Develop Best-In-class Port Infrastructure

CHAPTER 1
Develop Best-in-class Port

Infrastructure
M inistry of Ports, S h ip ping and Waterways | 13

Develop Best-in-class Port Infrastructure
1.1 Current Landscape ports2. Two Indian Ports (JN P T at 33, Mundra at
37) appear within top 402 ports category. There is
India has 12 Major Ports and 205 notified
a significant potential to develop port infrastruc
Non-M ajor Ports along its 7,500 km long coast
ture in India and become competitive with other
line and sea-islands1. Th e ports are critical eco
leading maritime nations such as US, China and
nomic and service provision units.
other South-East Asian regions.
The total traffic handled at Indian Ports has risen
The shipping industry is moving towards me
steadily from 885 M TPA in 2010-11 to 1307 M TPA
ga-size vessels, with more than 40% of the order
in 2019-201. India’s Major Ports have witnessed
book in next 3-5 years accounted by ships of size
~4% CAGR 1 growth over the last 5 years and han
20,000 T E U and above3. While a Capesize vessel
dled approx. 54% of the country’s total cargo in
requires 18m+ draft, draft at Indian ports varies
2019-20.
widely from 7m to 20m. Hence, Indian ports need
In 2019-20, approx. 25% of Indian cargo tranship to focus on increasing draft availability according
ment 1 was handled by Indian Ports and rest by to their respective cargo profile.
International ports leading to lost revenue op
Considering the evolving shipping market, ship
portunities for India and a higher risk of trade
sizes, and cargo profile, it is essential for the Indi
dependence. Enabling a Transshipment hub in
an Ports to further strengthen port infrastructure
India will not only address the current revenue
and drive a greater share of global EXIM trade.
losses for Major ports but also help take advan
Infrastructure is planning to be driven by careful
tage of an attractive position on global maritime
analysis of cargo trends and forecasts.
routes.
Globally, seven of the top 10 ports in the world
today (by container throughput) are Chinese
1.2 Traffic Forecast and Capacity Augmentation

Four-pronged bottom-up analysis methodology was undertaken to develop 10-year traffic projections
across commodities and regional clusters -
Non-exhaustive
Origin-Destination (O D ) analysis Assessment of ministry forecasts
and growth drivers' study for each
sub-category
Mapping and analysis of industrial capacities

# and policies for each commodity
Assessment of potential impact of key

(both existing & upcoming) across regions: policies and global trends on growth
scenarios in the next 5 or 10 years (example):
- 1200 + coal-fueled power plants
- Make in India Policy
- 55+ Steel production plants
- National Green Tribunal
- 50+ Cement production plants
- National Steel Policy
- 40+ Coal commercial blocks - National Electricity Plan
- 30+ fertilizer production plants - DFCC launch and manufacturing shift
potential from China
- 25+ Petroleum refineries
Inputs from ministry departments for key
Assessment of key growth drivers and
commodities
underlying variation factors for each
commodity - Ministry of Steel
- Ministry of Coal - Coal Vision 2030
- Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas
14 | D e v e l o p B e s t - i n -c l a s s Po r t In f r a s t r u c t u r e
• Discussion with leading industry players to
incorporate their inputs across commodities
• Analysis of commodity-wise growth indicators
and industry viewpoint from several domestic
and international agencies:
- International Energy Agency (IEA)
- Niti Aayog
- Petroleum Planning and Analysis cell
- Invest India
1 Indian Ports Association (IPA ) Statistics report for FY20

2 2020 edition of Lloyd’s List O n e H undred Ports
3 Drew ry M a ritim e Advisors A n n u a l Review report 2020
4 Indian Ports Association (IPA ) Statistics report for FY20
I 15
1.2.1 Commodity-wise Cargo Projections
Origin-Destination (O D ) analyses were undertaken for key commodities including POL, Coal, Iron ore,
Containers, Cement, Steel, and Fertilizers across regional clusters to arrive at 2030 traffic projections.
Three scenarios (High, Base, and Low) were developed for each commodity based on respective key
drivers and applicable sets of assumptions such as industry trends, Govt. policies, capacity additions
or decline possibilities, global market impact, inflation and others.
1.2.1.1 Petroleum , O il and Lubricants (P O L)
~430 M TP A 5 POL traffic was handled in 2019-20, constituting -340 M TPA EXIM traffic with -6 5 % vol
ume contributed by crude oil imports (Exhibit 1.1).
POL consists of three sub-categories - Crude oil, Petroleum Products and LNG. A bottom-up anal
ysis and key driver’s assessment was undertaken for each sub-category to estimate potential
traffic volumes.
Crude oil:
Key drivers analysed6

D om estic • -9 0 M TPA capacity additions via brownfield expansions across refineries such
refining as ~26 M TPA at EOL Jamnagar, ~10 M TPA at IOCL Panipat, etc. (Exhibit 1.2)
capacity • -7 5 M TPA capacity addition through potential greenfield refineries at Barmer
(9 M TPA), Cuddalore revamp (6 M TPA), and Ratnagiri (60 MTPA)
• Possible traffic variation in case of delays in land acquisition for -6 0 M TPA
new Ratnagiri refinery or delays in environmental clearances for -2 0 M TPA
brownfield Nayara Jamnagar refinery
D om estic oil • Expected decrease by 1% to 3% CAGR in Indian oil production; or, increase by
Production 1% CAGR in the most optimistic scenario (high case) (Exhibit 1.3)
• Declining curve expected due to natural decline in field reserves and no new
expected oil field
-315 -365 M TPA crude oil imports expected by 2030 (Exhibit 1.4)
• ........ .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .
E x h ib it 1.1 | 2019 T r a f f ic fo r P e tr o le u m , O i l a n d L u b ric a n ts
FY19 volume (M TP A )
EXIM traffic .............
C ru d e oil P e tro le u m LN G C o a s ta l POL

p ro d u cts
Source: IPA's Port statistics report, Transpo rt Research W in g (T R W ) - M inistry of Ports, Shipping and W aterways (M o P S W )
5 Indian Ports Association (IPA) Statistics report for FY20

6 International Energy Agency, M inistry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell (P PA C ), TR W -M o P S W
16 | D e v e l o p B e s t - i n -c l a s s Po r t In f r a s t r u c t u r e
Exhibit 1.2 |2019 Traffic for Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants
Refinery Capacity addition (M T P A ) Te n ta tive com pletion
IOC, Koyali/Vadodra 4 2023
IOC, Panipat 10 2021
IOC, Bongaigaon 3 2022
IOC, Paradip 5 2023
HPC, Visakh 7 2021
CPCL, Narimanam 8 2026
NRL, Numaligarh (BPCL) 6 2024
MRPL, Mangalore 3 2022
BPC, BORL-Bina 7 2021
RIL, Jamnagar* 7 2026
RPL (SEZ), Jamnagar 6 2021
EOL, Jamnagar 26 2025
Exhibit 1.3 | Domestic Oil Production to decline by 1% to 3%
Crude oil production (M TP A )1

K CA G R
FY20-FY30
l 1%
l 1%
l 3%
— Base case — Low case — High case
1. Low, Base, and High scenarios defined refer specifically to the cargo volum e ranges basis highlighted drivers
Source: International Energy Agency, M inistry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell (P P A C ),
TR W -M o P S W
I 17
Exhibit 1.4 | Low, Base and High case scenarios for Crude Oil Imports
Volume (M TP A )1
350 355 390
259 wrn _____ m.
FY’19 FY’30 (Low) FY’30 (Base) FY’30 (High)

Crude Imports Domestic crude production
Key drivers/
Low scenario Base scenario High scenario
assumptions
Brownfield ~80 M T P A capacity ~80 M T P A capacity
~95 M T P A capacity addition;
refining addition; Nayara expansion addition; Nayara
~80% Nayara capacity added
capacity delayed expansion delayed
Greenfield ~6 M T P A via Cuddalore ~33% Ratnagiri capacity (20

~9 M T P A Barm er refinery
refining revam p + 9 M T P A Barm er M T P A ) starting production +
operationalized
capacity refinery operationalized Barm er & Cuddalore refinery
Key
drivers ~35 M T P A crude ~30 M T P A crude
Domestic crude ~25 M T P A crude production:
production: status quo production: ~1%
production ~3% decreasing C A G R
capacity decreasing C A G R
Source: International Energy Agency, M inistry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Petroleum Planning and Analysis C ell (P P A C ),
TR W -M o P S W
Petroleum products:
Petrol (M S), Diesel (H S D ), and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) form around 70-75% of the petro
leum products8. Other products include asphalt, bitumen, paraffin, etc.

M S/H SD • Growth will primarily be driven by increasing alternate fuels adoption such as
dom estic esterification, natural gas, etc. and amendments in policies such as National
consum ption Green Tribunal, etc. (Exhibit 1.5)
LPG • Expected domestic LPG demand to be driven by GDP growth and piped gas
dom estic penetration in urban areas
consum ption • Expected investment of INR 10,000 Cr for infrastructure enhancement to
meet increased demand (Exhibit 1.6)
~50 to 125 M TPA exports likely by 2030; on the other hand, ~55 to 65 M TPA imports expected driven
by LPG demand (Exhibit 1.7)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o
7 International Energy Agency, M inistry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell (P P A C ), TR W -M o P S W
8 Indian Ports Association (IPA) Statistics report for FY20
18 | D e v e l o p B e s t - i n - c l a s s Po r t In f r a s t r u c t u r e
Exhibit 1.5 | LPG Consumption Demand to increase between 5% to 9%
LPG consumption demand (MTPA )1 CAGR

FY20 -FY3 0
— Low case — Base case — High case
Source: International Energy Agency, M inistry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell (P P A C ),
TR W -M o P S W
Exhibit 1.61LPG infrastructure investment

More than 10000 Cr. Investment underway in enhancing infrastructure
* Company Asset Investment (Cr)
| IOCL Pipeline (Deendayal to Gorakhpur) 9,000
HPCL LPG terminal expansion 1,000
IOCL LPG infrastructure in North East 286
1 Energy Infrastructure Ltd (EIL) LPG import terminal 700
Total 10,986
: 1. Low, Base, and High scenarios defined refer specifically to the cargo volume ranges basis highlighted drivers
j Source: International Energy Agency, Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell (P PA C ), TR W -M o P S W
| 19
Exhibit 1.7 | Low, Base and High case scenarios for exports and imports of
petroleum products
Export volume (M TP A )1 Import volume (M TP A )1
125
55 60
61 70
ria m
50
F Y ’19 FY’30 (Low) FY’30 (Base) FY ’30 (H igh) FY ’19 FY’30 (Low) FY’30 (Base) FY ’30 (H igh )
I M S/H SD ■ Others LPG ParafTin/Petcoke Others
Key drivers/
assum ptions
Domestic
t
Key
consumption (for
M S/HSD exports)
~3.5% C A G R growth; low
alternate fuels adoption rate
-3 % C A G R growth; status quo
energy policies
-2 .5 % CAG R growth till 2030;
sustainable energy scenario
d riv e rs
G ra d u a lG D P recovery scenario; Slow urbanization and low piped Growth G D P renewal; high
LPG consumption
slow urbanization and high piped gas penetration urbanization and low piped gas
1 (for imports)
gas penetration under P M U Y program penetration
~90 M TP A brownfield capacity ~90 M TP A brownfield capacity; -1 0 5 M TP A expansion capacity;

Refining capacity addition; ~9 M TP A Barm er -1 5 M TP A from Barm er & ~35 M TP A from Barmer,
refinery operationalized Cuddalore refinery Cuddalore & Ratnagiri refinery
TR W -M o P S W
Liquified N a tu ra l Gas (L N G ):
Natural gas in India is either produced domestically (in gaseous form) or imported in liquefied
form (liquefied natural gas or LN G). Gas imported in liquid form is gassified at im port terminals
and then moved internally through pipelines.

f
LNG Government policies to improve the gas share from - 6 % in 2019 to 15% by
consum ption 2030. Ban on higher polluting fuels by the Supreme Court of India, and high
dem and growth in segments like CGD, LNG for transportation, etc. further expected to
drive consumption of LNG (Exhibit 1.8).
D om estic • Domestic supply of LNG to be led by new O N G C and private sector fields in
LN G supply the eastern offshore (Exhibit 1.8)
• RLNG term inal’s capacity planned to increase to -8 3 M TPA by 2030
• Boost to supply from new LNG pipeline projects - Cochin LNG terminal to
Mangalore and Bangalore and, Dhamra LNG terminal to Kolkata
-30 to 80 M TPA LNG imports volume likely by 2030 (Exhibit 1.9).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o
9 International Energy Agency, M inistry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell (P P A C ), T R W -M o P S W
20 | D E V E L O P B E S T-IN -C L A S S P O R T I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
Exhibit 1.8 | LNG Demand and Supply Forecast till 2030
In d ia n n a tu ra l gas d e m a n d ( M T P A )
CAGR
(FY20-FY30)
— L o w re n e w a b le s a d o p tio n s c e n a rio — S u s ta in a b le D e v e lo p m e n t S c e n a rio
— C u r r e n t P o licie s S c e n a rio
TR W -M o P S W
In d ia n d o m e s tic gas s u p p ly
(M T P A )1
CAGR
60 (FY20-FY30)
50
In cre a se p rim a rily led by n e w O N G C
50 K G 9 8 /2 a n d p riva te s e c to r fie ld s in the

e a s te rn o ffs h o re ; v o lu m e s likely to v a ry
g iv e n th e lo w prices
45
40
35
30
0
FY 19 FY 20 FY 2 1 FY 2 2 FY23 FY24 FY 25 FY26 FY 2 7 FY 2 8 FY 29 FY30
— A— L o w case — Bas e case — Op t i mi s t i c case
T R W -M o P S W
I 21
Exhibit 1.9 | Low, Base and High case scenarios for LNG imports
Volume (M TP A ) 1
115
100
45
FY’19 FY 30 (Lo w ) FY 30 (B ase) FY 30 (H ig h )
I LN G im p o rts Dom estic production
Key drivers/
assum ptions
I
~6% CA G R growth; led by
,, . -1 0 % CA G R supported by
Natural gas high fluctuation in%global
C A G Rspot
growth similar _ ^ '
, ’ Govt policies to improve gas
demand prices and low alternate
trend fuels
as recent years , r . °
share in energy mix
Key adoption
C'nVerS -8 % CA G R growth; eastern

6% CAGR; supply increase -4 % CAGR ; similar trend as
Domestic supply offshore fields coupled with
rr ' . . r from eastern offshore fields recent years
low prices
TR W -M o P S W
22 I D E V E L O P B E S T-IN -C L A S S P O R T I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
In summary, 600-685 M TPA POL traffic is expected by 2030. (Exhibit 01.10)
Exhibit 1.10 | POL Traffic Summary for 2030
FY30 E All values are in M T P A
Base Low / High

S No. Category FY 19 case1 cases1 Key assessm ent drivers highlights
1 PO L category Bottom -up analysis and growth drivers study
undertaken for each sub-category
1.1 Crude oil 225 325 315 / 365 Crude dem and driven by available refining
capacity in India:
- -355 M T P A refining capacity expected
by 2030 basis industry m apping of
brownfield expansions and greenfield
projects
- Traffic variation likely due to ~60
M T P A new Ratnagiri refinery (land
acquisition delays) & ~20 M T P A
brownfield projects at risk e.g. Nayara
Jam nagar issues due to environm ental
clearances
Domestic crude supply:
- ~30 M T P A supply in base case
considering natural decline in field
reserves & zero new oil fields
(triangulated with P N G R B estimates)
1.2 Petro 95 130 Imports e.g. LPG (~40% of total im ports)

products driven by urbanization growth scenarios
105 /190 and respective piped gas penetration rates
(Im port, (I-35, (I-60, (10-30%) triangulated with IEA estimates)
Export) E- 60) E-70) Exports e.g. M S/H SD (~70% of total
exports) projected basis domestic
consumption (~280-315 M T P A ) driven by
growth of alternate fuels, policy im pact as
N G T , etc. and increased focus of private
players on domestic market
1.3 LNG 20 55 30/80 NG consumption dem and: ~6% to 10%

growth expected as a result of fluctuations
in global spot prices & policy im pact such
as Suprem e Court Ban on polluting fuels,
etc.
Domestic supply: ~4 to 8% growth by new
O N G C & reliance fields in eastern offshore
1.4 POL 90 100 ~1% C A G R growth likely; ~80% evacuation

coastal from the refineries occurring via
established pipeline network due to low
cost of transportation ( ~0.14 to 0.18 INR
per ton
per K m )
Total PO L 430 610 600/685
T R W -M o P S W
| 23
1.2.1.2 Coal
-3 20 M TP A 10 Coal traffic was handled in 2019-20, constituting -245 M TPA EXIM traffic with -8 5 % vol
ume by thermal coal imports across ports (Exhibit 1.11)
There are two types of coal used in India- Therm al coal and Coking coal. While Coastal shipping for
coal has grown steadily in last few years, there is further potential to grow in next 5-10 years. A bot-
tom-up analysis and an assessment of key growth drivers was undertaken for each sub-category to
estimate potential traffic, such as:
T h e rm a l coal:
^ Key drivers analysed
D om estic India coal demand expected to vary in future due to likely increase in demand
consum ption for renewables / alternate fuels and efficiency improvements in energy
consumption (Exhibit 1.12)
D om estic • -T h e Ministry of Coal has targeted 1.3 Bn tons per annum by 2030, primarily
production led by -0 .9 to 1 Bn tons per annum coal output from Coal India Limited (CIL)
• Government of India is looking to ramp-up commercial block mining to
reduce im ports’ dependence further. Therefore, there is likely potential for an
additional surge in domestic coal capacity by -125 to 225 M TPA (Exhibit 1.13)
• E-auction of approximately 41 commercial mining blocks are planned by 2030
-1 30 to 435 M TPA imports expected by 2030, driven by a change in coal-based energy mix and the
addition of new commercial coal blocks (Exhibit 1.14)
Exhibit 1.111EXIM Coal Traffic in FY2019
Source: IPA's Port statistics report, T R W -M o P S W
10 Indian Ports Association (IP A ) Statistics report for FY20

11 International Energy Agency, M inistry of Coal, N ational Electricity Plan, Coal controller statistics, TR W -M o P S W
24 | D EVELO P BES T-IN -CLAS S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E

Exhibit 1.12 | Demand for Coal is expected to grow over the next 10 years
Coal demand grew steadily 5.1% Coal demand expected to grow between 3%
over last ten years to 5% and reach 1,320 to 1600 M TPA by 2030
Coal Production and Import (M T )
+ 5 .1 %
910
829 846 8 5 0 ^
735
-3%' 1,610
704 207 195 1,320 1,465
r r 607 6 0 4 ^ 1 1 , 910
554 cb , g ^ ] l
510 m m
431
609 639 655 669 72 5

4 5 7 49 3 532 533 540 556 566 FY 19 FY 30 FY 30 FY 30
(Low) (Base) (High)
i> oo cn o Dem and driven byJ
o o o
> > > > > > > > > > > > > • Econom ic growth and dem and for power
• Em ergence of alternate fuels, renewables
Production I Import • Im proving energy efficiency
Source: International Energy Agency, M inistry of Coal, National Electricity Plan, C oal controller statistics, TR W -M o P S W
Exhibit 1.13 |Commercial coal blocks auction to reduce imports’ dependence
State-wise distribution from upcoming

Distribution of coal blocks by size blocks by Capacity
M TP A M TP A
95.0
15 100.0 250.0 16.3 225.0
13 13
I — m Et -
200.0
36.6
10
150.0 124.0
50.0
100.0
50.0
0.0 0.0
1
X5 05 _C 05 Zi V)
0-1 1-5 5-10 >10 05
C -C tn)
^ Q £ <3
b 05
mtpa mtpa mtpa mtpa (/)O _c X5 X5
05 05
05 -M
05 05 05 I—
_c _c
_c 05
No of Mines (LHS)
U
— Cumulative Peak Rated Capacity (RHS)
Source: M S T C , C M P D I, PIB, M inistry of Coal, T R W -M o P S W
I 25
Exhibit 1.14 | Low, Base and High case scenarios for Thermal coal imports
Volume (M TP A )1
1,320 1,465 1,610
910
phi
FY’19 FY 30 (Low ) FY 30 (B ase) FY 30 (H ig h )
I C o al im p orts I Dom estic production
Key drivers/
assum ptions
-6 0 % coal-based energy m ix; -7 0 % coal-based energy m ix

Consum ption Energy efficient scenario;
n om inal growth in R E (status quo); low R E scale up
dem and R E driving -5 0 % energy m ix
adoption due to interm ittent nature
Key
1 Bn capacity from Cl L;
drivers -0 .9 Bn capacity from Cl L;
-0 .9 Bn capacity from Cl L; o n ly -1 2 5 M T P A from
D om estic o n ly -1 7 5 M T P A from
-2 2 5 M T P A addition from com m ercial blocks due to
production com m ercial blocks due to
com m ercial blocks auction delays + stripping
high stripping ratio issues
ratio issues
TR W -M o P S W
Coking coal:
^ Key drivers analysed12

D om estic • As per the National Steel Policy and steel industry experts, the total domestic
steel steel throughput is expected to reach -2 55 M TPA by 2030 (Exhibit 1.19)
production • -60-80% of steel production is likely to be based on Blast Furnace operations,
(coal which will further drive the demand of coking coal by -1 05 to 140 M TPA by
dem and) 2030
D om estic . to 20 M TPA of coal capacity addition is expected by 2030 through
coal supply Government of India’s push to improve ash content (from 25-30% to 10-14%)
through operationalisation of coal washeries as required by domestic steel
plants
-7 0 to 115 M TPA imports expected by 2030, driven by variation in coal-based steel operations and
washeries completion (Exhibit 1.15)
O
12 International Energy Agency, M inistry of Coal, N ational Electricity Plan, Coal controller statistics, TR W -M o P S W
26 | D EV ELO P B E S T-IN -C L A S S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E
Coal Coastal Shipping:
The Indian Railways are the primary transporter of coal in the country, and the current mine-power
plant linkages have been designed to optimize railway-based transportation costs. Coastal shipping
opportunities for thermal power plants primarily depend on the following criteria -
Geographic location - Plants located in coastal states - Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka,

Goa, Kerala, Tam il Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh
Type of coal used - Power plants using domestic/blended coal or imported coal are relevant
for potential coastal evaluation. Lignite-based power plants are not relevant as they are
O located at the pit head, and there is limited scope for coastal movement
Key enablers to support coastal shipping for coal are as follows -
Eastern port cluster, comprising of ports at Paradip, Dhamra, etc.to ramp up their coal export
(mechanized) capacity to 100-120 M TP A 13 by 2030
The capacity for coal movement from M CL coal mines in lb valley/Talcher to the Eastern
cluster ports to be ramped up to ~55-65 rakes13 per day by 2030.
Differential pricing structure is required for coastal cargo to improve cost economics and
reduce costs related to 2-leg rail/rake transportation
In total, -100 to 130 M TPA coal (Exhibit 1.16) can be moved through the coastal mode by 2030 with
existing thermal power plants running at 70-80% Plant Load Factor (PLF) and upcoming plants in
Gujarat and Maharashtra running at 50% PLF.
In summary, -3 10-69 5 M TPA Coal traffic is expected by 2030 across scenarios (Exhibit 1.17)
Exhibit 1.15 | Low, Base and High case scenarios for Coking Coal Imports
Volume (M TP A )1
140
77
FY’19 FY 30 (Lo w ) FY 30 (B ase) FY 30 (H ig h )
I Im ports D om estic production
Key drivers/
assum ptions
-6 0 % o f steel production -7 0 % o f steel production -8 0 % o f steel production

Consum ption
driven by Blast Furnace driven by Blast Furnace driven by Blast Furnace
dem and
operations operations operations
K ey ............................................
drivers Coal washeries -1 7 M T P A additional -1 2 M T P A additional - 7 M T P A additional
operations (for washeries capacity; aided by washeries capacity; 3 washeries capacity; 4
dom estic push washeries operationalization washeries operationalization
production) from Govt, to reduce im ports delayed delayed
Source: International Energy Agency, M inistry of Coal, National Electricity Plan, C oal controller statistics, SteelM int,
Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
13 M inistry of Coal, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W ; Detailed technical feasibility study to be done in

collaboration with M inistry of Railways (M o R )
| 27
Exhibit 1.161100 to 130 MTPA coastal shipping potential for coal
M a jo r Ports
□ C u rre n t coastal traffic 2019 (M T P A )
M in o r Ports
□ E stim a ted coastal traffic 2030 (M T P A )
3.1 <1
<1 5 to 8
_ Deendayal
A d d itio n a l p oten tial with W Sikka _ Dahej 28.7 1140 to~55l
W e st Coast pow er plants 0 Magdalla ^Paradip
a d o p tin g coastal sh ippin g D_h_amra i W ith increase in coal h a n d lin g
e.g. G S E C L G a n d h in a g a r, capa city as w ell as rake m o v e m e n t
A d a n i P ow er B a ru c h , etc. fro m M C L fields to eastern ports
Vishakapatnanr
7.8 II10 to 1 5 1 “ I____ 1.8 2 to 6
Mormugao
A d d itio n a l p oten tial with New Mangalore: : 0 Krishnapatnam ;
~3 G W ca p a city addition at >1 26.3 II25 to 30|
; Chennai !
M a h a ra s h tra State pow er
I Karaikal A d d itio n a l ~6 to 8 G W capacity likely
plants w ith coastal
th ro u g h K ris h n a p a tn a m Pow er
adoption
C o rp ., N T P C S im h a d ri plants, etc.
<1 2 to 5
6.4 5 to 10
Source: M inistry of Coal, Expert discussions, T R W -M o P S W

Note: < 1 refers to limited traffic (for both current and 2030 traffic)
2 8 | D E V E LO P B E S T -IN -C L A S S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E
•................................................
Exhibit 1.17 |Coal Traffic Summary for 2030
FY30 E AH values are in M T P A
Base Low / High

S No. Category FY 19 case1 cases1 Key assessm ent drivers highlights
2 C o a l ca te g o ry B o tto m -u p a n a ly s is a n d g ro w th d riv e rs
s tu d y u n d e rta k e n fo r e a c h s u b -c a te g o ry
2.1 Th e rm a l 185 325 130/435 D o m e s tic c o n s u m p tio n : ~ 5 5 -7 0 %

co a l
e n e rg y c o n trib u tio n i.e. 1320 to 1610
M T P A t h e r m a l co a l d e m a n d fo r p o w e r
p la n ts by 2030 (tria n g u la te d w ith C E A
p ro je c tio n s )
• D o m e s tic p ro d u c tio n : ~ 0 .9 -1 B n to n s
e xp e cte d fro m C IL by 2030; e -a u c tio n s
o f c o m m e rc ia l blocks d riv in g ~ 12 5 to
225 M T P A c a p a c ity p o te n tia l
• U p c o m in g t h e r m a l p la n t: 6 -8 G W in A P
c lu s te r by N T P C S im h a d r ia n d
K r is h n a p a tn a m P o w e r C o rp
2. 2 C o k in g 60 95 7 0 /115 • D e m a n d d riv e n by ste e l p ro d u c tio n :

co a l ~255 M T P A ste e l c a p a c ity e xpe cte d by
2030 basis in d u s try m a p p in g
b ro w n fie ld e x p a n s io n s a n d gre e n fie ld
p rojects; ~ 6 0 -8 0 % stee l to be d riv e n by
c o k in g co a l-b a se d B la s t F u rn a c e
o p e ra tio n s
D o m e s tic co a l w a s h e rie s : ~ 2 0 -6 0 %
w a s h e rie s o p e ra tio n a liz a tio n
e s tim a te d basis c u rr e n t p roje cts sta tu s
a n d G o I p u sh fo r th e s a m e to redu ce
im p o rts
2.3 Coal 75 110 100/130

R e g io n -w ise u p c o m in g th e r m a l
co a stal
c a p a c ity m a p p e d fo r p o te n tia l in cre a s e
s h ip p in g
in co asta l s h ip p in g across clu s te rs
• T o u n lo c k a d d itio n a l ~20 M T P A
co a sta l p o te n tia l, key e n a b le rs
id e n tifie d like a d d in g rakes c a p a c ity in
E a s te rn c lu s te r, co st re d u c tio n fo r 2-
leg rake tra n s p o rt, etc.
T o t a l C o a l 320 530 300/680
Source: International Energy Agency, M inistry of Coal, National Electricity Plan, C oal controller statistics, SteelM int,
Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
| 29
1.2.13 Iron Ore fic volume for iron ore by 2030, led by low grade
iron ore exports and relaxation in tariffs in the
Iron ore production in India in 2019 crossed 231
long term (Exhibit 1.20).
M TP A 14 with a growth of 12.9% as compared to
204.7 M TPA in 2018. Indian ports handled about India’s geographical analysis shows further po
85 M TP A 15 of iron ore traffic in 2019, constituting tential to foster iron ore coastal movement from
-5 5 M TPA coastal traffic movement across ports East to West (Exhibit 1.21). A bottom-up analysis
(Exhibit 1.18) for regional cluster-wise current and upcoming
steel capacity provides potential for increase in
India’s steel output, as envisaged by the National
coastal shipping for iron ore across clusters (Ex
Steel Policy, is expected to reach 255 M TPA by
hibit 1.23). Hence, -100 to 110 M TP A 17 coastal
FY2030,thus leading to -4 30 M TPA consumption
movement of iron ore can be expected by 2030,
demand for iron ore (Exhibit 1.19). With most of
primarily driven by increase in steel/pellet pro
the major steel manufacturers in India such se
duction in Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Gujarat
curing iron ore mines in the Eastern hinterland,
and new iron ore blocks operationalizing in East
iron ore/pellets exports are likely to decrease in
ern cluster.
the next decade. Historically, exports of iron ore/
pellets have decreased with approx. 11.3% CAGR In overall, -120-145 M TPA iron ore traffic is ex
in the last 10 years15. In addition, export and im pected by 2030 (Exhibit 1.22)
port tariff duties on high-grade iron ore further
limits the EXIM potential, unless tariff relaxation
is allowed in the long term. For low grade iron
ore, there exists a 2-5% CAGR export growth po
tential16. This leads to 20 to 35 M TP A 17 EXIM traf
Exhibit 1.18 I EXIM Traffic for Iron Ore in FY2019
14 M inistry of Steel A n n u a l Report FY20

15 Indian Ports Association (IP A ) Statistics Reports
16 M inistry of Steel, S te elM int, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
17 Indian Ports Association (IP A ) Statistics Reports
Exhibit 1.19 | Key Elements of the National Steel Policy 2017
.8 .0 % '
300
Preference for C rud e Steel 102 I------------ 1
C a p a c ity(M t)
I I
2017 2031
.7 .1 % -* ’
255
C rud e Steel 97 1
----------- 1
Prod. (M t) l 1 1
2017 2031
e 7.5%—*
230
Finished steel 84 1
----------- 1
D e m a n d (M t) I 1 1
2017 2031
7 .1 % -*
430
Em phasis on Iron ore 165 1
----------- 1
B F / B O F 2 technology c o n sum p tion (M t) l 1 1
2017 2031
1. Cold-rolled grain-oriented 2. Blast Furnace/Basic Oxygen Furnace
Source: M inistry of Steel; National Steel Policy (2017)
Exhibit 1.201Low, Base and High case scenarios for Iron ore exports/imports
Volume (M TP A )2
35.0
30.0 25.0
20.0
nd
1
FY 19 FY 30 (Lo w ) FY 30 (B ase) FY 30 (H ig h )
I Exports Im ports
Key drivers/
assum ptions
A ll m ajor steel com panies have secured captive iron ore m ines; coupled with large price
Im port dem and
spread between Indian and global m arkets (~30$/t diff.)
^ S im ilar trend to continue in s im ila r exports tariffs; ~ 3 % Relaxation in tariffs to dive

Export tariffs o w g ra e iron expo s, C A G R growth in low grade exports; ~ 3 % C A G R growth
d riv e r tariffs continue as in current . , , „ . . . , . , ,
iron dem a n d e.g. from C h in a in low grade iron dem and
tim es ° °
1. <58% Fe content
Source: M inistry of Steel, National Steel Policy (2017), SteelM int, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
I 31
Exhibit 1.211100 to 110 MTPA coastal shipping potential for Iron ore
□ E stim ate d coastal traffic 2030 (M T P A ) i M a jo r Ports
1 M in o r Ports
11.3 1119 to 21|
? Increase in steel 0.2 <1

pro duction across
Deendayal
plants in G u ja ra t
agdala 6.9 27 to 33
19.9 |[~28~to 30l
®Paradip
Dhamra Increase in pellet pro duction
Bro w nfield expansion for Mumbai 0
in East Coast plants coupled
M a h a ra s h tra steel plants Dharamtar 0
Gangavaram w ith n e w iron ore blocks
alo ng w ith m o v e m e n t Jaigad 0 Vishakapatnam op e ra tionalization
fro m new d o m e stic iron
—Mormugao^
ore blocks
11 .8 16 to 18
1.2 3 to 5 New Mangalore|
Bro w nfield expansion for

K a rn a ta ka steel plants alo ng
0.4 <1
with m o v e m e n t fro m new
d o m e stic iron ore blocks
Source: M inistry of Steel, N ational Steel Policy (2017), SteelM int, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
3 2 I D E V E LO P B E S T -IN -C L A S S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E
Exhibit 1.22 | Iron Ore Traffic Summary for 2030
FY30 E A ll valu es are in M T P A
S No. Category FY 19 Base case Low/Best cases Key reasons

3 I ron ore category B o tto m -u p analysis and grow th drivers study
u nde rtaken for each sub-category
3.1 Iron o r e - E X IM 30 25 20/35 A ll m a jo r steel c o m p a n ie s have secured

captive iron ore m in es
E xport and im p o rt tariffs on high-grade
Iron O re lim itin g E X IM v o lu m e
~ 2 -5 % C A G R grow th likely in low grade
iron d e m a n d e.g. fro m C h in a
3.2 Iron ore ■ 55 105 100/110 • Coastal m o ve m e n t constituting -6 5 -7 0 % o f

C oastal total traffic m ovem ent
• Region-wise current and u pcom ing steel
capacity m apped for potential increase in
coastal shipping across clusters
• T o achieve additional -1 0 -1 5 M T P A coastal
potential, key enablers such as additional
h andling capacity at D h aram tar & Jaigad
port, etc.
T o ta l Iron ore 85 130 120/145
Source: M inistry of Steel, N ational Steel Policy (2017), SteelM int, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
1.2.1.4 Containers oped nations have reached more than 65% con-
tainerization levels18. Containerization in India
Since the mid-80s, structural changes in India’s
is set to increase in next 5-10 years with growth
trade policies and the maritime transport sector
in infrastructure (Ports, highways, and railways),
developments have brought high growth for con-
improved multi-modal transportation, and cost
tainerization. As a result, the share of contain
efficiency.
erized traffic in general cargo has increased sig
nificantly. In 2019, the total throughput of Indian Three different scenarios (Low case, Base case,
container terminals reached approximately 16 and High case) (Exhibit 1.23) were forecast basis
Mn T E U s 17, with ports on the West Coast domi key drivers such as varying GDP recovery scenar
nating the container infrastructure and through ios, manufacturing growth potential in India, and
put in India. More than 70% of the country’s con the success of DFCC to push containerization
tainers are handled at the West Coast ports18. etc. Overall, in India, container traffic is expected
to witness 6 % to 10% growth to reach 410 to 620
While India currently is at less than 30% con-
M TP A 18 by 2030 (Exhibit 1.24).
tainerization levels, other developing and devel
—o
18 IHS G lobal Trade flows, E IU data, Expert discussions, T R W -M o P S W
19 M inistry of C om m erce, C e m en t Inform ation System (C IS ), Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
I 33
Exhibit 1.23 | Indian Container Traffic and Growth Projections
Indian container traffic grow ing 1.3- 2.3x o f G D P Container growth projections using estimates for
over 5 year periods GDP growth and container growth multiplier
Low Base High

Econom ic recession
case case case
2.29X 2.21x 1.69X I
0.8X
CAGR India G D P V
20 14 15 14 growth rate
0 j "V " shaped G D P

1995-2000 2000-2005 2005- 2010 2010-2015 2015-2019 "L" shaped G D P " U " shaped G D P
I recovery; boost from
"M ake in India" and
I GDP growth (CAGR, 5 year %) recovery recovery
growth o f mfg.
sector
I Container growth (CAGR, 5 year %)
C ontainer
C o n ta in e r traffic is strong ly correlated
growth rate
w ith G D P (C O R X X 9 5 ) m ultiplier
Container traffic grows between ~1X-2X of G D P in 'M ake in India'

India a successful
Limited mfg. outsourcing
most large and com parable countries m anufacturing shift
campaign
hub (esp.
& Containerization
to India, low m ovem ent from
10 y r container growth m ultiplier '09-'19 containerization
push by D F C C
C hina ) + Success of
launch
DFCC
C ontainer
2 - "0.7 - - e.S -
growth rate
0 scenarios
China Indonesia Japan Russia S.Africa Brazil US
Source: IHS G lobal Trade flows, E IU data, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
Exhibit 1.24 | Low, Base and High case scenarios for Containers
Volume (M TP A )1 6 2 0 .0
505.0
410.0
• 235.0
FY 19 FY 30 (Low ) FY 30 (B ase) FY 30 (H ig h )
Key drivers/
assum ptions
"V" shaped G D P recovery;

India
boost from "M a ke in India"
G D P growth "L" shaped G D P recovery " U " shaped G D P recovery
and growth of
rate
m anufacturing sector
Key
drivers In d ia to becom e successful
Container Lim ited m anufacturing shift Push to 'M ak e in India 1
m anufacturing outsourcing
growth rate to India, low & Containerization push by
hub; success o f D F C C to
m ultiplier containerization D F C C launch
push containerization
Source: IHS G lobal Tra d e flows, EIU data, Expert discussions, T R W -M o P S W

1.2.1.5 O th e r co m m o d itie s (Coastal shipping) social and physical infrastructure develop
ment (Exhibit 1.26).
Cem ent:
Total cement capacity is expected to grow at
Cement is a highly cost-sensitive commod
3.5 - 4.5% CAGR to 85-100 M TP A 20 by 2030
ity with production clusters distributed
across 12 supply clusters (based on the loca
across India from where they serve nearby
tion of manufacturing units) (Exhibit 1.27).
regions. Around 65% of the bulk and bagged
In addition to the existing coastal move
cement 20 in the country is transported using
ment routes, the long haul rail movement
the road network which is also the cheapest
from production clusters located in coastal
transport mode until -200 km. The remain
districts of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and
ing cement is transported by rail, most opti
Tam il Nadu to coastal consumption regions
mal over longer lead distances i.e. from 200
of Maharashtra, Kerala, Odisha and West
km to 1400 km. (Exhibit 1.25). Bengal also has the potential to shift to the
Only about -2 % of the cement 20 is transport coastal mode. In summary, 13 to 18 M TPA
ed using coastal shipping, which remains the coastal movement potential exists for ce
most viable mode to transport cement be ment by 2030 (Exhibit 1.28).
yond 1300-1400 km. The coastal movement
Steel
is primarily limited to two large players who
have captive loading jetties in Gujarat with India’s overall steel production is -100
silo infrastructure to optimize costs through M TP A 21 with seven large players (SA IL,TA TA ,
bulk movement. In the next decade, South JSPL, RlNL, ESSA R JSW ,and Bhushan steel)
India is likely to continue as the largest re contributing -6 0 % of the total production.
gion for cement consumption, while Central Major long-haul movement of steel is be
& Eastern regions are expected to grow the tween the steel production clusters in East
fastest, aided by robust public spending for ern India to Western and Northern India’s
Exhibit 1.25 |Transporting Cement by coastal means is cheapest

over 1300 Kms
Costs incurred on logistics per ton per km
Cost per km per ton
D is ta n c e (k m )
Road Rail Coastal

(B u lk ) (B u lk )
— Road B a gged R a il Bagged — R a il B u lk — Road B u lk — C o a s ta l

(S id in g a t p la n t) (S id in g a t p la n t)
1. O n ly rail mode where a siding is present at the plant is considered

Source: M inistry of C o m m e rce, C e m e n t Inform ation System (C IS ), Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
—o
20 M inistry of C om m e rce, C e m en t Inform ation System (C IS ), Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
I 35
Exhibit 1.261South India to lead cement consumption followed by Central and
Eastern Regions
FY 2019 FY 2025
©
D e m a n d estim ated based on
G D P grow th , C o nstru ction
grow th and U rb a n iza tio n growth
X X - D em and (M T )
(x x % ) '19-'25 C A G R
CAGR
2019 2025 '19-'25
A ll India 280 380-406 6 -7 .7 %
C e n tra l 46 65-68 7 -8 .3 %
East 53 80-85 8.5 -1 0 %
N orth 53 70-75 6 -7 .3 %
South 74 95-102 5.2-6. 6 %
W est 54 70-75 5 .5 -7 %
G row th > N a tio n a l Average
G row th < N a tio n a l Average
Source: M inistry of C o m m e rce, C e m e n t Inform ation System (C IS ), Expert discussions, T R W -M o P S W
Exhibit 1.27 |Cement Capacity to grow at 3.5 - 4.5% CAGR across India
Summary and Index

Solan - M e g h a la ya & N E
— 0% < T o ta l su pply
-+ 3 % ^
-------- + 4 % —
/0
19 25
19 25
'19-25 growth
(m id-point of
Region range)
N orth 1 0 ( 2% )
South 29 (4 % )
East 31 ( 8 % )
W e st 11 (3 % )
C e n tra l 14 (5 % )
N e w I ntegrated
Existing Integrated
N e w G rin d in g
19 25
E xistin g G rin d in g
1. Includes O P C , PPC and PSC capacities
Source: Source: M inistry of C o m m e rce, C e m e n t Inform ation System (C IS ), Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
Exhibit 1.28 113 to 18 MTPA coastal movement potential for cement
' M a jo r Ports
M in o r Ports
0.1 II 2 to 2.5 I
Kolkata D riven by ~ 9 % grow th likely

1.6 II 1.5 to 2 | in D u rg a p u r su p p ly cluster
Pa rad ip
~ 5 -7 % grow th in • D h a m ra <1 II 1.5 to 2 I
d e m a n d likely; slow M um b a i V
grow th in su pp ly JN P T^ D riven by high grow th

clusters to aid coastal likely in D u rg a p u r and
m o v e m e n t fro m East B ila sp u r su p p ly clusters
0.4
----------- 1 <1 4 to 6
New Mangalore (
^ Chennai
Kam arajar H igh d e m a n d grow th expected in Eastern
h in te rla n d w ith m assive h o u sing and
0.9 II 2.5 to 3 I
in fra stru ctu re led d e v e lo p m e n t
~ 4 -5 % grow th likely ce m e n t
d e m a n d drive n by construction
<1 I 2 to 2.5 I
grow th and u rb a n iza tio n
Source: M inistry of C o m m e rce, C e m e n t Inform ation System (C IS ), Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W

Exhibit 1.29 I Coastal movement for steel becomes viable over 1200 kms
Costs incurred on logistics per ton per km
Rs/ton/km Road Rail Coastal

(Siding at plant)
12
Rail m o re eco n o m ic a l
10
th an road above -4 0 0 km
A v g lead distance for road
8
is 550km Coastal m o re eco n o m ic a l
6 th an rail above - 1 2 0 0 -
1300 km
4
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
Distance
(km)
Road Rail Coastal
Source: M inistry of Steel, National Steel Policy (2017), SteelM int, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
| 37
auto and capital goods production clusters, ment from plants in Hazira to consumption
major cities, and infrastructure project centers of Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Ker
sites. Railways are the most optimal mode ala (Exhibit 1.29).
of transport for the long-haul distribution
The overall modal share for the steel in
of steel products, even for the markets sit
dustry (finished products) is thus skewed
uated near the coast such as M umbai and
towards rail and road, indicating a potential
Ahmedabad. On the other hand, road trans
to create multimodal solutions to enable a
port for steel becomes marginally optimal
shift to the coastal mode. A further deep
for short-haul distribution i.e., below 400
dive into district-wise movement indicates
km. With coastal shipping becoming a via
that 14 to 20 M TP A 21 steel movement can
ble option only beyond 1200 km, the current
be potentially shifted to the coastal mode by
movement is primarily restricted to move
2030 (Exhibit 1.30).
•............................................................................................................................................................................
Exhibit 1.30114 to 20 MTPA coastal movement potential for Steel
□ C u rre n t coastal traffic 2019 (M T P A ) M a jo r Ports

□ Estim ate d coastal traffic 2030 (M T P A ) M in o r Ports
2.5 3 to 3.5 | Q
<1 1 to 1.5
Essar steel pro duction to 0 Deendayal
becom e 1.5X by 2030 # Dahej
0 Hazira i Paradip
across plants in G u ja ra t <1 4 to 6
) Dham ra
; M um bai Q ■
0 Gangavaram j Increase in steel
1 1.0 || 4 to 4.5 |<
® V ish a k a p a tn a m ! pro du ction in Eastern
Jaigad £
C oast plants alo ng w ith rise
M a h a ra s h tra steel plants — M o rm u g a o ® in coastal m o d e adoption
coupled with cost-effective for So u th e rn h in terla n d
N ew Mangalore £
co n su m p tio n poten tial in £ Ka m ar ajar
M u m b a i and T h a n e areas <1 10.5 to 1 1
F a cilita tin g coastal m o v e m e n t

<1 10 .1 to 0 .3 1 fro m th e R IN L plant
<1 II 0 .1 to 0 .3 1 <1 lto 2
Source: M inistry of C o m m e rce, C e m e n t Inform ation System (C IS ), Expert discussions, T R W -M o P S W

Fertilizers
India is the 3rd largest fertilizer producer globally, with ~90% production 22 constituting urea or
complex fertilizers. Around 65% of production comes from coastal plants while the rest is pro
duced along the natural gas pipeline in the hinterlands of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Punjab,
etc. Imports are majorly handled at Deendayal Port (-2 1 % ), Mundra (23%), Kakinada (12%),
Gangavaram ( 8 % ), and Vishakhapatnam (8.5%). Rail has been the primary mode of transport
for long-distance movement of fertilizer, even for movement between coastal plants and coastal
consumption centers. However, to promote coastal shipping, the government has taken some
policy initiatives in the last two years:
Extending Nutrient Based Subsidy (N BS) policy for P and K fertilizers and UFS policy for
urea to coastal and inland waterways. For coastal/inland water movement, the subsidy
provided is equal to notional railway freight from plant/port up to the nearest railhead of
O delivery points
21 M inistry of Steel, National Steel Policy (2017), S te elM int, Expert discussions, T R W -M o P S W
22 M inistry of C hem icals and Fertilizers, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
l E a l Relaxation of cabotage rule for foreign flag Tam il Nadu are the key originating states, while
vessels allowing them to engage in coastal the consumption is spread across the coastal dis
trade of India for the carriage of fertilizers tricts evenly, with Andhra Pradesh as the highest
by sea; subject to the quantity of trade of consumption state (Exhibit 1.32).
fertilizers contributing to at least 50% of
In summary, Total cargo traffic has been estimat
the total cargo on-board the ship
ed in the range o f -1 .8 to -2 .6 Bn ton per annum
The following additional key action items need across 3 scenarios (low case, base case, and high
to be undertaken to support coastal shipping for case) (Exhibit 1.33).
fertilizers -
Using smaller vessels (barges) directly to a

berth/jetty closer to consumption centers
Fast-tracking of reimbursement
mechanism for coastal shipping in the
online system
Representation to G S T council on inverted

duty structure to ensure that owner is
unable to claim complete input credit due
to higher input taxes
A deep-dive into the district-wise movement in
dicates that 5 to 8 M TP A 23 of rail movement can
be potentially shifted to the coastal movement
for fertilizers (Exhibit 1.31). Odisha, Gujarat, and
Exhibit 1.311Increased potential for coastal movement for fertilizers
Illustration: Potential coastal

movement across coastal districts
(Base case scenario) Potential
Key O -D Pairs (M T P A )
T a m il N a d u -A n d h ra
-0 .4
P ro duction by Pradesh
plants near A n d h r a Pradesh - W e st
- 0.2
c o a s t/ T W T Bengal
G u ja ra t - A n d h r a Pradesh -0 .4
D ispatch to O d is h a - B ih a r - 0.2
c o a s ta l/ N W -l/ N E T a m il N a d u - K arn ataka -0 .4
states
G u ja ra t - M a h a ra s h tra -0 .4
r A n d h r a Pradesh - O d is h a -0 .3
A d d re ss a b le coastal K e r a l a - T a m i l N adu -0 .3
sh ip p in g p o te n tia l 1 O d i s h a -A n d h r a Pradesh - 0.2
k T a m il Nadu
Kerala
A n d h r a Pradesh - T a m il
-1 .0 M T P A -0 .4
-0 .6 M T P A N adu
I Destination state
M a h a ra s h tra to G u ja ra t -0 .4
from coastal plant
O th e rs -2 .4
To ta l - 6.0
1. Potential includes m ove m ent to districts w ithin 200 km of coast/100 km of N W -1
Source: M inistry of Chem icals and Fertilizers, Discussion with Port team s, A D B report, Expert discussions, T R W -M o P S W
23 M inistry of C hem icals and Fertilizers, Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
| 39
Exhibit 1.32 |5 to 8 MTPA coastal movement potential for fertilizers
1M a jo r Ports
M in o r Ports
<1 ||0.4to0.6|
£ Kolkata
<1 ||0.8 to 1 . 2 |<
i Dahej
►Hazira S Paradip :
’ D ha m ra !“ <1 110.5 to O.i
I M um bai
<1 II 0.5 to 0.8 J i jnpt • • Gangavaram :

^ V is h a k a p a tn a m 1“
<1 II 1 to 1.5
<1 0.5 to 0.8
1 Chennai
1 Kam arajar
<1 110.8 to 1 .2 1
<1 0.5 to 0.8 V .O .C h id a m b a ra n a r!
Source: M inistry of Chem icals and Fertilizers, Expert discussions, A D B report, TR W -M o P S W

Exhibit 1.33 |2030 Traffic Projections across 3 scenarios

(low case, base case, and high case)
POL, Coal, Iron ore, and

containers driving ~85%
o f overall traffic
FY 11 FY 15 FY 19 FY 30 (Lo w ) FY 30 (B a se ) FY 30 (H ig h )
I POL C oal Iron ore C onta in e rs O thers
1. B TP A - Billion To n s Per A n n u m
40 | D EVELO P BE S T-IN -C LAS S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E

1.2.2 Growth in Cargo Traffic at Port er commodities as well. Below exhibits describe
the anticipated growth in cargo traffic across key
Clusters
commodities in the next decade for each of the
All Indian ports along the coastline have been eight clusters. (Exhibit 1.35-1.39).
distributed into eight port clusters (Exhibit 1.34)
for Origin-Destination (O D ) analysis. 1.2.3 Capacity Planning and
These clusters serve either as origin or destina Augmentation
tion points for cargo. O D analysis for commod Towards the end of FY 19, the aggregate capaci
ities has been conducted on a point-to-port or ty of Major Ports was 1452.64 M TP A 25 as against
port-to-point in the hinterland basis. For exam 1451.2 M TP A 25 in FY 18. According to internation
ple, for Crude oil O D analysis, 1200+ coal fueled al standards, port capacity should be 30% higher
power plants in India were mapped for potential than cargo traffic to provide efficient services and
status in the next decade (capacity additions, lower the average turnaround and pre-berthing
operational status, process type, raw material time. Major Ports’ capacity has been enhanced
forecasts, etc.). Also, all operational and upcom consistently to meet growing traffic needs, but
ing coal fields were analyzed to understand the the increase in traffic has not been proportional
domestic production potential in each regional to the increase in capacity. Exhibit 1.40 below de
cluster. This was used to project in thermal coal picts cargo traffic and capacity utilization across
imports potential across regional clusters. Major Ports during 2018-19.
Similar approach has been replicated across oth Each Major Port shall consider commodity-wise
Exhibit 1.34 | Eight port clusters along the coastline for Origin-Destination
analysis
M a jo r Ports
M in o r Ports
Source: TR W -M o P S W
24 Traffic and Research W ing, M inistry of Ports, S h ip ping and Waterways

| 41
Exhibit 1.35 |Cluster-wise potential POL Traffic by 2030
i M a jo r Ports
M in o r Ports
□ Projected traffic 2030 (M T P A )
M undra
^^Deendayal
G u ja ra t cluster 0 Kolkata
Vadinar ® » s i k k a - Dahej
Haldia W e st Bengal &
310-330 P ip a v a v # J JH a z ira i Par ad ip
« Dham ra O d is h a cluster
M um b a i \ I Gopalpur
N orth M H c lu s t e r ^ 70-90
Gangavaram
60-70 Jaigad ® : I ™ Vishakapatnam
'K a k in a d a N orth A P cluster
| M orm ugao 0 :
S outh M H and G o a c lu s te n 30-40
Krishnapatnam
Kattupalli
0-5 N ew Mangalore 0 : Kam arajar iSouth A P and N orth T N cluster
Chennai
Karaikal 30-40
! Cochin .................s
0 V .O .C h id a m b a ra n a r:
K a rn a ta k a clusteri ■ ■------------------------- i
40-50 1 30-40 I
1. FY30 Base case traffic scenario undertaken for cluster-wise m odelling and segmentation
Source: Expert discussions, TR W -M o P S W
Exhibit 1.361Cluster-wise potential Coal Traffic by 2030
' M a jo r Ports
□ T h e r m a l coal traffic 2030 (M T P A )
M in o r Ports
□ C o k in g coal traffic 2030 (M T P A )
W e st Bengal & O d is h a
cluster
M undra 150-170 40-50

G u ja ra t cluster • • Deendayal 0 Kolkata
adinar •»sik- - D ahej
Sikka Increase in coal h a n d lin g
Haldia
45-55 0-5 capacity as w ell as rake
P ip a v a v # J jH a z ira j
0 Paradip
£
Dham ra
m o v e m e n t fro m M C L fields
M um b a i \ :0 Gopalpur
N orth M H cluster
Gangavaram
N orth A P cluster
0-5 0-5 Jaigad ^ : I * Vishakapatnam
'K a k in a d a 15-25 25-35
; M orm ugao £ :
S outh M H and G o a cluster' South A P and N orth T N cluster
Krishnapatnam
>
Kattupalli
30-40 0-5 New Mangalore 0 i Kam arajar 110-130 0-5
Chennai
A d d itio n a l ~6 to 8 G W capacity likely
: Cochin th ro u g h K ris h n a p a tn a m Pow er C o rp .,
0 V .O .C h id a m b a ra n a r: N T P C S im h a d ri plants, etc.
K a rn a ta k a cluster S outh T N and K e rala cluster
0-5 0-5 20-30 0-5

Exhibit 1.37 |Cluster-wise potential Iron Ore Traffic by 2030
M a jo r Ports
M in o r Ports
□ Projected traffic 2030 (M T P A )
cluster
Additional Essar pellet

capacity; new iron ore
blocks operationalization
B ro w nfie ld expansion for Karnataka'

steel plants a lo n g with m o v e m e n t
fro m ne w d o m e stic iron ore blocks
K a rn a ta k a cluster : ..................................................... r i
0-5 1 0-5
Exhibit 1.38 |Cluster-wise potential Container Traffic by 2030
M a jo r Ports
M in o r Ports
□ Projected traffic 2030 (M n T E U s )
cluster
0-3
G u ja ra t cluster
Additional Essar pellet
10-20 capacity; new iron ore
M um bai # _*• u - :
■0 Gopalpur blocks operationalization
N orth M H clu s te r! >- im dt w ^ D i g h i :
Gangavaram
5-10 Jaigad ® : a ™ Vishakapatnam
^ K a k in a d a ►N o rth A P cluster
| M orm ugao ^ :
S outh M H and G o a cluster'
0-3
B ro w nfie ld expansion for K arn ataka

steel plants a lo n g w ith m o v e m e n t
fro m ne w d o m e stic iron ore blocks
K a rn a ta k a cluster'
0-3
|43
Exhibit 1.39 |Cluster-wise potential Traffic Scenario for Key Commodities by
2030
Volume (M TP A ) 7 1 0 -7 3 0
4 0 0 -4 2 0
2 1 0 -2 3 0
0 -5
jo -5
1 5 0 -1 7 0 0 -5
$ 0 -5 /
r O -5
l°-5
■ 2 0 -3 0 1
7 0 -8 0 I0'5
l £ n - e;
M M
E
1
1 0 0 -11 0 u,
4 0 -5 0
6 0 -7 0 ^ 1U-2U |
1 4 0 -5 0 3 0 -4 0 I
W e st Bengal N orth A P South A P South T N and K arn ataka South M H & N orth M H G u ja ra t
& O d is h a cluster & N orth K e rala cluster cluster G o a cluster cluster cluster
cluster T N cluster
C o k in g C oal Iron O re Steel O th e rs
C o n ta in e rs POL T h e rm a l Coal
capacity requirements in line with potential Potential areas for capacity expansion have been
growth in traffic in next decade and reduce inef identified through a multi-variate assessment
ficiencies like pre-berthing delays, high TR T, etc. (Exhibit 1.41) for each commodity driven by two
Exhibit 1.40 |Cargo traffic and capacity utilization across Major Ports during
2018-19
S. Capacity
Port/state Capacity (M TPA) Traffic handled (M TPA)
NO. Utilization (%)
1 S M P K o lkata 8 0.8 63.76 79.0
2 P a ra d ip 233.0 109.30 46.9
3 V is h a k h a p a tn a m 126.9 65.30 51.5
4 K a m a ra ja r 9 1.1 34.50 37.9
5 Chennai 133.6 53.01 3 9.7
6 V.O . C h id a m b a ra n a r 9 5.0 3 4.3 4 36.1
7 C o c h in 7 3.6 32.02 43.5
8 N e w M a n g a lo re 9 8 .4 4 2.51 43 .2
9 M o rm u g a o 62.5 17.68 28.3
10 JN P T 118.3 70.71 5 9.8
11 M um bai 7 8.4 60.63 77.3
12 D eendayal 261.1 115.40 44 .2
All ports 1452.6 699.2 48.1

•.........................................................................................................................................................
Exhibit 1.411Capacity Expansion prioritization framework
Phase - 1:
10-year projected C A G R for FY30 (% ) Im m e d ia te priority
------------- i --------------
Phase - III: M e d iu m
to lon g-te rm priority ►JN P T (C T)
\ ♦ KPL (Coal)
♦ PPT (Coal)
\ CoPT (C T )
• KoPT (C T )
f ---------- V oCPT ( C T ) -
I DP T ( C T ) - ♦ -C h P T (C T ) ♦ KoPT (Coal)
I V oCPT (Coal) I
I KPL (C T ) N M P T (Coal) I
I V P T (Coal) I
RPT
T ((C T )I M oPT (Coal) *
I • N M P T (P O L) V P T (PO L) PT (PO L)
• ■ M oP T (10) p p j (1 0 )- I V P T (10) V P T (C T )
■1 / CoPT (P O L )_ . D P T (P O L)
j A
!
i
V oCP T (P O L )—
M oPT (PO L)
K P L (P O L )-
N M PT (C T )" t
PPT (P O L)
C h P T (PO L)
rv
N M p T (|0j - " KnPT (P O L)
KoPT I M oPT (C T )
M bP T (PO L)
♦ D P T (Coal)
i
L
TF
40 60 80" 10Q
• C o n ta in e rs Iron ore A POL ♦ Coal Phase - II: S h o rt- C u rre n t capacity u tiliza tion (% )j
te rm p riority
Source: IPA's Port statistics report, Discussion with M ajor ports, TR W -M o P S W
key factors: ports have identified capacity expansion projects

based on the following themes (Exhibit 1.43):
Regional cluster-wise traffic growth
potential in the next 10 years New berth addition in line with cargo
profile
Current capacity utilization for each
commodity across Major Ports Existing berths upgrade to improve
handling capacity
Initiative 1.1:
Existing berths conversion to handle new
Drive capacity expansion across Major
commodities
Ports in phases based on traffic growth O
forecasts As part of MIV 2030, Major Ports need to under
take 423 M TPA capacity addition. A total invest
To ensure that capacity expansion occurs in line
ment cost of over INR 33,400 Cr. has been en
with traffic growth potential across regional clus
visaged for this capacity expansion. Out of this,
ters (Exhibit 1.42) potential areas for capacity
approximately 95% capacity expansion is likely
expansion are identified and prioritized across
to be planned under Public Private Partnership
three phases (Immediate priority, Short-term pri
(PPP)/ Captive mode by Major Ports (Exhibit
ority, and Medium to Long-term priority). Major
1.44).
| 45
* Exhibit 1.42 |Capacity Expansion aligned with potential growth in 2030
traffic
Expansion
opportunities for
Key traffic Key capacity addition future evaluation by
Cluster name growth areas projects by Major ports Major ports
• Containers: 100-120
• ~27 M T P A container
M T P A growth potential • Higher potential for
G u jr a t d u s te r term inal at T u n a Tekra
• POL: 50-70 M T P A containers capacity
• ~60 M T P A POL capacity
growth potential additional
additional at Deendayal
• ~30 M T P container capacity

• Containers: 50-60 M T P A
additional in B M C T (Phase-
N o rth M H growth potential
II) at J N P T
d u s te r • PO L : 10-15 M T P A
• ~10 M T P A POL capacity
growth potential
addition at M um bai
• General Cargo: 10-20
• ~16 M T P A cargo capacity
S o u th M H & M T P A growth potential • Potential to increase
addition via redevelopment
G o a d u s te r • Coal: 20-30 M T P A coal handling capacity
of 4 berth at M orm ugao
growth potential
• 2-5 M T P A container
• New berth traffic potential:
K a rn a ta k a • PO L : 10-15 M T P A
(~7 M T P A POL capacity) ~ 6 M TP A capacity
d u s te r growth potential
addition by FY25 currently planned to
be done in phases
• ~28 M T P A container
capacity via 4 berths
mechanization at
growth potential
V .O .Chidam baranar
S o u th T N and • POL: 5-10 M T P A growth
• ~6 M T P A PO L capacity
K e ra la d u s te r potential
additional at Cochin
• Coal: 10-15 M T P A
• ~9 M T P A bulk capacity
growth potential
addition at
V .O .Chidam baranar
• ~40 M T P A coal capacity
addition through new bulk
term inals and modification
• Coal: 60-80 M T P A
S o u th A P and of iron ore berth at
growth potential
N o rth T N Kamarajar
d u s te r • New Container term inal
growth potential
(~30 M T P A capacity)
additional in Phases at
Kam arajar
• Potential for coal
capacity addition
• POL: 50-10 M T P A
• 3-5 M t Pa container
N o rth A P growth potential • ~5.3 M T P A POL capacity
traffic potential: ~9
d u s te r • Coals: 10-15 M T P A additional by FY22
M T P A capacity
growth potential
currently planned to
be done in phases
14 M T P A container capacity
additional at Kolkata
Containers: 10-15 M T P A
30 M T P A coal capacity
growth potential
additional through berth
Coal: 80-100 M T P A
mechanization and new
W est Bengal & growth potential.
berth additional at Pradip
O ris s a d u s te r Iron ore: 15-20 M T P A
~10 M T P A berth additional
growth potential
for iron ore at Pradip
PO L : 30-40 M T P A
~10 M T P A liquid capacity
growth potential
addition at Kolkata

• Exhibit 1.43 |Capacity Expansion projects identified at Major Ports as part
of MIV 2030
New berths addition in line Existing berths upgrade Existing berths conversion
with expected cargo profile to improve handling capacity to handle new commodities
Extension of IC T T term inal Modification of Iron ore Rejuvenation of K P D berths

Phase - 1
with ~4.5 M T P A container term inal to ~12 M T P A coal for ~5.5 M T P A container
capacity at Cochin port term inal (S IO T L ) at capacity through PPP mode
Kam arajar port at Kolkata Dock Com plex
Extension of B M C T Conversion of Berth 9 to
container term inal with ~30 ~11 M T P A coal handling handle container traffic (12
M T P A capacity on D B F O T capacity addition through M T P A capacity) under PPP
basis at JN P T port Multi-cargo and Bulk mode at V.O.
term inal at Kam arajar port Chidam baranar port
~18 M T P A coal handling
capacity addition through Setting up Floating Cranes /
CB-3 & berths at Kamarajar RM QCs/extended gate
port facilities for ~8.5 M T P A
container capacity addition at
New ~10 M T P A bulk berth Kolkata Dock complex
developm ent for coal
im ports at Paradip port Mechanization of Berth No. 3
(~3.5 M T P A bulk capacity) on
D F B O T basis at H aldia Dock
• Mechanization of 5 berths
(EQ -1, EQ-2, EQ-3, CQ -1, and
CQ -2) for ~23 M T P A coal
capacity addition at Paradip
port
• Mechanization of Berth 3 & 4

for ~16 M T P A container
capacity under PPP mode at
V.O . Chidam baranar port
Construction of 6 O il jetties Pipeline rationalization for 4 Re-development of 1 Iron

Phase - II
at Deendayal dock, 1 SB M at Oil jetties for ~16 M T P A Ore & 3 barge berths to
Vadinar, and 2 product capacity addition at handle general cargo (14
jetties at Vadinar for ~44 Deendayal port M T P A ) on PPP basis at
M T P A PO L and liquids M orm ugao port
capacity at Deendayal port Setup of Floating Storage
Regasification Unit for 5
4 M T P A Fifth Oil berth M T P A capacity expansion at
addition at M um bai port M um bai port
Setting up ~2 M T P A coastal Extension of container

cargo berth at Morm ugao term inal with ~9.5 M T P A
port capacity on D B F O T basis at
Vishakapatnam port
Source: M ajor port team s, T R W -M o P S W
I 47
• Exhibit 1.43 |Capacity Expansion projects identified at Major Ports as part
of MIV 2030
Additional ~4 M T P A m ulti Reconstruction of SCB berth Conversion of ~4.5 M T P A

Phase - III
liquid term inal at Cochin for ~1.5 M T P A POL capacity general cargo berth to
port at Cochin port mechanized fertilizer
handling facility at
Additional ~27 M T P A Mechanization of Berth No. Deendayal port
container term inal in Tu n a 14 for ~6 M T P A container
Tek ra at Deendayal port capacity addition at N M P T
Setting up ~2.5 M T P A Development of ~0.6 M T P A

coastal cargo berth at JN P T LPG term inal at Paradip port
port
Deepening and Optim ization
Addition of liquid cargo of Inner Harbour facilities for
term inal with ~4.5 M T P A ~25 M T P A cargo capacity at
capacity at J N P T port Paradip port
New ~31 M T P A Container N C B III berth mechanization

term inal (in phases) at for ~9 M T P A bulk capacity
Kam arajar port under PPP mode at V.O.
Chidam baranar port
~3 M T P A IO CL captive jetty
at Kam arajar port
Addtion of ~3 M T P A Marine
Liquid Te rm in a l on PPP
basis at Kam arajar port
Additional ~5 M T P A LNG
Te rm in a l in Kukrahatiat
S M P Kolkata port
Setup of liquid cargo jetties

for ~4.5 M T P A capacity at
S M P Kolkata port
2 M T P A Chemicals capacity
expansion in Pir Pau at
M um bai port
Construction of new berth

No. 17 for ~7 M T P A POL
capacity addition at N M P T
New ~10 M T P A iron ore

berth developm ent at
Paradip port
Developm ent of Mahanadi

Riverine Port (Phase-I) for
~21 M T P A capacity at
Paradip port
Developm ent of additional

~5.3 M T P A oil handling
facility at Vishakapatnam
port

Exhibit 1.44 |95% Capacity Expansion at Major Ports planned under PPP/
Captive Mode
m
Capacity
&
Investm ent
• •
PPP/
00
Internal
S No. M ajor Port name Addition (Rs. Crore) Captive resources
o K olkata Port (K D S & H D C ) 27 1408 1285 123
© P aradip Port 89 10213 10213 0

© V isa k h a p a tn a m Port 15 812 633 179
© K a m a ra ja r Port 81 3976 3786 190
© C h e n n a i Port 0 0 0 0
© V .O .C h id a m b a ra n a r Port 37 1207 1207 0
© C och in Port 10 1405 1384 21
© N e w M a n g a lo re Port 13 431 281 150
© M o rm u g a o Port 16 903
©
700 203
M u m b a i Port 11 2062 1946 116
Ja w a h a rla l N e h ru Port 37 3724 3724 0

0 D een d a ya l Port 87 7289 6975 314
To ta l 423 33429 32134 1295

1.3 World-class Mega Ports Deep-draft availability to handle an

increasing num ber of mega-ships in the
As ships become biggerand specialized, ship cost
future
per day will increase to m inimize total transport
-■ 16 meters deep drafts would be essen
costs, total ship time in the port must be reduced.
tial to improve cargo handling capacity
This approach has led to an increasing preference
of Indian Mega Ports as approximately
for Mega Ports across the globe (e.g. Port of
40% of the future fleet order book com
Yangshan, Port of Hedland, etc.) to provide better
prises of ships of 20,000 T E U capacity
infrastructure for faster operations and also
or higher (Exhibit 1.47).
lowered operational costs for ports by at least 10 -
15% (Exhibit 1.45). Effective hinterland connectivity to
facilitate best-in-class evacuation
Currently, India has 5 Major Ports and 2 Non-M a-
jo r Ports with greater than 100 M TP A 26 capacity.
-■ Dwell time for exports in global Mega
There is a significant opportunity for India to set
Ports is approximately 40% lower than
up Mega Ports and compete with global ports.
Indian Ports, thus highlighting the ne
(Exhibit 1.46).
cessity of having an efficient evacuation
network to move high volumes of cargo
To establish Mega Ports in India, three key crite
Land availability to create a sustainable
ria need to be considered -
industrial ecosystem
Global Mega Ports such as Port of Yangshan, Port
of Jebel Ali, etc. have created large industrial
ecosystems (industrial clusters, SEZs, FTZs, etc.)
—o
| 49
Exhibit 1.45 | Mega Ports developed / underway in other advanced maritime
nations
Port o f Singapore
Port o f Rotterdam 955 M T P A Benefits o f M e g a Ports
; 670 M T P A
O - ], 1 0 -1 5 % lower
Port o f Yangshan Port o f Hedland in o p e rational costs
China Australia
A b ility to handle
D rive h in terlan d
e co n o m ic
d e v e lo p m e n t
Source: Respective Port websites; Drew ry M aritim e Advisors Database; Port of Singapore to reach 955 M T P A in phases
Exhibit 1.461India Ports with greater than 100 MTPA capacity
M undra
Deendayal
Port
Jaw aharlal Visakhapat

Nehru Port nam
Krishnapatnam
Chennai
X M a jo r Ports
^ N o n -M a jo r Ports
O C u rre n t capacity
50 | D E V E L O P B E S T-IN -C L A S S P O R T I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
Exhibit 1.47 | Large ship sizes to be the norm in future
C o nta ine rsh ip fleet and o rd e r book by size range
54%
8K 8K to 12K 12K to 16K 16K to 20K >20K
C u rre n t fleet O rd e r book Vessel size ( T E U )
Source: Drew ry A n n u a l Review report, IHS M arkit
around ports to drive higher cargo throughput Based on detailed evaluation across key crite
Four clusters - West Bengal and Odisha, Gujarat, ria for Mega Ports and emerging growth poten
South Andhra Pradesh and North Tam il Nadu, tial of clusters, 3 Mega Ports - Vadhavan-JNPT
and North Maharashtra - have emerged as Cluster, Paradip Port, and Deendayal Port have
high-potential clusters for the next decade (Ex been identified to be developed into Mega Ports
hibit 1.48) basis potential estimates in 1.3.2. with >300 M TP A capacity and Kamarajar is to be
further evaluated in next 1-2 years for additional
Mega Port on the East Coast.
| 51
•.........................................................................................................................................
Exhibit 1.48 | High Potential Traffic Clusters for 2030
© H igh poten tial cluster

# M a jo r Ports
0 M in o r Ports
■G ujarat cluster West Bengal & Odisha c lu s te r-
710-730 400-420
-4 9 0 -4 -6 % -2 1 0 -4 -8 %
M TPA M TP A
M undra [#
Deendayal j Kolkata _
FY'30 FY'30
FY'19
Hazira ; traffic traffic CAGR
Pipavav £ £ Dham ra Haldia j
160-180
-1 1 0 -2 -5 %
M TP A
Gangavaram |— 1
! a “ Visakhapatnam j FY'19 FY'30 FY'30
! ™ Kakinada traffic traffic CAGR
•South A P & North T N c lu ste r-

Krishnapatnam 1
320-340
® Kattupalli : ^ -1 6 0 -5 -8 %
M TP A
W
| $ ------- Kam arajar:
FY'19 FY'30 FY'30 ^ --------C hennai i FY'19 FY'30 FY'30
Karnataka c lu s te r...... South T N and Kerala cluster.............
70-80 0 V.O.Chidambaranafi 150-170

-4 5 -3 -6 % -8 0 -5 -7 %
M TPA M TP A
W
FY'19 FY'30 FY'30 FY'19 FY'30 FY'30
traffic traffic CAGR traffic traffic CAGR
1. FY30 traffic range m entioned basis Base case scenarios; FY30 C A G R range given across Low to High case traffic scenarios
Source: IPA's Port Statistics report
Initiative 1.2: Vadhavan can also act as a gateway port for

EXIM cargo of the Tarapur industrial area
Develop Vadhavan-JNPT cluster (in e.g., steel rods, steel coils, scrap, etc. More
phases) on West Coast with 20m deep over, port-land can be utilized to setup suit
draft and -10,000 hectares of land to able industries such as Agri industries, food
drive industrialization industries, reefer facilities, etc. SEZ status
Vadhavan and JN P T ports have an available and at least 10,000 hectares27 of land acqui
draft of 19m and 16.5m respectively27 and sition are required to create sizeable indus
are therefore well suited for accommodat trial clusters at Vadhavan.
ing larger ships. Given the container traffic Vadhavan port (23 Mn T E U ’s handling ca
potential in North Maharashtra and Gujarat pacity by 2030) and JN P T port (10 Mn TE U
cluster, the Vadhavan-JNPT cluster can act capacity by 2023) should be augmented as
as a Mega Port to upcoming West Coast traf a Mega Port cluster on the West Coast in a
fic. phased manner.
The Vadhavan-JNPT port cluster connects Initiative 1.3:
with DFC and Mahasamrudhi Marg. There
fore, it can cater to cargo from North & Develop Paradip as World-class Dry-
Central India efficiently. It is strategically bulk port on East Coast
situated to cater to primary hinterlands of Paradip is the 2nd largest port in India in
Maharashtra (M um bai, Pune, Nashik, Au terms of overall traffic handled across ports
rangabad, etc.) and secondary hinterlands (112 M TP A 28 in 2019-20) and has 17m draft
of Southern Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. available29 currently with dredging underway
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o
27Jaw aharlal N ehru Port Tru st
to reach 19.8m by 2023. Given the dry-bulk Approximately 1000 acres of land 30 is avail
traffic growth potential in the West Bengal able at Deendayal Port for industrialization
and Odisha cluster, Paradip Port is well-suit purposes. Also, approximately 580 acres of
ed to cater to upcoming traffic on the East land 30 has been identified for township and
Coast. community development.
Paradip is located in close proximity to Ma- Given its suitability as mentioned above, it
hanadi coal fields, hence suitable for coastal is envisaged to develop Deendayal Port (in
transport of coal to southern and western phases) as a World-class Mega Port on the
India. It is also well-connected to serve sev West Coast.
eral steel plants in the hinterland29. Besides,
Paradip is strategically located to cater to
[4Initiative 1.5:
iron ore movement for steel plants in south Evaluate and develop Kamarajar (in
ern and western hinterland. phases) on East Coast
Paradip Port has allocated about 100 acres Kamarajar currently has a m aximum draft of
of land 29 for creating industrial clusters and 16.5m31, with the potential to achieve 18m+
Multi-Modal Logistics Parks (M M L P ). Given for accommodating mega-ships. With adja
its location, it has high potential to set up cent South Andhra Pradesh and North Tam
steel, coal industries, wood-based industries, il Nadu clusters having high growth poten
and Free Trade Warehousing Zones (FTW Z) tial for bulk and container traffic, Kamarajar
in that land parcel. port exhibits high potential to develop into
Given its suitability as mentioned above, another Mega Port on the Southeast Coast.
it is envisaged to develop Paradip Port (in It is also located31 favorably to cater to the
phases) as a World-class Mega Port on the Chennai cluster’s trade needs and the pro
East Coast. posed CBIC (Chennai- Bangalore Industrial
Corridor). Moreover, Kamarajar is also well
3 Initiative 1.4:
connected to multiple thermal power plants
Develop Deendayal - Tuna Tekra in the hinterland like Neyveli Lignite Corpo
(in phases) on West Coast with 19m ration, TA N G E D C O , and more.
deep-draft A study of the surrounding areas and hin
Deendayal Port is the largest in India in terlands demonstrates high potential to set
terms of overall traffic handled (123 M TP A 28 up electronic sector industries, automotive
in 2019-20). The available draft is currently industries, Free Trade Warehousing Zones
15m with the potential30 to reach 18m+. Giv (F TW Z ), and tourism hubs. At least 2,000
en the high traffic growth potential across hectares of land 31 acquisition is required for
commodities in the Gujarat cluster, Deen creating industrial clusters and Multi-Modal
dayal - Tu na Tekra Port cluster can serve Logistics Parks (M M LP ) at Kamarajar.
as a high-potential Mega Port on the west Therefore, a detailed techno-economic fea
coast. sibility study shall be undertaken to finalize
Deendayal Port is located on the Northern a detailed development plan for Kamarajar
Coast of Gujarat, hence well-positioned to as a Mega Port on the East Coast which will
serve both Northern and Western hinter cater to EXIM Trade in Southern India.
lands such as Rajasthan, Delhi-NCR, Punjab These Mega Ports on both East and West Coasts
and Haryana. Efficient rail and road connec will be able to cater to high traffic potential in the
tivity 30 with principal cities like Mumbai, next decade and develop Indian Port’s strategic
Ahmedabad, Surat, Baroda provide efficient importance in the South Asian region (Exhibit
evacuation opportunities for EXIM cargo
1.49).
owners.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o
29 Discussions with Paradip port team
30 Deendayal Port Trust
31 Kam arajar Port Trust
| 53
Exhibit 1.49 | Mega Ports on East and West Coast
Source: IPA's Port Statistics report, Expert discussions
1.4 Transshipment opportunities Given the extra port handling charges incurred
at the transshipment hubs, transshipment of
in India
cargo results in logistic cost inefficiencies for
Indian Ports handled -16.1 Mn T E U s 32 of con Indian industry. The additional port handling
tainer cargo in 2019. Nearly 75% of this car cost is to the tune of USD 80-100 per T E U 34,
go was gateway (12 Mn TE U s ), while -2 5 % was which could be saved if the container was im
transshipped (TS ) enroute to the destination (4.1 ported/exported as direct gateway cargo in
Mn TE U s). Currently, nearly 75% of India’s trans stead of being transshipped.
shipped cargo is handled at ports outside India.
Colombo, Singapore and Klang handle more O p p o rtu n ity to becom e a large
than 85% of this cargo, with Colombo alone han tran ssh ip m e nt hub for trade between
dling approximately 2.5 Mn T E U s 32 (Exhibit 1.50). the US, EU, A frica and Asia
India needs to setup transshipment port alter Container transshipment in Asia mainly oc
native that can match competing international curs on three key routes -
ports with regard to location, draft and overall • US/ Europe to/from the Far East
cost economics. This is essential due to following • Africa to/from Asia, primarily the Far
reasons: East
• US/ Europe to/from India and Indian
A pprox. $200-220 M n 33 o f potential port
subcontinent
revenue (opp ortu nity) loss per a n n u m
The routes to/from Europe and America
Indian ports lose up to $200-220 Mn of po
are the most significant currently, but Afri-
tential revenue each year on transshipment
ca-bound traffic is set to grow faster ( 6 - 7 %)
handling of cargo originating/destined for
over the next decade35. While most of the
India. The loss is even higher when consider
transshipment trade happens in the South
ing the opportunity to handle cargo emerg
East Asian and Middle East clusters, loca
ing from other countries in the region.
tions in Southern India are geographically
Inefficient logistics for a large segm ent an efficient location for transshipment of
o f In dia’s EX IM in d u stry situated in cargo moving to Africa, EU or East Coast of
South India America.

Exhibit 1.501Current Transhipment scenario in India
m 3-100 |
U exc<
cost: to IncJian
e>cporte rs
*
and
P ortofjebel
Ali, Dubai
L: nporte
(2 %)
Indian
Indian Eastern Western
.. Coastline Coastline
International Suez-Far
Colombo Port of Klang,
East Tra d e Route (60%) Malaysia
.........y (3%)
^ Q Port of Singapore
"’N ' & (10%)
XX % % of India cargo transshipm ent Cargo m ovem ent
M itigate risk to Indian trade due to 1.4.1 Key Success Factors for an
d ependence on in te rn a tio n a l ports
Indian Transshipment Hub
With 75% of the country’s transshipment
Globally, countries have carefully planned and
cargo being handled at international ports,
undertaken targeted interventions to ensure
this makes Indian industries vulnerable to
success of a transshipment hub. Several factors
increase in costs, potential inefficiencies,
need to be considered at both port and central
and congestion issues, and creates long
government level to ensure the success of a
term risks for India’s trade competitiveness.
transshipment hub.
A strong economic case therefore exists for en
The Malaysian government undertook a set of
abling a transshipment hub in Southern India
notable interventions 36 to ensure the success of
that can attract Indian and regional transship
Port of Tanjung Pelepas (P TP ) -
ment traffic from the current hubs, save signifi
cant revenue loss, reduce logistics inefficiencies 1. Offered several incentives to get anchor
for Indian trade, reduce risks to country’s export client, APM investing 30% stake in PTP
competitiveness and create an opportunity for and Maersk shifting most operations from
India to become a large hub for Asia-Africa, Asia- Singapore to PTP
US/Europe container traffic trade. 2. Leveraged gateway traffic to its advantage
through duty imposition on trucks going out
of Malaysia to redirect traffic for the PTP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o
33 A ssu m ing $60 to $70 port charges basis current V o C P T and C olom bo port rate ranges
34 Illustration for a cargo m ove m ent from M adurai using trans-shipm ent in C olom bo and shipping to A ntw erp in Europe
35 Drewry M aritim e Advisors A n n u a l Report FY20, Expert discussions
36 A lph alin er database, Expert discussions
3. Focused on high port productivity and Proxim ity to m a ritim e routes37
efficiency right from the design stage
The Suez route accounts for a significant
4. Ensured feeder network availability by share of the total global container traffic
opening the carriage of transshipment flows, and the mainline vessels use this
containers for foreign ship owners from route for transporting cargo between the US,
Port Klang and Tanjung Pelepas to ports in Europe and Asia. Liners prefer m inim um de
Kuching, Bintulu and KK viation from their courses when selecting a
transshipment port. As demonstrated in Ex
Based on learnings from successful global trans
hibit 1.52, it is evident that all current ports
shipment hubs,factors have been identified fora
on the East and West coasts of India are at
transshipment hub which influence routing deci
a distance of greater than 5 hours of voyage
sions of mainliners (Exhibit 1.51):
from the shipping route, which makes these
Ava ila bility o f deep draft locations unattractive for transshipment
as compared to Colombo which is at 0.5-1
Global vessel sizes have significantly in
hours of voyage from the shipping route.
creased in the last decade, and most main
liners typically prefer calling at ports with at Vizinzham, Kanyakumari region and Cam p
least 18m draft. To that end, the availability bell Bay are promising locations given their
of adequate draft has become a crucial fac position at approximately 6-10 Nautical
tor in attracting shipping lines. Miles (N M ) deviation (0.5-1 hours) from the
Suez route.
The current ports in southern India - such
as Cochin and V.O.Chidambaranar - have H in te rlan d connectivity & Gatew ay cargo
insufficient drafts of 14.5m and 14.2m re
The presence of significant assured gateway
spectively. Vizinzham, Kanyakumari region
cargo is often a big factor in liners’ decision
and Campbell Bay, on the other hand, have
to move to a new location since it brings
deep draft potential of ~20m (Exhibit 1.54 ).
down the volume risk. This also becomes a
key differentiator as it drives a larger scale of
•...............................................................................
Exhibit 1.511Factors influencing Routing Decisions of Mainliners
*__ * * ♦
4 f
F
*— ^ iiiii
Availability Proximity to Hinterland Productivity

Positive Ease of Ancillary
of deep draft m aritim e connectivity and
economics Customs services
routes & Gateway of cargo reliability processes (bunkering,
cargo (Add - logistics for ports and taxation crew change,
on to T S ) operations support etc.)
56 I D EVELO P BES T-IN -CLAS S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E

•.........................................................................
Exhibit 1.52 | Mainliners prefer proximity to maritime routes
DP Draft potential
RD M aritim e
route deviation
DP: ~20m
RD: 0.4-0.6 hours
<& C a m p be ll Bay
In terna tion al Suez-

\ Far East Tra d e Route
\
\
-1
operations for the liners and allows them to • Provide an economic incentive for liners
combine their gateway traffic with transship to shift and incur the cost of re-configur-
ment traffic without the need for a feeder ing their routes
movement.
• To counter the cost of additional shipping
A large share of transshipment traffic from time for feeder traffic
South Indian ports, around 40-50%, could be
redirected as gateway cargo at India trans Productivity and reliability for ports
shipment hub, given better logistic cost eco operations
nomics. High productivity and reliability are critical
for mainliners given an hour lost on a vessel
^ Positive econom ics o f cargo logistics
can result in losses of approximately USD
For Indian transshipment hub to be success 5000 - 800038. Productivity and reliability, in
ful in attracting traffic, it is critical to match turn, depends on the design of the port and
the port charges with competing ports, es efficiency of port labor.
pecially Colombo Port. It might be critical
to give a discount over and above the port Ease o f Custom s processes and taxation
charges of Colombo Port for the following support
reasons: Customs clearance process in Indian ports is
perceived to be more complex and time-con-
• To make it economically viable for ship
suming than global ports, which leads to a
ping lines to invest in capital cost of shift
high turnaround time and cargo lead times
ing existing operations (building facili
in India. Simplification and digitization of
ties/infrastructure for employees, office
customs processes are required
buildings, etc.)
3 7 IP A’ s P o r t S t a t i s t i c s r e p o r t , I H G I n t e r n a t i o n a l d a t a b a s e , S e a r a t e s
3 8 IP A’ s P o r t S t a t i s t i c s r e p o r t , I H G I n t e r n a t i o n a l d a t a b a s e , S e a r a t e s
| 57
i Ancillary services Kanyakumari region (5-8 years) under the
guidance of V.O. Chidambaranar port
In addition to infrastructure and reduced
costs, support services also play a crucial • Set up additional transshipment hub in the
role in attracting and retaining mainliner Campbell Bay (5-8 years) in a phased manner
ships such as - • Enhance Transshipment volumes at Cochin
Port (1-2 years)
• Availability of bunkering at a competitive cost
• Ship repair and building 1.5 Infrastructure Modernization
• Crew change services Initiative 1.7:
• Ship channeling and anchorage Accelerate landlord model adoption for
• Off-port and in-port bunkering services berth operations across Major Ports
• Emission monitoring Currently, approximately 28% of the berths across
Major Ports are under PPP/captive mode39, which
Apart from this, India’s transshipment hub’s suc handle around 51% of the total cargo (Exhibit
cess will also depend on its ability to convince 1.54).
a significant shipping liner to become an anchor
client and re-route its traffic from the compet Discussions have led to identification and pri
ing ports. Mainliners take a long-term view and oritization of 39 berths across Major Ports for
consider several factors while deciding their pre landlord model adoption in Phase-1. A detailed
ferred port of call. Consultations with leading implemented roadmap is to be developed by re
shipping liners, Indian and International port op spective ports (Exhibit 1.55).
erators, and other major container ports in the As part of the long term strategic interventions,
world have brought forth the following key imper Major ports need to move to a landlord model
atives that may influence liners to move traffic to and bring in more private sector participation to
a new port in this region: drive operational efficiency.
• ~15-20% lower costs vs. Colombo through
Initiative 1.8:
lower port charges and potential waiver of
service tax (for at least the initial 5 years) Maximizing mechanized bulk berth oper
• One of the top liners as an anchor investor ations across Major Ports
for the port With evolving ship types and increasing parcel
• Ensure high evacuation speed by establishing sizes at ports, loading and discharge rates have
last-mile road and rail connectivity with the to be enhanced in the next decade. It emphasiz
port (for gateway traffic) es the need of increased mechanization at Indi
• Simplification and digitization of customs an ports where all berths should be adequately
processes equipped with high capacity cranes, conveyor
systems, Harbour Mobile Cranes (H M C ’s), grab
Initiative 1.6:
unloaders, etc. Based on learnings from global
Develop a Transshipm ent H ub in Southern ports, five world-class mechanization models to
India be evaluated by Major ports to improve berth
productivity (Exhibit 1.56).
Based on the detailed study of the “ Must-have”
factors highlighted above, Kanyakumari region Considering regional-cluster wise growth poten
and Campbell Bay shows strong potential for a tial for each commodity, current berth occupan
transshipment hub (Exhibit 1.53). A phase-wise cy, draft availability at berth, and berth structural
development approach needs to be undertaken integrity, a framework was used to assess and pri
to ensure success as follows - oritize berths for mechanization. This has led to
• Prioritize development of Vizhinjam in the identification of 21 berths across the Major Ports
short-term (1-3 years) by providing required as high potential candidates for mechanization
support from Central Govt. in Phase-1, and the remaining 87 berths can be
undertaken after re-evaluation in the next 2-3
• Setup additional transshipment hub in the
years (Exhibit 1.57).
3 9 IP A’ s P o r t S t a t i s t i c s r e p o r t F Y 2 0
58 | D e v e l o p B e s t - i n - c l a s s Po r t In f r a s t r u c t u r e
Exhibit 1.53 |Vizhinjam, Kanyakumari and Campbell Bay are strong
contenders for a TS hub
Parameters Campbe^
Bay J ’ VizhinjamChidambaranar
Kanyakumari . V'° ‘Cochin
~14.5m depth;
~14.2m depth;
Availability of can be
~20m depth ~20m depth ~20m depth can be increased
deep-draft increased up
up to 16m
to ~18m
Proxim ity to
4-6 hours; ~7X
m aritim e ~0.4-0.6 6-8 hours; ~11X of
~0.5-1 hours ~0.5-1 hours of
routes (e.g. hours Kanyakumari
voyage tim e voyage tim e Kanyakumari
Suez-far trade voyage tim e region
region
route)
£ £
» J
Key Key Four-laning Connected to
Good connectivity
Hinterland concern - concern - of N H 47 and key
to clusters like
connectivity1 last mile last mile doubling of hinterland
M adurai,
road & rail road & rail rail lines market
Chennai, etc.
connectivity connectivity required of ~6.5 Lakh
TEU s
Positive
economics Need to ensure ~15-20% lower costs vs. Colom bo through lower port charges (at least
of cargo for initial ~5 years)
logistics
Productivity & At par or better vessel turnaround performance w.r.t regional transshipm ent ports
reliability e.g. Colom bo, Singapore, etc.
Ease of Potential waiver of service tax and digitization of customs processes to ensure lower
Processes costs/TAT
Ancillary Provision of additional support services such as bunkering, crew change, ship
services chandling, etc.
*
0
2
m onths2
Resistance &
delayed;
concerns
Other raw
raised by
considerations material
local
and
population
connectivity
issues
1. Basis Discussions with M ajor Ports team s and Industry Experts

2. Estimated tim eline as of A pr'20 (P re -C O V ID ) with respect to announced date of 1st Sept,2018 by M/S A dani Co.
Source: IPA's Port Statistics report, Discussions with M ajor port team s, Drew ry database, Searates, Expert discussions
| 59
Exhibit 1.54 | Percentage of PPP/ Captive berths at Indian Ports
No. o f berths1 in FY20

300
54
52 199
— B—
CO
4-*
o
o
% of berths
under PPP/ 35% 6% 67% 33% 18% 32% 40% 27% 35% 45% 4% 28%
Captive mode
PPP / Captive berth Port operated berth2
1. O n ly operational berths considered as of FY20

2. Port berths include following types - Privately operated (Stevedoring agent) and port operated berths
Source: IPA's Port Statistics report, Discussions with M ajor P o rtTe a m s
Exhibit 1.55 |39 Berths across Major Ports identified for Landlord Model
Adoption
Port Berth details Timelines

Paradip E Q - I , E Q - I I and E Q -I I I 2023
CQ -1, S Q B and CQ-II 2025
Cochin N C B Berth 2025
V. O. Berth 9 and NCB-III 2022

C hidam baranar
Berth 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 2025
Deendayal Berth 1 3 ,1 4 ,1 5 and 16 2025
S M P Kolkata Berth 1, 2, 5, 9 ,1 0 ,1 1 ,1 2 and 14 2025
M orm ugao Berth 9 ,1 0 and 11 2022
N ew M angalore Berth 9 ,1 0 ,1 1 , and 14 2023
Vishakapatnam Berth EQ 7, W Q 7 and W Q 8 2022
JN P T CB-01 and CB-02 2023
1. O n ly operational berths considered as of FY20

2. Port berths include following types - Privately operated (Stevedoring agent) and port operated berths

Exhibit 1.561Mechanization Models to improve Berth Productivity
• r%
•• 4-step approach undertaken for
Situational berth assessment across ports
Model type Model applicability
T A Full G rab discharge cranes Deep draft berths
: mechanization + conveyor/ discharging cape
stacker reclaimer size vessels
+ wagon tippler/loader Berths requiring
productivities o f 50K to
100K TP D
Mobile harbor cranes Moderate draft berths
© + conveyor/ where productivity and >C o m m o d ity grow th
stacker reclaimers + efficiency o f ground potential
W agon tippler/loader operations are a concern
I Partial Mobile harbor cranes Berths where
©I
C u rre n t berth
mechanization productivity is prim ary
O ccu pa n cy >= 50%
/Addition of concern
equipm ent Conveyor systems Berths where ground
l
operations is a concern iDraft >= 10 m eters
Rake loader/tippler Situations with high rake © I
© turn around tim es where Berth structural integrity
rake operations
Feasible berths for /
are a bottleneck
m e ch a n iza tio n /
Source: Expert discussions
Exhibit 1.57 | Mechanization of 21 Berths across Major Ports in Phase 1
S No. Port Berth nam e g No. Port Berth nam e g No. Port Berth name
v. u .
1 N C B III 8 M orm ugao Berth 9 15 P Kolkata B/3
Chidam baranar
2 Paradip Central Quay-11 9 M orm ugao Berth 10 16 Chennai 13A
3 Paradip Central Quay-1 10 Deendayal CJ-16 17 Cochin N C B Berth
South Q uay
4 Paradip 11 Deendayal CJ-15 18 N ew Mangalore Berth 6
Berth
5 Paradip East Quay-111 12 Deendayal CJ-14 19 Vishakapatnam W Q -7
6 Paradip East Quay-1 13 Deendayal CJ-13 20 Vishakapatnam W Q -8
7 M um bai 21 ID 14 S M P Kolkata B/9 21 Paradip East Quay-11
M ajor ports can evaluate berth m echanization through landlord m odel
| 61
I nitiative 1.9: compliant. Hence, all Indian bulk terminals must
target m aximum possible berths as Panamax
Implement terminal wise adequate draft class compliant and a m inim um of one Capesize
strategy in line with cargo profile compliant berth, especially for ports with at least
The shipping industry is moving towards me- one Capesize call per week.
ga-size vessels, with more than 40% of the order
book in next 3-5 years accounted by ships of size
1.6 Conclusion and Summary
20,000 T E U and above4. While a Capesize vessel Four key areas were identified to enable India to
required upwards of 18m draft, draft at Indian meet its EXIM growth requirements as well as
ports varies widely from 7m to 20m1. Ports must have a growing share of the regional and global
increase draft according to the respective cargo maritime trade:
profile.
1. Augment -2 0 % capacity through brownfield
Indian container terminals must target a mini expansion across Major Ports in line with
m um of one berth with 16-16.2m draft and con traffic growth projections for commodities.
tainer terminals with mainline calls must target
2. Develop Mega Ports with World-class
18m+ draft by 2030
infrastructure. 3 Mega Ports - Vadhavan-
For the bulk segment, a significant reduction in JN P T Cluster, Paradip Port,and Deendayal
transportation cost is observed with economies Port with >300 M TPA capacity and Kamarajar
of scale as we move from Panamax to Capesize to be evaluated for additional Mega Port on
vessels. Approximately USD 1 to USD 2 per ton the East Coast.
savings are possible between a full load Pan
3. Operationalize Vizhinjam port in short
amax and small Capesize vessel for coastal &
term and setup additional transhipment
international routes, respectively. Only 60% of
ports in Kanyakumari and Campbell Bay
Indian bulk berths currently are Panamax class
Exhibit 1.58 |Vision 2030 Targets
□=
□=
Category KPI metric Current T a rg e t(2030)
No. of Major ports with 300 M TP A +

- 3 ports1
cargo handling capacity
World class
Mega ports
No. of ports with 18m+ draft availability to
5 9 ports1
handle main line calls
4 Transshipment
hub
% of Indian cargo transshipm ent handled
by Indian ports
25% >75%
ITS Infrastructure % of Cargo handled by PPP/Captive/

5 1% 2 >85%
la modernization O & M parties across Major Ports
1. V a d h a va n -JN P T cluster, Paradip, Deendayal (T u n a Te k ra ) identified as per current estimates

2. Basis all berths data from m ajor ports and IPA's M ajor ports statistics report 2018-19
40 IPA’s Port Statistics report, Discussions with M ajor and N o n -M a jo r Ports

41 Drewry M aritim e Advisors A n n u a l Report, IHS M arkit
62 | D E V E LO P B E S T -IN -C L A S S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E
regions in a phased manner. This will enable As part of Vision 2030, globally benchmarked
India to address the current revenue losses targets have been defined to help India develop
to adjacent transhipment hubs and take best-in-class port infrastructure (Exhibit 1.58).
advantage of its attractive position on global The development of Indian Ports is estimated to
maritime routes. drive cost savings to the tune of INR 6,000-7,000
Cr per annum for EXIM clients and help unlock
4. Modernizing Major Ports infrastructure
INR 70,000 - 75,000 C r worth of potential reve
through PPP model. Key targeted
nue. Further, the augmented operations are esti
improvements include landlord
mated to create an additional -700,000-1,000,000
model acceleration, maximizing berth
jobs in the sector, another compelling reason to
mechanization and increasing draft
undertake the various initiatives identified in this
availability to enable handling of mega ships.
chapter (Exhibit 1.59).
Exhibit 1.59 |Vision 2030 potential Impact
Rationale for estimation of

Potential impact
impact created
4
Impact on -7 ,0 0 ,0 0 0 - Additional jobs Both direct and indirect jobs creation with
econom y 10,00,000 creation1 increasing port throughput
+
4
Im pact on IN R 6,000- Cost savings to Cost savings per annum to EXIM clients with
trade 7,000 Cr. EXIM clients2 reduced cost per T E U of transshipm ent containers
t IN R 1,00,000 -
1,25,000 Cr.
Investment
Investm ent for port capacity augmentation and
developm ent of W orld class infrastructure (M ajor
and N on-m ajor Ports)
Im pact for
ports
Incremental Basis W orld class Mega ports, capacity
IN R 70,000-
1 75,000 Cr.
value unlock
for ports2
augmentation across all ports, and re-gaining
>90% Indian T S cargo from international ports
1. ~505 M T P A of container traffic projected in FY30; 40% T S traffic assum ed; ~90% Indian T S cargo assumed to be handled at
Indian T S hubs; ~$80-$100 per T E U excess cost currently
2. -3 0 0 M T P A at Vadhavan by FY30; ~1030 M T P A capacity addition with Mega ports and brownfield expansion at all ports;
IN R 200 per ton revenue for ports with 60% capacity utilization
I 63

Develop Best-In-class Port Infrastructure

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

Develop Best-In-class Port Infrastructure

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 1

Develop Best-in-class Port

M inistry of Ports, S h ip ping and Waterways | 13

1.2 Traffic Forecast and Capacity Augmentation

Mapping and analysis of industrial capacities

Assessment of potential impact of key

1 Indian Ports Association (IPA ) Statistics report for FY20

Key drivers analysed6

C ru d e oil P e tro le u m LN G C o a s ta l POL

5 Indian Ports Association (IPA) Statistics report for FY20

Refinery Capacity addition (M T P A ) Te n ta tive com pletion

IOC, Koyali/Vadodra 4 2023

IOC, Panipat 10 2021

IOC, Bongaigaon 3 2022

IOC, Paradip 5 2023

HPC, Visakh 7 2021

CPCL, Narimanam 8 2026

NRL, Numaligarh (BPCL) 6 2024

MRPL, Mangalore 3 2022

BPC, BORL-Bina 7 2021

RIL, Jamnagar* 7 2026

RPL (SEZ), Jamnagar 6 2021

EOL, Jamnagar 26 2025

Exhibit 1.3 | Domestic Oil Production to decline by 1% to 3%

Crude oil production (M TP A )1

— Base case — Low case — High case

FY’19 FY’30 (Low) FY’30 (Base) FY’30 (High)

Greenfield ~6 M T P A via Cuddalore ~33% Ratnagiri capacity (20

Key drivers analysed7

LPG consumption demand (MTPA )1 CAGR

— Low case — Base case — High case

Exhibit 1.61LPG infrastructure investment

I M S/H SD ■ Others LPG ParafTin/Petcoke Others

~90 M TP A brownfield capacity ~90 M TP A brownfield capacity; -1 0 5 M TP A expansion capacity;

Key drivers analysed9

-30 to 80 M TPA LNG imports volume likely by 2030 (Exhibit 1.9).

— L o w re n e w a b le s a d o p tio n s c e n a rio — S u s ta in a b le D e v e lo p m e n t S c e n a rio

50 K G 9 8 /2 a n d p riva te s e c to r fie ld s in the

— A— L o w case — Bas e case — Op t i mi s t i c case

FY’19 FY 30 (Lo w ) FY 30 (B ase) FY 30 (H ig h )

I LN G im p o rts Dom estic production

C'nVerS -8 % CA G R growth; eastern

Exhibit 1.10 | POL Traffic Summary for 2030

FY30 E All values are in M T P A

Base Low / High

1.2 Petro 95 130 Imports e.g. LPG (~40% of total im ports)

1.3 LNG 20 55 30/80 NG consumption dem and: ~6% to 10%

1.4 POL 90 100 ~1% C A G R growth likely; ~80% evacuation

Total PO L 430 610 600/685

^ Key drivers analysed

Exhibit 1.111EXIM Coal Traffic in FY2019

Source: IPA's Port statistics report, T R W -M o P S W

10 Indian Ports Association (IP A ) Statistics report for FY20

24 | D EVELO P BES T-IN -CLAS S P O R T IN F R A S T R U C T U R E

Coal Production and Import (M T )

609 639 655 669 72 5

Exhibit 1.13 |Commercial coal blocks auction to reduce imports’ dependence

State-wise distribution from upcoming

Source: M S T C , C M P D I, PIB, M inistry of Coal, T R W -M o P S W

FY’19 FY 30 (Low ) FY 30 (B ase) FY 30 (H ig h )

I C o al im p orts I Dom estic production

-6 0 % coal-based energy m ix; -7 0 % coal-based energy m ix

^ Key drivers analysed12

Geographic location - Plants located in coastal states - Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka,