg/m3)

Project site 13.2 7.3 10.3
Verna 12 6.1 8.9
Consua 7.0 6.1 6.6
Pale 13 7.4 10.1
It is observed from Table-3.7 that, the average concentration of SO2 at various stations
in the study area was much below the prescribed limits of 80 µg/m3 specified for
residential, rural and other areas (Refer Annexure-I). The highest SO2 concentration of
13.2 µg/m3 was observed at station near Project site, which is again well below the
prescribed limit of 80 µg/m3 specified for residential, rural and other areas.

Observations on ambient NOx levels
The summary of ambient NOx levels is given in Table-3.8.
TABLE-3.8
Ambient air quality status – NOx (Unit : µg/m3)

Project site 20.2 10.5 14.4
Verna 12 6.5 9.4
Consua 12.8 6.9 9.3
Pale 13 6.7 10.0
It can be seen from Table-3.8 that during the study period, NOx concentration at various
sampling stations was well below the prescribed limit of 80 µg/m3 specified residential,
rural and other areas (Refer Annexure-I). The highest NOx concentration of 20.2 µg/m3
was observed at station near Project site, which is also well below the prescribed limit of
80 µg/m3 specified for residential, rural and other areas (Refer Annexure-I).
3.6 NOISE ENVIRONMENT
Baseline noise data has been measured using A weighted sound pressure level meter.
The survey was carried out in calm surroundings. Sound Pressure Level (SPL)
measurement in the outside environment was made using sound pressure level meter.
Hourly noise meter readings were taken at each site, and equivalent day time and night
time noise levels were estimated. The ambient noise levels recorded and are tabulated
in Table-3.9. The day time and night time noise levels are presented in Table-3.10. The
ambient noise standards are enclosed as Annexure-II. The stations covered as a part of
ambient air quality monitoring are shown in Figure-3.6.

TABLE-3.9
Ambient noise level in the study area (Unit : dB(A))

Time Station
Project site Verna Consua Pale
6 AM – 7AM 37 35 35 36
7 AM – 8 AM 40 38 38 38
8 AM – 9AM 42 48 41 40
9 AM – 10AM 45 44 44 44
10AM – 11AM 47 46 47 46
11AM –12 Noon 45 46 46 45
12 Noon – 1 PM 42 45 46 44
1 PM – 2 PM 43 42 44 44
2 PM – 3 PM 43 42 44 44
3 PM – 4 PM 42 42 44 42
4 PM – 5 PM 48 44 44 42
5 PM – 6 PM 48 46 47 43
6 PM – 7 PM 47 46 46 44
7 PM – 8 PM 46 44 44 44
8 PM – 9 PM 44 42 42 42
9 PM – 10 PM 42 40 42 40
10 PM – 11 PM 40 40 40 40
11PM–12 midnight 38 38 40 38
12midnight–1 AM 37 37 38 37
1 AM – 2AM 37 36 37 37
2 AM – 3 AM 36 36 36 36
3 AM – 4 AM 35 34 36 36
4 AM – 5AM 34 34 34 34
5 AM – 6 AM 34 34 34 34
TABLE-3.10
Equivalent noise levels in the study area (Unit : dB(A))

Location Leq(day) Leq(night)
Project site 44.5 35.6
Verna 44.3 34.9
Consua 44.4 36.0
Pale 43.2 35.2
It may be seen from the Table-3.10 that the day time equivalent noise level ranged from
a minimum of 43.2 dB (A) to a maximum of 44.5 dB (A). The night time equivalent noise

level ranged from a minimum of 34.9 dB (A) to a maximum of 36.0 dB (A). The day and
night time equivalent noise level at various sites located close to residential areas were
compared with Ambient Noise Standards (Refer Annexure-II) and were observed to be
well below the permissible limit specified for residential area.
3.7 VEGETATION
In Goa, forest area is largely confined to the Western Ghat hill slopes. About 72% of the
total forest area observed in Goa lies within South Goa and remaining 28% lies within
North Goa. Almost 69% of the forest cover in South Goa lies within Sanguem taluka
followed by Canacona taluka (19%) and Quepem taluka (12%). The coastal talukas of
Salcete and Mormugoa in which the study area lies have almost no forest. As per the
secondary data sources the forest area and its distribution in the Goa covering both
south and north Goa districts in given in Table-3.11.
TABLE-3.11
Total Forest plantation area in Goa
Item Unit Value*
Area under forest
a) State owned ha 142438.00
b) Private ha 122438.00
c) Provisional ha 20000.00
Additional Area brought under plantation
New plantation
a) Casuarina ha -
b) Mangroves ha 100.00
c) Mixed ha 337.50
d) Canes ha 25.00
e) Medicinal plants ha 5.00
f) Others ha -
Enrichment
a) Mixed sapling ha 451.00
b) Cashew ha -
c) Rubber ha -
Source : Statistical Handbook, Goa

3.8 MARINE WATER QUALITY
The status of marine ecology before the project and the impacts on marine ecology due
to the construction and operation of the proposed project are the important aspects of
this project. The baseline data on marine ecology has been collected through a
ecological survey conducted in the month of March 2008.
Sampling sites:
Samples were collected from four sampling sites which are shown in Figure-3.7.
• Site-1. Site 1 was fixed near the wall of the berth.

• Site 2. Site 2 was fixed in the extreme end of the wall
• Site 3. Site 3 was fixed in the point at the middle of site 2 and the landward side .
• Site 4. This sampling location was selected and fixed near the landward side of
the wall of berth.
The water samples were collected from both surface and bottom levels. The sediments
(sea bed) samples were also collected from the above referred sampling stations. The
collected samples were analysed for physico-chemical and biological parameters. The
analysis results of various physico-chemical parameters in surface and bottom water
samples are listed in Tables-3.12 and 3.13 respectively.
TABLE-3.14
Physio-chemical characteristics surface water samples
Parameter Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4
Temperature (oC) 25.0 25.4 25.6 25.2
Salinity (ppt) 33.7 33.9 32.2 33.5
PH 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) 6.7 6.5 6.0 6.0
BOD (mg/l) 3.9 4.1 3.7 3.8
Ammonical nitrogen (µg/l) 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.4
Phosphate (µg/l) 1.1 1.0 0.9 1.0
Total phosphorus (µg/l) 2.5 2.8 2.7 2.8
Total nitrogen (mg/l) 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.6
Zink (µg/l) 4.0 4.0 4.4 4.4
Cadmium (µg/l) 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.14
Lead (µg/l) 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.24


Mercury (µg/l) ND ND ND ND
Copper (µg/l) 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5
Nickel (µg/l) ND ND ND ND
Chlorides (ppt) 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.1
Depth(m) 3.0 6.0 11.0 3.5
Electrical Conductivity 73.6 73.8 73.1 73.1
(µS/cm)
Light penetration (cm) 78.0 72.0 75.0 78.0
Oil and grease(mg/l) 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.2
ND – Not detected (Below detection level)
TABLE-3.13
Physico chemical characteristics of bottom water samples
Parameters Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4
Temperature (oC) 25.0 25.0 24.6 24.5
Salinity (ppt) 32.3 32.5 32.5 32.5
pH 8.2 8.1 8.1 8.1
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) 5.2 6.4 6.0 6.0
BOD (mg/l) 3.2 3.3 3.6 3.6
Ammonical nitrogen (µg/l) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8
Phosphate (µg/l) 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.2
Total phosphorus (µg/l) 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.9
Total nitrogen (mg/l) 2.6 3.0 3.0 2.9
Zink (µg/l) 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.0
Cadmium (µg/l) 0.18 0.11 0.13 0.12
Lead (µg/l) 0.13 0.15 0.16 0.15
Mercury (µg/l) ND ND ND ND
Copper (µg/l) 0.4 1.1 1.2 1.6
Nickel (µg/l) ND ND ND ND
Oil and grease (µg/l) 2.0 1.8 1.4 0.9
Electrical Conductivity 56.0 56.1 56.0 52.0
(µS/cm)
Temperature
The temperature of surface and bottom water samples ranged varies from 25.0-25.6oC
and 24.5 to 25.0oC with a difference of less than 1 oC between the surface and bottom
waters.

pH
The pH of seawater at surface water samples ranged from 8.3 to 8.4, while in bottom
water samples, it ranged from 8.1 to 8.2. The variation in pH is within normal limits.
Salinity
The variation in salinity in surface water samples ranged from 33.2 to 33.9 ppt. The
salinity is marginally higher in bottom water samples. This phenomenon indicated
mixing of surface and bottom waters. The salinity levels observed in the project area is
typical of that observed in coastal area.
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
The DO level in surface and bottom water samples ranged from 6.0 to 6.7 mg/l, 5.2 to
5.6 mg/l respectively . The DO levels indicate the absence of pollution sources.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
The BOD values in surface and bottom water samples ranged from 3.7 to 4.1 and 3.2 to
4.6 mg/l respectively.
Total Phosphorous
Phosphate phosphorous in surface water samples ranged from 2.5 to 2.8 µg/l, which is
marginally higher than the bottom waters (0.9 to 1.1 µg/l). The value of phosphate
phosphorus in various samples was observed to be in the range normally observed in
marine water samples.
Total Nitrogen
The concentration of nitrites in surface and bottom water samples ranged from 2-2.6
mg/l and 2.6 to 3.6 mg/l. Though surface and bottom water layers do not indicate

significant difference, the relatively higher values in bottom waters suggest contribution
from nitrogenous compounds in sediments.
Trace Metals
The trace metals such as lead, cadmium and mercury were analyzed in inshore and
offshore water at various stations around Mormugao Port area were analysed. The
analysis results are listed in Table-3.12 and 3.13.
The concentrations of Cadmium and Lead ranged from 0.11 to 0.18 µg/l and from 0.13
to 0.24 µg/l respectively. The concentrations of mercury and nickel were in not
detectable range.
3.9 SEDIMENTS
the grain size distribution of sediments and physico-chemical characteristics are given
in Tables-3.14 and 3.15 respectively.
TABLE-3.14
Grain size distribution of sediment

Sediment type % of sand % of silt % of clay
Clay 10 15 75
Clay 5 20 75
Clay 2 18 80
Clay 5 10 85
TABLE-3.15
Physico chemical characteristics of sediment

pH 8.1 8.0 8.3 8.3
Nitrate (mg/g) 3.1 3.0 3.1 2.2
Phosphates (µg/g) 3.9 4.2 4.2 4.2
Total nitrogen(µg/g) 3.2 3.3 3.6 3.6
Zink (µg/g) 2.6 2.1 2.1 3.0
Cadmium (µg/g) 0.08 0.2 0.1 0.1
Lead (µg/g) 1.2 1.3 2.1 1.2
Mercury(µg/g) ND ND ND ND
Oil and Grease(µg/g) 2.6 2.6 3.0 3.1


Sodium (µg/g) 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.6
Potasium (µg/g) 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6
Nickel (µg/g) ND 0.1 ND 0.4
Chromium (µg/g) ND ND ND ND
Organic matter (%) 46.0 44.8 43.8 44.0
Sediment of the proposed project area is predominantly clayey .Physico chemical
characteristics of the sediment did not show the presence of any pollutants or high
levels of heavy metals harmful to the aquatic fauna. Nutrient content of the sediment
was slightly higher than that of the water.
3.10 MARINE ECOLOGY
The results of various biological aspects as monitored at various stations is given in
Table-3.16.
TABLE-3.16
Biological Parameters of the study area

Parameters Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4
Gross primary productivity (mg C/m3/d) 1.1 1.32 1.3 1.0
3
Net primary productivity (mg C/ m /d) 0.12 0.11 0.13 0.13
Community respiration (mg/l) 0.98 0.97 1.17 0.87
Chlorophyll `a’ (mg/ m3) 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.12
3
Phaeophytin (mg/m ) 0.4 0.35 0.6 0.3
Oxydisable particulate organic carbon 2965 2987 3054 3219
(mg /m3)
The Net Primary Productivity of the water ranged from 0.11 to 0.13 mgC/ m3/d. This
seems to be due to the very high turbidity and very low light penetration. Values of
Chlorophyll a and phaeophytin were low. Oxidisable particulate organic carbon content
was higher (2965 -3219 mg/m3).

Phytoplanktons
A total of 7 genera of phytoplanktons were recorded in the study area. The details are
given in Tables-3.17 and 3.18. The total phytoplankton density ranged from 218 to 274
no./l.
TABLE-3.17
List of Phytoplankton groups obtained from the sampling sites.

List of Groups
Coscinodiscus
Euglena
Nitzschia
Pleurosigma
Rhizosolenia
Skeletonema
Thalassionema
TABLE-3.18
Density and biomass of Phytoplankton groups

Phytoplankton Groups Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4
Coscinodiscus 46 26 36 42
Euglena 10 12 9 4
Nitzchia 6 8 4 6
Pleurosigma 2 4 2 0
Rhizosolenia 0 6 4 2
Skeletonema 4 6 1 4
Thalassionema 12 2 8 6
Others 138 160 166 210
Total Phytoplankton 218 224 230 274
density (no/l)
Biomass (mg wet wt / l) 3.6 3.0 4.0 4.2
Zooplanktons
In the Mormugao port area, zooplankton fauna was represented by 16 different groups.
The Zooplankton biomass at various stations ranged from 4.0 to 6.2 mg(Wet wt.)/l.

Foraminifera was the dominant group followed by Copepoda. The details are given in
Tables-3.19 and 3.20.
TABLE-3.19
List of common zooplankton species obtained from the study sites
List of Zooplankton species
Copepoda
Fish eggs
Fish Larvae
Foramenifera
Globigerina
Nauplius larvae
TABLE-3.20
Density and Biomass of common zooplankton groups observed at the sampling
sites
Species Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4
Copepoda 46 50 68 62
Fish eggs 14 12 8 8
Fish larvae 4 6 0 4
Foramenifera 160 180 140 160
Globigerina 22 26 28 14
Nauplius larvae 24 42 22 20
Total Density of 270 316 266 268
Zooplankton (no / l )
Biomass (mg wet wt /l) 4.8 6.2 4.0 4.4
Meio-fauna
The population density of macro-fauna in the study area ranged from 180 to 220
no./100 cm2. About 7 groups were recorded in the area. Nemotodes was the dominant
group. The details are given in Tables-3.21.
TABLE-3.21
Density and biomass of benthic meiofauna
Faunal group Site.1 Site 2. Site 3 Site 4
Decapod larvae 8 12 18 16
Harpaticoidea 12 10 16 12
Kinorhynca 22 26 22 32
Nematodes 120 156 126 120
Oligochaetes 8 2 0 12
Ostracodes 6 8 8 12

Faunal group Site.1 Site 2. Site 3 Site 4

Turbellaria 6 6 4 4
Density (no/100cm2) 180 220 194 208
Biomass (mg wet wt/100cm2) 6.6 6.8 6.0 6.8
Macro-fauna
Seven groups of macro-fauna were observed in the study area. The details are given in
Table-3.22. The density ranged from 92 to 118 No./100 cm2.
TABLE-3.22
Density and biomass of benthic macrofauna

Faunal groups Site 1 Site 2. Site 3 Site 4
Amphipodes 8 12 16 10
Bivalves 2 1 4 2
Decapoda 12 8 8 10
Gastropoda 4 6 6 8
Oligochaetes 12 10 12 14
Polychaetes 4 6 6 8
Prawns 4 6 6 4
Others 46 62 60 52
Density (no/100cm2) 92 112 118 108
Biomass 12.2 16.4 16.0 15.1
(mgdrywt/100cm2)
3.11 FISHERIES
Goa has a coastline of 104 km and 48 fishing villages situated along the coastline. Fish
landing is taking place at 88 centres. The marine fish produce in Goa during the last last
year i.e. 2003-2004 was 83756 tonnes. The fishing season in Goa generally
commences from the middle of August and lasts up to mid-May. About 25% of the total
marine fish production of Goa is contributed by traditional fishing whereas the balance,
i.e. 75% of the total marine fish production is contributed by mechanized fishing.
The Vasco fishing centre, where the proposed fishing harbour is to be developed is
situated within the Mormugao port limits, opposite to Berths no. 10 and 11. The landings

of marine fish at Vasco bay is more than 20,000 tonnes/year. The major fish species
landing at the Vasco Bay includes meckerets, oil sardines, silver belly, soles, caranx,
prawns, etc. As per Department of Fisheries, state government of Goa, about 188
MFVs, 32 migratory MFVs are operating from Vasco Bay. The commonly observed fin
fishes and shell fishes in Goa are given in Table-3.23.
TABLE-3.23
Most common fin fishes and shell fishes found in Goa
Fin fishes
Chirocentrus
Gerrus filamentosus
Harpodon neherius
Katsuwonus pelamis
Rastreliger kanagurta
Sphyraena jello
Thryssasetirostris
Trichiurus lepturus
Trichiurus savala
Sardines
Pomfret
Anchovies
Silver bellies
Prawns
Metapenaeus dobsoni
Metapeneus affinis
Peneaeus sp
Crabs
Portunus pelagicus
Portunus sanguinolentus
3.12 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS
The project area comes under taluk Mormugao Taluka Tiswada of South Goa district in
the state of Goa. The study area mainly comprises of urban area i.e. Mormugao and
Chicalim and rural area including villages namely Chicolna, Issorcim, Pale, Sao Jacinto

Island, Sao Jorge Island and a part of village Sancoale. The demographic profile of the
study area is given in Table-3.24.
TABLE-3.24
Demographic profile of the study area

Total population 224739
Male 118074
Female 106665
No. of females/1000 males 903
SC population 3905
% of SC population 1.74
ST population 119
% of ST population 0.05
Literacy rate
Male literacy 80.6%
Female literacy 70.5%
Average literacy 76%
The population of the study area is 224739. The number of females per 1000 males is
903. The average family size is 4.5. The literacy rate in the study area is 76%. The male
and female literacy rates are 80.6% and 70.5% respectively.

CHAPTER-4
ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Based on the project details and the baseline environmental status, potential impacts
that are expected to accrue as a result of the proposed project have been identified.
The Environmental Impact Assessment for quite a few disciplines are subjective in
nature and cannot be quantified. Wherever possible, the impacts have been
quantified. However, for intangible impacts, qualitative assessment has been done.
This Chapter deals with anticipated positive as well as negative impacts due to the
construction and operation of the proposed coal terminal.
4.2 IMPACTS ON LAND ENVIRONMENT
Impacts due to construction activities
Pre-construction activities generally do not cause significant damage to environment.
Preparatory activities like the use of existing access road, construction of storage
sheds, etc. being spread over a large area, would have no further significant impact
once the land is acquired and its existing use changes. Clearing, stripping and
leveling of sites, construction of bunds for protection from flooding, earth filling and
excavation for foundations, will lead to some disturbance to the habitat. Since, the
proposed project site lies within, the Mormogao port area, and t level of construction
activities in the proposed project is not of such level and nature, to cause any
significant adverse impact on this account.
The natural drainage in the area is such that the entire water would outfall in the
marine water. This could lead to marginal increase in turbidity levels. However,
based on experience in similar projects, this impact is not expected to be significant.
WAPCOS Centre for Environment

4-1
b) Operation phase
Generation of garbage at the coal terminal
The problem envisaged during operation phase could be the disposal of garbage or
solid waste generated from various sources. The various sources of solid waste
generated from coal terminal area and the project office. The solid waste generated
from the coal terminal area shall mainly comprise of floating materials, packaging,
polythene or plastic materials, etc. Therefore, a system needs be devised whereby
undue quantity of garbage is not permitted to accumulate in the coal terminal area
and the same could be disposed off at designated sites in a proper manner.
Impacts due to effluents from labour camps
The average and peak labour strength likely to be deployed during construction
phase of the proposed coal terminal will be about 150 and 250 respectively. These
are quite a few villages situated in vicinity of the Mormugao port. It is assured that
the labour force engaged by the contractor could come from outside areas. It is
assumed that about 50% i.e. 125 labourers will stay in labour site camps close to the
site. The balance labour population would come from nearby settlements. Based on
this the total water requirement for the labour population congregating in the area for
constructing the proposed coal terminal who will stay during the construction phase
are estimated as below:
• Peak labour strength : 250

• Labours likely to stay at construction site (50%) : 125
• Married families (80% of 125) : 100
• Single : 25
Husband and wife both working (80% of 100) : 80
• Families (80/2) : 32
• Families where only husband is working (50% of 40) : 20
• Family size (assumed) : 5

4-2
• Total number : 40x5+20x5+25

=325 --- (A)
• Add 5% for the persons who will be service provider : 16
like shops, repairing facilities, etc.
• 50% of service providers will have families : 8
• Total number : 8x5+8=48 --- (B)
Total population (A+B) = (A + B) = 325+48=373

Say 375
Water requirement : 70 lpcd
Total water requirement : 26.25 m3/day
About 250 labour would stay at the construction site, only during working hours. The
water requirement for such labour shall be 11.25 m3/day @ 45 lpcd. Thus, total water
requirement works out to (26.25 + 11.25) about 38 m3/day.
The sewage generated is normally taken as 80% of the total water requirement i.e.
(0.8 x 38) 31 m3/day. The domestic water normally contains high BOD, which needs
proper treatment and disposal, otherwise, it can have an adverse impact on the DO
levels of the receiving body.
The disposal of sewage without treatment can cause problems of odour and water
pollution. The typical composition of untreated sewage is given in Table-4.1.
TABLE-4.1
Typical composition of untreated sewage

Parameters Value
Total Solids, mg/l 720
Total Dissolved Solids, mg/l 500
Total Suspended Solids, mg/l 220
BOD mg/l 220
Oil and grease, mg/l 100
Alkalinity (as CaCO3), mg/l 100
Total Phosphorus, mg/l 80
Total Nitrates, mg/l 40
Bicarbonates, mg/l 100
Carbonates, mg/l 10
Nitrates, mg/l 40
Phosphates, mg/l 40
Chlorides, mg/l 50
Sulphates, mg/l 30
Calcium, mg/l 40

4-3
Parameters Value
Magnesium, mg/l 40
Potassium, mg/l 15
Sodium, mg/l 70
It is clear from Table-4.1 that BOD is the major pollutant, as far as sewage is
concerned. Normally untreated sewage would find its way to natural drainage system
which ultimately confluences into the sea. However, these natural drains are
seasonal in nature and are likely to remain dry in the non-monsoon months. During
this period, the flow of untreated sewage from the labour colonies in these drains can
lead to development of anaerobic conditions, with associated water quality problems.
However, in the present case it must be mentioned that the total quantity of sewage
(31 m3/day) generated by the labour during construction phase is quite small and is
not expected to cause any adverse impact on the marine water quality. However, it is
proposed to treat the sewage from labour camps before disposal. The details are
outlined as a part of Environmental Management Plan (EMP) in Chapter-5 of this
report.
Impacts due to construction
Pile driving, deposition of rubble, compaction and other construction work, is water
course resuspension of sediments resulting in increase in turbidity. It also reduces
sunlight penetrating into the marine water body. The vessels involved in construction
and related activities are a possible cause of oil spills, garbage discharge, etc.
Runoff from construction site water is also another source of pollution. The impacts
on this account are not expected to be significant. However, mitigation measures
have been recommended as a part of the Environmental Management Plan to
ameliorate even the marginal impacts.

4-4
Impacts due to dredging
Presently, the total maintenance dredging of the port is about 3.5 million cubic
meters. This is carried out annually during the months of August and September for
a period of about 35 days. The dredged material is dumped in the designated spoil
ground located about 10 km away from the port. There will not be any additional
maintenance dredging involved due to the implementation of the project since the
capital dredging is negligible.
Water requirement for domestic use
The water requirement for domestic use includes requirement for drinking, cleaning,
etc. in the coal terminal area. Assuming a population of 100 in the coal terminal area
at peak hours and per capita water requirements of 75 lpcd, the total water
requirement works out to 7.5 m3/day. The sewage generation shall be of the order of
6 m3/day. Suitable measures for treatment of sewage shall be commissioned, which
are recommended as a part of EMP outlined in Chapter-5 of this Report.
Water Pollution due to ship movement
The discharge from ships that could be source of water pollution include bilge water,
ballast water, oily wastes, sewage, garbage and other residues from the ship. Spills
of oil, fuel, etc. can also be the source of pollution. Appropriate measures have been
recommended to control water pollution from ships in the Environmental
Management Plan, outlined in Chapter 5 of this report.
4.4 IMPACTS ON NOISE ENVIRONMENT
The major sources of noise during construction phase are due to operation of
various construction equipment. The noise levels generated by various construction
equipments are given in Table-4.2.

4-5
Under the worst case scenario, considered for prediction of noise levels during
construction phase, it has been assumed that all the equipments are operating at a
common point. Likewise, to predict the worst case scenario, attenuation due to
various factors too have not been considered for noise modeling.
TABLE-4.2
Average noise levels generated by the operation of

various construction equipment
Equipment Noise level [dB(A)]
Floating pontoon with mixer machine and crane 70
Winch machine 80
Transit mixer 75
Dumpers 75
Generators 85
Batching plant 90
Air compressors 90
Pile drivers 115
Modeling studies were conducted to assess the increase in noise level due to
operation of various construction equipment, and the results are given in Table-4.3.
TABLE-4.3
Predicted noise levels due to the operation of
various construction equipment
Distance Ambient Increase in Noise level Increase in
(m) noise level noise level due to ambient noise
(dB(A)) due to construction level due to
construction activities construction
activities (dB(A)) activities (dB(A))
(dB(A))
30 45 70 70 25
50 45 66 66 21
100 45 60 60 15
200 45 54 55 10
500 45 46 49 4
1000 45 36 46 1
1500 45 36 45.5 0.5
2000 45 34 45 -
It is clear from Table 4.3 that at a distance of 100 m and 200 m from the construction
site, the increase in noise levels will be about 10 dB(A) and 15 dB(A) respectively.

4-6
The other source of noise during construction phase will be due to movement of
trucks, which will transport the construction material. For prediction of worst
scenario, it has been assumed that there will be an additional movement of 50
trucks/hour. The variation in noise level due to increase in vehicular movement is
given in Table-4.4.
TABLE-4.4
Variation in noise level due to vehicular movement

S. Distance Ambient Increase in Noise level Increase in
No. (m) noise noise level during ambient noise
level due to construction level due to
(dB(A)) construction phase construction
activities (dB(A)) activities (dB(A))
(dB(A))
1. 30 45 61 61 16
2. 50 45 57 57 12
3. 100 45 51 52 7
4. 200 45 45 48 3
5. 300 45 41 47 2
6. 400 45 39 46 1
It is clear from Table-4.4, that the increase in noise level due to vehicular movement
is not expected to be significant during construction phase. The increase in ambient
noise level at a distance of 30 m, 50 m, 100 m and 200 m is 16 dB(A), 12 dB(A), 7
dB(A) and 3 dB(A) respectively. These noise levels have been assessed considering
that there will be no attenuation due to various sources. However, if we consider the
attenuation due to air, barrier, vegetation etc. then the increase in noise levels will be
even less. The nearest residential areas are at a distance of about 1 km from the
proposed project site. Hence, no adverse impacts are anticipated on noise levels
due to the proposed project.

4-7
4.5 IMPACTS ON AIR ENVIRONMENT
Impacts due to fugitive emissions
The major pollutant in the construction phase is SPM being air-borne due to various
construction activities. The vehicular movement generates pollutants such as NOx,
CO and HC. But, the vehicular pollution is not expected to lead to any major impacts.
The soils in the project area are sandy in texture, and are likely to generate dust as a
result of vehicular movement. However, the fugitive emissions generated due to
vehicular movement are not expected to travel beyond a distance of 200 to 300 m.
The impact on air environment during construction phase is not expected to be
significant, since, there are habitation in the vicinity of the site.
Impacts due to construction equipment
The combustion of diesel in various construction equipment could be one of the
possible sources of incremental air pollution during the construction phase. The fuel
utilization rates of various equipments expected to be in operation during
construction phase is given in Table-4.5. Under the worst case scenario, it has been
considered that equipment used for construction of berth and earthwork at each site,
are operating at a common point.
TABLE-4.5
Fuel combustion during construction phase
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment Fuel consumption No. of Total fuel
rate (lph) units consumption (l)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dumpers 30 4 120
Generators 30 2 60
Batching plant 40 1 40
Dumpers 20 4 80
Loaders and unloaders 25 3 75
Excavators 25 2 50
Water tanker 8 5 40
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 465
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4-8
The major pollutant likely to be emitted due to construction of diesel in various
construction equipment shall be SO2. The short-term increase in SO2 concentration
has been predicted using Gaussian plume dispersion model. The results are
summarized in Table-4.6.
TABLE-4.6
µg/m3)
Short-term (24 hr) increase in concentration of SO2 (µ
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wind Distance (km)
Speed -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(m/s) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-34 -10 -6 -4
0.2 2.60x10 1.27x10 6.36x10 5.19x10
-7 -4 -4 -4
0.85 1.56x10 2.91x10 2.43x10 2.3x10
-4 -4 -4 -3
1.53 4.08x10 9.66x10 2.33x10 1.19x10
-4 -4 -4 -5
2.78 6.03x10 6.82x10 1.44x10 4.47x10
-4 -4 -4 -5
4.30 5.22x10 6.82x10 1.44x10 4.47x10
-4 -4 -5 -4
5.98 3.91x10 3.56x10 7.05x10 3.22x10
-4 -4 -5 -5
7.00 3.78x10 3.04x10 6.04x10 2.76x10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is evident from Table 4.6 that the maximum short-term increase in SO2 is observed
as 0.00119 µg/m3, which is at a distance of 200 m from the emission source. The
incremental concentration is quite low and does not require any specific control
measure. Thus, the operation of construction equipment is not expected to have any
major impact on the ambient air quality as a result of the project.
(b) Operation phase
Impacts due to coal handling
It is a well known fact that coal handling operations lead to entrainment of dust,
which can have an adverse impact on ambient air quality. In the proposed project,
the coal from the terminal will be unloaded through unloaders which will be sent
through closed conveyor belt. Thus, entrainment of coal dust during barge unloading
and conveyor belt movement shall be minimal.

4-9
4.6 IMPACTS ON ECOLOGY
The direct impact of construction activity for any project is generally limited in the
vicinity of the construction sites only. The construction sites include berthing, storage
and infrastructure facilities. The proposed project site lies within the existing
Mormugao port area.
There is no forest with tree cover in the vicinity of the project site. The study area has
no major forest cover. Hence, no significant impacts are envisaged on terrestrial flora
as a result of the proposed project.
4.7 IMPACTS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
In the construction stage the peak labour force, skilled and unskilled labourers, is
estimated at about 250. About 125 labour population are likely to come from nearby
sites. The balance, i.e. 125 labour and their family members are likely to stay near
construction sites. Thus, it is necessary to develop adequate infrastructure facilities,
so that the requirements of the immigrating labour population are met.

4-10
CHAPTER-5
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
5.1 GENERAL
The Environmental Management Plan proposes to integrate the baseline
conditions, impacts likely to occur, and the supportive and assimilative capacity of
the system. The most reliable way to achieve the above objective is to incorporate
the management plan into the overall planning and implementation of the project.
The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the proposed coal terminal project
is classified into the following categories:
• Land Environment
• Water Environment
• Air Environment
• Control of Noise
• Greenbelt Development
• Socio-Economic Environment
5.2 LAND ENVIRONMENT
The construction material required for the project shall be procured from the nearby
quarries. The impacts of the construction phase on the environment would be
transient in nature lasting only till the construction activities continue. The surface
roads, which are proposed to be utilized during construction, shall be black topped
to avoid entrainment of fugitive dust. These measures will reduce the entrainment
of fugitive emissions to a large extent. Adequate provisions shall be made for timely
repair of roads.
For the proposed coal terminal, it is recommended that construction material
extracted from the quarries/borrow areas which are already under operation.
Attempt shall be made so that no new quarries be opened specially for the coal
terminal.

5-1
5.3 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
During construction and operation phases, the municipal solid waste so generated
will contain mainly vegetable matter followed by paper, cardboard, packaging
materials, wood boards, polythene, etc. The total solid waste to be generated
during construction phase would be of the order of 1.0 t/day. Likewise, in the
project operation phase, about 0.5 t/day of solid waste will be generated from
domestic sources. Adequate facilities for collection and conveyance of municipal
wastes generated at the disposal site shall be developed.
During project construction phase, the solid waste generated from labour camps,
shall be disposed at designated landfill sites identified in consultation with the
district administration. The solid waste from labour camps of coal terminal be
disposed along with the solid waste being disposed at present by the Mormugao
Port Trust.
During project operation phase, the solid waste generated from the coal terminal
area shall be disposed alongwith the solid waste generated by the Mormugao Port
Trust. The solid waste collected in the form of sweepings consists mostly of spilled
solids and organic matter of natural origin, and does not contain any toxic material.
These sweepings will be used as landfill material after proper grading. There will be
no solid waste for disposal. Thus there is no environmental impact envisaged due
to solid wastes. A covered truck will be required to transport the solid waste from
the coal terminal area to the disposal. A provision of Rs.1.5 million can be
earmarked for this purpose.

5-2
Construction phase
The major source of water pollution in the construction phase is the sewage
generated by the workers and employees. During construction phase about 31
m3/day of sewage is expected to be generated. It is proposed to construct twenty
(20) community toilets within the labour camps. An amount of Rs.40,000 is likely to
be spent for construction of a community toilet. Thus, a total expenditure of Rs.1.0
million is likely to be incurred for this purpose.
The sewage can be treated in septic tank and disposed off into the existing sewage
network of Mormugao Port Trust. It is proposed to construct one septic tank for
treatment of sewage generated during construction phase. The community toilets
and septic tanks shall be used in project operation phase as well.
As a part of control of water pollution. 25 `Community toilets’ and 1 septic tank need
to be constructed. The total cost required will be Rs.1.3 million. The details are
given in Table 5.1.
TABLE-5.1
Cost estimates for sanitary facilities for labour camps

Unit Rate (Rs./unit) Number Total cost
(Rs.million)
Community toilets 40,000 25 1.0
Septic tank 300,000 1 0.3
Total 1.3
Drinking water facilities and waste disposal facilities shall be located away from
each other. The effluent from workshops, oil storage, etc. will contain oil and grease
particles which shall be treated in an oil skimmer and suitably disposed after
treatment. The oil skimmers should be made available at the berthing quay. The

5-3
collected oily matter can be stored in cans, etc. and disposed off at designated
landfill sites finalized in consultation with the district administration. An amount of
Rs.0.5 million has been earmarked for this purpose.
Operation Phase
Sewage generation
During project operation phase major source of water pollution shall be the sewage
generated by the labour/staff involved in project related activities. Adequate number
of toilets shall be constructed in the terminal and the office area as a part of the
project. The sewage from the community toilets shall be treated in the septic tank,
which is proposed to be constructed during project construction phase. The treated
sewage from septic tanks shall be disposed into the existing sewage network of
Mormugao Port area.
Effluent from coal stock yard
The coal stock yard in the terminal area shall be cleaned immediately once a phase
of coal handling operations is completed. The water can be channeled from various
area, and can then be settled in a settling tank. It is likely that considerable quantity
of coal slurry settles within the drain, before reaching the settling pond. Thus, at
regular intervals of drain length sumps can be installed adjacent to the drain to
allow the bulk of the solids to settle in these sumps with overflow water being
channeled to the settling pond. The solids which settle out in the sumps can be
cleaned out by a front end loader or back hoe and the material can be returned to
the respective stock pile area.

5-4
5.5 AIR ENVIRONMENT
Control of fugitive dust from stock piles
Environmental Management and Pollution Control pose a major concern to all.
There is a need of efficient pollution control Technique, to meet the stringent norms
as stipulated by the Pollution Control Board for dust control at open stock piles,
conveyor transfer points, dump hopper loading points and other such dust
generating locations in a bulk material handling plant
There are 3 different type of dust suppression systems.
• Using plain water

• Using plain water with chemicals
• By atomized fog (Dry fog dust suppression system)
In the traditional dust suppression system using water, agglomeration of the
dust particles takes place with the water droplets so that the particles becomes
heavy enough to be returned to the product stream by gravity thus avoiding
material getting air borne and wastage of material. This system also eliminates
the need for any secondary handling of collected material.
In a typical plant with a number of conveyors and transfer points, each transfer
point should be treated for effective dust suppression
In a chemical based dust suppression system, a chemical is used to reduce the
surface tension of water, thereby increasing the dust adhesive power. The
chemical helps in keeping the dust particles agglomerated for a longer period of
time, thereby reducing the water requirement. Dosing pumps are used in the
system to pump the chemical in the desired fixed ratio.
The Dry Fog Dust Suppression System controls fine dust in the form of
respirable and fugitive dust. The system utilizes water and air to create an ultra

5-5
fine droplet sized fog that achieves dust suppression through agglomeration. No
chemical is required and the water addition to the process is restricted to 0.1%
by weight of material being handled. The Dry Fog Dust Suppression system
controls virtually all types of respirable and larger airborne dust and mists.
Momentum and coverage of the water spray is adjusted to optimize penetration
and enshrouding of the dust, while droplet size and turbulence is adjusted to
allow contact and removal of particulate with a minimum of water. The
advantages of dry fog dust suppression system is:
• Dust Generation is stopped at source

• Reduced cost and rugged system
• No adverse effect on product / material handled
• Moisture addition at the range of 0.1%
• No expensive equipments and disposal arrangement
• System could be set to operate on Auto / Manual mode
• Easy to install, operate & maintain
• Compatible to operate on PLC based central control rooms
The cost required for implementation of this system is included in the project cost.
Hence, separate provisions have not been earmarked as a part of the cost for
implementation of Environmental Management Plan.
Control of Pollution due to increased vehicles
The major source of air pollution in the proposed project is the increased vehicular
movement in the project construction and operation phases. The movement of
other vehicles is likely to increase, as the commissioning of the project would lead
to significant development in the area. Thus, as a control measure, vehicles
emitting pollutants above the standards should not be allowed to ply either in the
project construction or in the operation phases. Vehicles and construction
equipment should be fitted with internal devices i.e. catalytic converters to reduce
CO and HC emissions.

5-6
All the roads in the vicinity of the project site and the roads connecting the quarry
sites to the construction site should be paved or black topped to minimize the
entrainment of fugitive emissions. If any of the roads stretches cannot be black
topped or paved due to some reason or the other, then adequate arrangements
must be made to spray water on such stretches of the road.
Other measures for air pollution control
• The stackers can operate from a distance with brooms to keep the stack pile
surface to a minimum. This reduces the area contributing to dust
entrainment. The stackers can be provided with face masks to minimize their
exposure to coal dust.
• All regularly used roadways around the site must be swept daily with a tank
mounted road sweeper and washed by a truck mounted cart.
• All transport shall be properly covered at the bottom and top with perfect
sealing of plastic/tarpaulin sheets, so that no coal dust spills and spreads out
during present operation.
• The coal stack yard should be covered with screens/walls. The screens
should be made of a permanent brick wall of height of at least 7 to 8 m,
covering the entire threes sides of coal stock yard.
• Regular cleaning of roads.
• Removal of the accumulated dust from roadsides.
Management of traffic
The increase in traffic density will not cause any serious impact as the road
infrastructure is capable of handling this increase. The trucks will be properly
covered with tarpaulin and overloading will not be allowed to avoid spillage of loose

5-7
material on roads. Regular maintenance and washing of vehicles will be done and
the emissions from the vehicles will be kept as per norms. The drivers will be
warned not to blow horns near the habituated areas, villages etc and the speed
limits will be set for them to prevent accidents.
5.6 CONTROL OF NOISE
The construction and operation phases are likely to increase the vehicular traffic in
the area, which can lead to increase in the ambient noise levels mainly along the
road alignment. It is proposed to develop a greenbelt along the road stretches near
to the habitation sites. Three rows of trees will be planted. The details of the same
are given in Section 5.7.
During construction phase, the use of various construction equipment is the major
source of noise. However, based on the modeling studies, the noise due to
operation of various construction equipment is not likely to have any adverse impact
on the habitations in nearby habitats. However, efforts need to be made to reduce
the noise generated by the various construction equipment. The various measures
that could be implemented are as follows:
• Noise from air compressors could be reduced by fitting exhaust mufflers and
intake mufflers.
• Chassis and engine structural vibration noise can be dealt by isolating the
engine from the chassis and by covering various sections of the engines.
• Noise levels from the drillers can be reduced by fitting of exhaust mufflers
and the provision of damping on the steel tool.
• Exposure of workers near the high noise levels areas can be minimized. This
can be achieved by job rotation/automation, use of ear plugs, etc.
The effect of exposure of high noise levels on the workers operating the various
construction equipment is likely to be harmful. It is known that continuous exposure

5-8
to high noise levels above 90 dB(A) affects the hearing acuity of the
workers/operators and hence, has to be avoided. To prevent the adverse impacts,
the exposure to high noise levels should be restricted as per the exposure period
outlined in Table-5.2. Workers operating in the high noise areas should be provided
with earplugs.
TABLE-5.2
Maximum exposure periods for different noise levels as per OSHA

Maximum equivalent continuous noise Unprotected exposure period (hrs) per
level (dB(A)) day for an 8 hr/day and 5 days per
week
90 8
95 4
100 2
105 1
110 0.5
115 0.25
120 No exposure permitted at or above this
level
It is proposed to develop greenbelt around in coal terminal area, office internal and
approach roads which will go a long way to achieve environmental protection and
mitigation of pollution levels in the area.
Depending upon the topo-climatological conditions and regional ecological status,
selection of the appropriate plant species has been made. Various criteria adopted
for selecting the species for greenbelt development are:
- plant should be fast growing;

- preferably perennial and evergreen;
- indigenous;
- resistant to SPM pollution, and
- should maintain the ecological and hydrological balance of the region.

5-9
The general consideration involved while developing the greenbelt are:
- Trees growing upto 10 m or above in height with perennial foliage should be

planted around the perimeter of the proposed project area.
- Trees should also be planted along the road side in such a way that there is
dust control.
- Generally fast growing trees should be planted.
- Since, the tree trunk area is normally devoid of foliage upto a height of 3 m, it
may be useful to have shrubbery in front of the trees so as to give coverage
to this portion.
Taking into consideration the above parameters, the greenbelt development plan
has been evolved for the proposed alternatives to reduce the pollution levels to the
maximum possible extent. The plantation will be at a spacing of 2.5 x 2.5 m. The
width of the greenbelt will be 30 m. About 1,600 trees per hectare will be planted.
The maintenance of the plantation area will also be done by the project proponents.
The cost of plantation per hectare is estimated at Rs.100,000. About 3 ha of land is
proposed to be afforested as a part of Greenbelt Development Plan. The total cost
of afforestation works out to Rs.0.3 million. The species for greenbelt development
shall be finalized in consultation with the Forest Department.
5.8 ELIMINATION OF FIRE HAZARD
Following measures are proposed to be recommended for control of fire hazards
from coal stock yards during project operation phase:
• 3 no. of mobile fire tender will be placed at the coal stock pile area.
• Autogenous combustion of coal stock is to be prevented by limiting the coal
stock height to not more than 6 m.
• Continuous compaction to ensure avoidance of air passage by chimeng draft
effect which may induce construction of coal.
• Lump size of coal to be restricted to 20 mm, which will not lead to formation
of air voids, eliminating the possibility of combustion.

5-10
CHAPTER-6
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME
6.1 THE NEED
Monitoring is an essential component for sustainability of any developmental project.
It is an integral part of any environmental assessment process. Any development
project introduces complex inter-relationships in the project area between people,
various natural resources, biota and the many developing forces. Thus, a new
environment is created. It is very difficult to predict with complete certainty the exact
post-project environmental scenario. Hence, monitoring of critical parameters is
essential in the post-project phase.
Monitoring of environmental indicators signal potential problems and facilitate timely
prompt implementation of effective remedial measures. It will also allow for validation
ofthe assumptions and assessments made in the present study.
Monitoring becomes essential to ensure that the mitigation measures planned for
environmental protection function effectively during the entire period of project
operation. The data so generated also serves as a data bank for prediction of post-
project scenarios in similar projects.
6.2 AREAS OF CONCERN
From the monitoring point of view, the important parameters are marine water
quality, ambient air quality, noise, etc. An attempt is made to establish early warning
system which indicate the stress on the environment. Suggested monitoring
parameters and programmes are described in the subsequent sections.

6-1
6.3 MARINE WATER & SEDIMENT QUALITY
Construction phase
The chemical characteristics of marine water quality should be monitored once in
three months and biological parameters once a year during project construction
phase, close to the major construction sites. Both surface and bottom waters shall be
sampled and analysed. The parameters to be monitored are as follows:
Marine Water
Physico-chemical parameters
- pH
- Salinity
- Conductivity
- TDS
- Turbidity
- D.O.
- BOD
- Phosphates
- Nitrates
- Sulphates
- Chlorides
Biological parameters
- Light penetration
- Chlorophyll
- Primary Productivity
- Phytoplanktons (No. of species and their density)
- Zooplanktons (No. of species and their density)
Sediments
Physio-chemical parameters
- Texture
- pH
- Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
- COD
- Sodium
- Potassium
- Phosphates
- Chlorides
- Sulphates

6-2
Biological Parameters
- Benthic Meio-fauna
- Benthic Macro-fauna
The marine water and sediment sampling and analysis be conducted by an external
agency. A provision of Rs.0.75 million/year has been earmarked for this purpose.
Assuming construction phase is to last for 2 years and considering as escalation of
10%, an amount of Rs.1.58 million can be earmarked.
Operation Phase
The chemical characteristics of marine water quality should be monitored once in
three months and biological parameters once a year during project operation phase.
Both surface and bottom waters should be sampled and analysed. The parameters
to be monitored are as follows:
Marine Water
Physico-chemical parameters
- pH
- Salinity
- Conductivity
- TDS
- Turbidity
- D.O.
- BOD
- Phosphates
- Nitrates
- Sulphates
- Chlorides
Biological parameters
- Light penetration
- Chlorophyll
- Primary Productivity
- Phytoplanktons (No. of species and their density)
- Zooplanktons (No. of species and their density)

6-3
Sediments
Physio-chemical parameters
- Texture
- pH
- Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
- COD
- Sodium
- Potassium
- Phosphates
- Chlorides
- Sulphates
Biological Parameters
- Benthic Meio-fauna
- Benthic Macro-fauna
The marine water and sediment sampling and analysis be conducted by an external
agency. A provision of Rs.0.6 million/year has been earmarked for this purpose.
Construction Phase
Ambient air quality monitoring is recommended to be monitored at three stations
close to the construction sites. The monitoring can be conducted for three seasons.
For each season monitoring can be conducted twice a week for 4 consecutive
weeks. The parameters to be monitored are SPM, RPM, SO2 and NOx. An amount
of Rs.0.18 million/year would be required. Considering, construction phase of two
years and escalation of 10%, an amount of Rs.0.38 million/year can be earmarked
for this purpose. The ambient air quality monitoring during project operation phase
can be conducted by an agency approved by Goa Pollution Control Board.
Operation phase
The ambient air quality monitoring will have to be conducted at three locations. Air
quality could be monitored for three seasons in a year. High volume samplers can be

6-4
used for this purpose. The frequency of monitoring shall be twice a week for 24
hours for four consecutive weeks. The parameters to be monitored are SPM, RPM,
SO2 and NOx. The ambient air quality monitoring during project operation phase can
be conducted by an agency approved by Goa Pollution Control Board. An amount of
Rs.0.18 million/year can be earmarked for this purpose.
6.5 NOISE
Personnel involved in work areas, where high noise levels are likely to be observed
during project construction and operation phases. For such in-plant personnel,
audiometric examination should be arranged at least once a year.
The noise level monitoring during construction and operation phases will be carried
out by the project staff and a noise meter can be purchased. An amount of Rs.0.08
million has been earmarked for this purpose.
Neighbourhood (upto radius of 1 km)
It is recommended that during project operation phase, monitoring of sensitive areas
like schools and medicare centres be conducted within a distance of 1 km radius of
the coal terminal to ascertain noise levels at receptors, taking note of any excessive
build-up in any particular direction.
Sites of greenbelt development should be monitored once in every month during
project operation phase to study the growth of various species and to identify the
needs if any, such as for irrigation, fertilizer dosing, pesticides, etc. The monitoring
can be conducted by project staff.
6.7 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME
The summary of Environmental Monitoring Programme for implementation during
project construction and operation phases is given in Tables-6.1 and 6.2.

6-5
TABLE-6.1

1. Marine water
Phosphates,
Chlorides.
Primary
Productivity,
Phytoplanktons,
Zooplanktons
2. Sediments
Potassium,
Phosphate,
Chlorides,
Sulphates
Macro-fauna
3. Ambient air quality SPM, RPM, SO2 - Summer, Close to
and NOx Post- construction
monsoon site(s)
and Winter
seasons.
- Twice a
week
for four
consecutive
weeks per
season.
4. Noise Equivalent Noise During peak Construction

Level construction Site(s)
activities

6-6
TABLE-6.2

project operation phase
1. Marine water
Phosphates,
Chlorides.
Primary
Productivity,
Phytoplanktons,
Zooplanktons
2. Sediments
Potassium,
Phosphate,
Chlorides,
Sulphates
Macro-fauna
3. Ambient air quality SPM, RPM, SO2 & - Summer, Villages
NOx Post-
monsoon &
Winter
seasons.
- Twice a
week
for four
consecutive
weeks per
season.
4. Noise Equivalent Noise Once per month Project area
Level and sites
within 1 km
of the
project area
5. Greenbelt Rate of survival Once per month Various
Development and growth of plantation
various species sites.

6-7
CHAPTER-7
COST ESTIMATES
7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (EMP)
The cost estimates for implementing EMP shall be Rs.4.64 million. The details are
given in Table-7.1).
TABLE-7.1
Summary of cost estimate for implementing

Environmental Management Plan (EMP)
S. Parameter Cost
No. (Rs. million)
1. Covered truck for transportation of solid waste 1.50
2. Sanitary facilities at labour camps 1.30
3. Treatment of effluent from workshops 0.50
4. Greenbelt development 0.30
5. Purchase of noise meter 0.08
6. Implementation of Environmental Monitoring Programme 1.96
during construction phase (Refer Table-7.2)
Total 4.64
7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMME
construction phase is Rs.1.96 million. The details are given in Table-7.2.
TABLE-7.2
Summary of cost estimates required for implementation during

S. No. Parameter Cost (Rs. million)
1. Marine Ecology 1.58
2. Ambient air quality 0.38
Total 1.96

7-1
operation phase is Rs.0.93 million/year. The details are given in Table-7.3.
TABLE-7.3
Summary of cost estimate for implementing Environmental Monitoring

Programme during operation phase
S. No. Parameter Cost (Rs. million/year)
1. Marine water quality 0.75
2. Ambient air quality monitoring 0.18
Total 0.93

7-2
ANNEXURE-I
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (Unit : µg/m3)

Pollutants Time weighted Industrial Residential, Sensitive
Average Area Rural and Area
other Areas
SO2 Annual Average * 80 60 15
24 hours ** 120 80 30
NOx Annual * 80 60 15
24 hours ** 120 80 30
SPM Annual * 360 140 70
24 hours ** 500 200 100
RPM Annual * 120 60 50
24 hours ** 150 100 75
* Annual Arithmetic mean of minimum 104 measurements in a year taken twice a
week 24 hourly at uniform interval.
** 24 hourly/8hourly values should be met 98th percentile of the time in a year.
However, 2% of the time, it may exceed but not on two consecutive days.
NOTE :
1. National Ambient Air Quality Standards: the levels of air quality with an adequate
margin of safety, to protect the public health, vegetation and property.
2. Whenever and wherever two consecutive values exceeds the limit specified
above for the respective category, it would be considered adequate reason to
institute regular/continuous monitoring and further investigation.
Source : S.O. 384 (E), Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 dated
April 11, 1994 and [EPA Notification : GSR 176 (E), April 2, 1996]

ANNEXURE-II
Ambient noise standards

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area Category Limits in dB(A) Leq
Code of Area -----------------------------------------
Day time Night time
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Industrial Area 75 70
B. Commercial Area 65 55
C. Residential Area 55 45
D. Silence Zone 50 40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note : 1. Day time 6 AM and 9 PM
2. Night time is 9 PM and 6 AM
3. Silence zone is defined as areas upto 100 metres around such
premises as hospitals, educational institutions and courts. The silence
zones are to be declared by competent authority. Use of vehicular horns,
loudspeakers and bursting of crackers shall be banned in these zone.
4. Environment (Protection) Third Amendment Rules, 2000 Gazettee
notification, Government of India, date 14.2.2000.

ANNEXURE - G

AMPTPL

Milestone Schedule - MPT_GOA_Coal Handling Terminal
Activity ID Activity Name Original Start Finish 009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Duration
Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2
Milestone Schedule
S - MPT_GOA_Coal Handling Terminal 1103 22-Sep-09 31-Mar-13
A1000 Project Start 0 22-Sep-09

A1010 Project Complete 0 22-Sep-09
Preconstruction
Preconstru 260 22-Sep-09 21-Jul-10
A1020 Signing of Concession Agreement 0 22-Sep-09
A1030 Soil Investigation - Land 92 01-Oct-09 31-Dec-09
A1040 Joint Survey of Area A-1 & A-2 31 01-Jan-10 31-Jan-10
A1050 Complying Condition Precedence 181 22-Sep-09 21-Mar-10
A1060 Handingover Area A-1 & A-2 1 22-Mar-10 22-Mar-10
A1070 Submission of DPR 121 23-Mar-10 21-Jul-10
Construction - Marine
Constructi 783 01-Apr-10 30-Sep-12
A1080 Bund Construction 426 01-Apr-10 31-May-11

A1090 Dredging 365 01-May-10 30-Apr-11
A1100 Reclamation of area A-, A-2 & A-3 639 01-Oct-10 30-Jun-12
Jetty Construction
Const 712 23-Jun-10 30-Sep-12
A1110 Basic Engineering, Award of Work & Mobilization 153 23-Jun-10 22-Nov-10
A1120 Pilling 165 mts 396 01-Dec-10 31-Dec-11
A1130 Handingover of area A-3 0 31-Mar-11*
A1135 Basic prepatory work after receiving area A-3 61 01-Apr-11 31-May-11
A1140 Pilling 135 mts 335 01-Jun-11 30-Apr-12
A1150 Superstructure 300 mts (Including Precasting, Curing, Erection, 608 01-Feb-11 30-Sep-12
In-situ work & Finishing)
Mechanical Work
Mechanica 784 01-Aug-10 31-Jan-13
A1160 Detail Engineering 184 01-Aug-10 31-Jan-11
A1170 Order for Equipment 120 01-Feb-11 31-May-11
A1180 Handingover of area A-4, C & other areas 0 31-Mar-11*
A1185 Basic prepatory work after receiving area A-4, C & other areas 61 01-Apr-11 31-May-11
A1190 Delivery of Mechanical equipments, Fabrication & Erection including 611 01-Jun-11 31-Jan-13
Civil works
Electrical & Automation Work 784 01-Aug-10 31-Jan-13
A1200 Detailed Engineering 184 01-Aug-10 31-Jan-11

A1210 Order for equipments 150 01-Feb-11 30-Jun-11
A1220 Delivery of Electrical equipment, installation & erection including civil 581 01-Jul-11 31-Jan-13
works
Trial Run, Testing & Commissioning 50 01-Feb-13 31-Mar-13

A1230 Trial run, Testing & Commissioning 59 01-Feb-13 31-Mar-13
Actual Work Critical Remaining Work Page 1 of 1 TASK filter: All Activities
Remaining Work Milestone (c) Primavera Systems, Inc.

Detailed Project Report Coal Handling Te

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Detailed Project Report Coal Handling Te

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Detailed

10.18 GREEN BELT 102

Adani Group, a diversified conglomerate, has interests in various activities

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Mundra Port & SEZ

Adani Petronet Adani Adani

Yearwise Trend of cargoes handling at Mundra Port (in MT)

1.3 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE COAL

Sr No. Equipment Capacity Nos.

No. of Plots/ Area Storage Capacity

January 31.6 19.6

Month Average Maximum (ºC) Average Minimum (ºC)

May 33.0 26.3

4.3 INTEGRATED LOGISTICS COST ANALYSIS AND TRAFFIC

Source: i-maritime analysis

Source: i-maritime analysis

Source: i-maritime analysis

Tonnage Overall In m In m m

4000 100 15.4 7.0 6.3

6000 118 16.6 8.3 6.9

8000 130 17.6 9.5 7.4

10000 140 18.5 10.5 7.9

12000 150 19.4 11.2 8.5

15000 163 20.7 12.0 9.0

20000 180 22.8 13.0 9.7

25000 194 24.7 13.8 10.3

30000 205 26.5 14.3 10.7

40000 223 29.7 15.4 11.1

50000 235 32.5 16.2 11.6

60000 245 35.0 17.1 12.0

80000 259 39.2 18.8 12.6

100000 268 42.5 20.4 13.0

160000 280 45.0 16.0

Sr. Codes Descriptions

Sr. Conv. Rated Length Lift* Belt Belt Motor*

Maximum Berthing Energy for the above range of vessels is 119 TM. The berth

towards the sea. OR reclamation as per the alternative methodology as

Sr. Codes Descriptions “ Code of Practice …”

4. IS:4651 for planning & design of ports & harbours (Part 1 to 5)

Suitable rating HT capacitors with automated power factor correction

PLC system will be installed to ensure safe and reliable operation of conveyors

10.17 ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION MEASURES

Environment protection measures, as recommended in the Environment

10.18 GREEN BELT

Mundra Port and Special Economic Zone Limited

Traffic Assessment for Mormugao Port

i-maritime Consultancy Private Limited

6.3. Hinterland Assessment ................................................................................................ 40

12.1. Sensitivity due to mismatch in Hinterland Capacity Accretion ................................... 116

Table 18-2 Inland Rail Distances (km) ...................................................................................................... 144

1.2. Hinterland Assessment

1.2.1. Coal based thermal power plants

1.2.2. Cement Plants

1.2.3. Sponge Iron Plants

1.2.4. Integrated Steel plants

1.3. Competition Analysis

1.3.1. Internal competition

1.3.2. External Competition

Figure 1-1 Chief Competing Ports and Hinterland Cargo centres

Source: i-maritime analysis, www.wikimapia.com

Figure 1-2 Existing Coal and Iron Ore Movement

Source: i-maritime analysis, Primary surveys

1.4. Integrated Logistics Cost Analysis and Traffic Projections

Based on the study, the following points can be surmised