Indian Port Association (IPA)

*OEJBO1PSUT"TTPDJBUJPO
Coordination of business plans for major ports in India

Consolidated port development plan
Volume 1
Main Report, final version
Prepared by Port of Rotterdam Authority, September 2007
* this page left blank *
Indian Port Development Plan, Volume 1
Executive summary
Observations on the project
The Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways (MOSRTH), which Ministry
is responsible for overseeing the 12 Major Ports in the country, has mandated that
each of the 12 Major Ports develop a Business Plan. Subsequently each of the 12
Major Ports engaged consortia of international and national Consultants to:
1. Prepare a Business Plan for the port that can be implemented without any
government financial support;
2. Install a process for monitoring and reporting progress in achieving results;
3. Provide the capability to update the plan annually to reflect changing
circumstances.
The Indian Ports Association awarded the Port of Rotterdam in March 2006 the
contract to act as Advisor to review the process and results of the preparation of
the Business Plans of the 12 Major Ports. The Indian Ports Association acted as
the contract party and monitored the work of the Advisor.
The overall goal of the development of Business Plans for the 12 Major Ports was:
To transform Indian Ports into world class facilities suited to the
requirements of the future economy of India
This major exercise was conducted in a years time. Where all Consultants
submitted a kind of helicopter view for each port for the years to come, the
Advisor herewith submits his satellite view in this report.
Obviously the quality of the Business Plans varied to some extent. Most reports
were informative and contained many analyses. Some reports were of high quality.
This report is kept as condensed as possible. For more information reference is
made to Volume II, where the Business Plans are summarised, and to the
Business Plans themselves.
Vision and strategy
Vision, mission and strategy were defined for all ports, but in earlier stages of the
project these were not always translated into port development plans and projects.
All missions and visions appeared to be ambitious and most of the ports want to
become the most important or best port in their regions. The port user however,
is not mentioned very often in these missions and visions.
Strategies were developed to achieve the port missions. They can be
characterised as follows:
Many projects were proposed in each port (many NMDP);
Few innovative ideas were launched;
Many organisational improvements were proposed;
Few ports suggested to change the institutional setting;
The strategies focused on the short and medium term and masterplanning
beyond 2014 was mostly lacking.
Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1
ii
Competition
The competitive situation within the Indian port sector can be characterised as
follows:
The Major Ports have a market share of 75% and form a kind of cartel;
There is hardly competition between the Major Ports;
Intermodal competition is virtually lacking due to an insufficient and
inefficient supply of hinterland infrastructure and rolling stock;
Within-port competition is almost absent, JNPT is a welcome exception;
International port competition for transhipment is impossible due to the
high port costs in India and present regulations (cabotage);
There is increasing competition from the private ports and minor ports.
Regarding port competition the following remarks and recommendations can be
made:
Encouragement of competition is strongly related to port reform measures,
which involves a long process;
Quality of services and decrease of costs for the port users should be the
primary goal;
Sufficient port capacity should be created in time;
Efficiency increase is needed, which can easily be achieved when creating a
competitive environment;
Large scale projects such as the development of large container terminals,
should be integrated with hinterland connectivity projects;
Private ports will gain market share, at least on the short term;
Too often Port Trusts are of the opinion that the port who will be first in
developing container terminals, will automatically get the cargo. It should
be realised that the sustainability of a competitive advantage only lasts for
the time needed by another port to offer the same or better facilities and
services.
A general SWOT for the Major Ports was prepared by the Advisor and is presented
below:
iii
Strengths
High growth
High market share
Financial means available
Most ports located at
strategic locations
Weaknesses
Old infrastructure
Limited water depth
Old and inefficient cargo handling
systems
Poor hinterland connections
Rigid institutional framework
High tariffs
Poor quality of services / business
attitude
Overstaffing
Lack of capacity
Lack of extension possibilities
Opportunities
Introduce competition
Huge Indian market, and
landlocked countries in the
North
Improve organisation:
training, IT, downsizing
Port reform more
autonomy
PPP other than BOT
Invest in infrastructure,
lower costs for port users
Invest in total transport
chain
Threats
Private ports
Minor ports
Bureaucracy
Time
SWOT table for the 12 Major Ports
Cargo Forecast
The cargo forecasts were generally of good quality. Most Consultants based the
forecast on an analysis by commodity of historic trends; international, national
and local developments; and competitive position. Most Consultants took the
existing cargo mix as a basis for future forecasts; some also considered
development of new cargo types. Iron ore and containers are the most
competitive markets and the forecasts for these commodities were subject to
most discussions.
The consolidated cargo forecast made by all Consultants is shown in the figure
and table below:
iv
Throughput per Port
2007-08
POL
Iron Ore
Coal
Containers
Fertilisers
Other Cargo
Total
2011-12
2007-08
160,66
95,64
74,49
83,88
15,34
80,44
510,47
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2025-26
2011-12
216,51
108,97
126,68
161,38
19,76
106,11
739,41
2025-26
335,95
139,52
189,61
679,97
37,20
212,82
1595,07
Consolidated cargo forecast in M Tons
As can be seen from this figure the most Eastern and Western ports show the
highest throughputs thanks to their vicinity to the large hinterland in the North.
The Southern ports have a smaller hinterland but they are located close to the
main international shipping routes, which could be an opportunity for the future.
Compared to the NMDP forecast prepared earlier, the Consultants predicted a port
throughput which on average was 18% higher.
With respect to the container market the following observations can be made:
Capacity for container handling at the Major Ports is limited. The largest
one: JNPT, is predicted to reach capacity already by the year 2014;
The upcoming private ports may solve the capacity problem, although it
should be mentioned that not one of them is capable to handle several
millions of TEUs in the near future. Nevertheless it may be expected that
they will be the fastest within the country to create capacity. A choice
could be made: should this be left to the private sector or:
Should the Government create new major (container) ports on the East
and West Coast?
Make use of economy of scale, India is a suitable country for it;
In the South Ennore seems to be in the best position for relatively easy
container terminal development;
On the East coast: Can the new West Bengal port become a new container
hub?
On the West coast it should be investigated whether new container port

development needs to take place in Gujarat or Maharashtra.
Iron ore is another important commodity, for which the following observations can
be made:
Iron ore is the most important commodity in the port of Mormugao. Also in
New Mangalore, Visak and Paradip it plays an important role;
There is a shift towards the idea of using the iron ore national reserves for
the development of India. The Government policy on exports of iron ore
will determine the throughput volumes in the ports;
Ennore offers opportunities for large scale iron ore facilities.
Port facilities
A land use plan was developed in most ports. However, a clear vision on port
planning and phased development is lacking for some ports.
High BOF (berth occupancy factor) is accepted, sometimes it is the aim to
maximise the BOF where in fact a lowering to 60-70% should be strived for.
This means that congestion is accepted at the expense of port users (and
eventually Indian producers/consumers);
Many ports are at or close to capacity and due to the constraints in
available land, there are few possibilities to expand;
Generally speaking the productivity on the berths is on the low side, a
capacity increase can be achieved through mechanisation of cargo handling
and other efficiency improvement measures. Ports also used to be berthminded: constructing new berths before the capacity of the existing ones
was increased. Fortunately there is presently a greater consciousness
regarding increasing capacity of existing facilities;
The move to a door-to-door concept of containers is not considered;
Short term projects are worked out well;
Masterplans are considered to a limited extent. A land use plan was
developed in most ports. However, a clear vision on port planning and
phased development is lacking for some ports. Development of a detailed
strategic port master plan beyond the scope of this project was
recommended for a few ports only.
Port planning
Some specific remarks can be made with respect to the characteristics and
development possibilities in Major Ports:
Kandla: mid to long term development outside creek is an opportunity;
JNPT: mid to long term development is missing for this Indian main container
port;
Cochin, Tuticorin, and possibly other ports: the backbone concept should be
further investigated. This was one of the very few innovative ideas brought
forward by the Consultants: the development of a railway connectivity for
cargo that could be jointly operated by the private sector and Major Ports. The
Southern Major Ports are closest to the main maritime shipping routes. This
railway line would foresee in fast and reliable transport of (mainly) containers
to and from the North;
vi
Ennore is a major opportunity to become a 3rd generation port on the East

Coast. It is in fact the only port where sufficient space is available to develop
the port into a large worldclass port with basins of sufficient width and
terminals with sufficient back up area. The present danger however is that
long term planning is not taken into account and that the construction of
terminals on the short term might block future developments;
Paradip and Visakhapatnam could possibly be alternative container ports for
North India, again on the condition that an integrated hinterland transport
system, which needs to be fast and reliable, is taken into account;
For old port cities Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai the remark can be made that
little synergy with their original satellite ports JNPT, Haldia, and Ennore is
sought for. It is recommended to look for this synergy;
In this respect it is worthwhile mentioning that both Mumbai and Chennai are
opting for major container port development. Absolute priority should be given
to direct hinterland connections taking into account autonomous traffic growth
in these metropoles;
Plans for transferring outdated port areas in urban developments with
waterfront and warehousing functions are mentioned. This is a logical
development and in case port functions can be shifted to deeper water this
should be encouraged;
For the Port of Kolkata IWT opportunities have not been taken into account.
This should be explored.
Hinterland connectivity
As in many other countries, probably the most important transport/logistics
challenge facing India is its infrastructure. While considerable private sector
investment is now being directed into the development, expansion and
modernisation of Indian ports, the countrys road, rail and inland waterway
systems have suffered from years of neglect and under-investment.
The average cost of freight is relatively high and Indias inadequate transport
infrastructure is holding back economic growth.
The system of distribution containers and containerised cargoes is highly
concentrated with most containers for Delhi and north India being routed through
the Mumbai/JNPT port complex. This route is already one of the busiest domestic
freight arteries in the country. With new container terminal developments in
Gujarat and with decent rail connections to and from the ports of Mundra and
Pipapav this situation is changing gradually.
The Consultants have presented many problems and projects related to hinterland
connectivity, most of them related to the direct vicinity of the port concerned.
Although the Port Trusts are obviously very well aware of the hinterland
connectivity problem within and directly outside the port, it is the impression of
the Advisor that relatively little effort is made to promote and lobby for an
integrated transport system on a national scale. This is clearly a responsibility of
the national Government. It is recommended that the Major Ports would take a
more pro-active approach to safeguard the smooth flow of cargo to the hinterland.
vii
Port organisation and institutional setting

The Consultants have all examined the situation with respect to the internal
organisation of the Port Trusts and recommended many projects for
improvements. Most projects related to:
(the establishment of) the Human Resources Department;
(the establishment of) the Marketing Department;
The improvement of the Information Technology structure.
Unfortunately only few Consultants have looked at the larger picture, which is the
relations with the Ministry, the division of responsibilities and tasks between the
Ministry and the Port Trust, the necessary level of autonomy, and suggestions for
a stronger involvement of the private sector in the Indian ports. The Advisor is of
the opinion that a clear division of responsibilities and tasks, taking into account
an optimal (not maximum) level of autonomy, will form the foundation for the
future of the Major Ports in India.
The present needs are:
There should be an incentive to more competition amongst the Major Ports;
Delegation of powers and responsibilities;
Autonomy in tariff setting and investing;
Fast decision making process;
Operational freedom;
Professionalism.
There are five basic options for port reform. The following is recommended:
1. Improve port organisation. As Consultants have pointed out, there is ample
room for improvement.
2. Liberalisation: is already the case in JNPT and has worked out well.
However, it is not recommended for further activities. On the contrary, in
case the port wants to pursue the landlord model, the public container
terminal would then be transferred to the private sector.
3. Commercialisation: delegation of powers and responsibilities from Ministry
to ports. This is the option where most benefits can be achieved. The shift
to the landlord port management model is the major activity to be
undertaken, whereby the Port Trust will contract out non-core business,
port operations will be transferred to the private sector and whereby the
Port Trust will invest in infrastructure instead of the BOT operator in order
to decrease costs for port users. BOTs should be avoided when sufficient
funds are available.
4. Corporatisation: is a possible step after commercialisation, although less
important. Ennore is the only corporatised Major Port.
5. Privatisation aspects will take place when transferring to the landlord
management model through the sale of superstructural assets. Another
privatisation aspect could be the formation of joint-ventures with private
sector operators in the total transport chain to the hinterland.
viii
Financial issues
Apart from a few Major Ports, the financial position of the Major Ports is very good.
The following observations can be made:
Funds available for investments by ports:
o Over Rs 20.000 Cr in 2014;
o Huge borrowing capacity over Rs 40.000 Cr in 2014;
Future pressure on tariffs due to competition: port tariffs are high due to
the monopolistic situation of the ports. Tariffs will go down when
competition is getting stronger;
Pressure on revenue sharing in BOT contracts will take place due to
competition.Revenue shares are high due to monopolistic situation of the
ports. Revenue shares will go down when competition is getting stronger;
Economic development in India can be stimulated by lower costs and
efficiency improvements, a.o. by applying the landlord model;
Substantial investments in connectivity are needed and have an enormous
positive effect on the economic development of India. Ports can participate
in these connectivity projects, f.i. in the backbone concept;
TAMP-regulation is not stimulating efficiency;
Ports can also participate in other (private) ports when there is limited
room for own expansion;
Especially city-ports can think about expansion outside the city and
development of real estate.
The Advisors recommendations on the financial strategy to be followed are:
Decrease the tariffs in order to improve the competitive position and to
benefit the port users;
Decrease the revenue share in BOT contracts in order to attract terminal
operators;
Invest in port infrastructure according to the landlord port model, in order
to decrease the investment costs for the port operators, therewith making
the port attractive for additional operators as well (increase of competition).
Terminal handling charges could then also be lowered, which is beneficial
for the port users;
Define and implement additional projects; especially in the period 2012-14.
Selected projects and action plans
All Consultants presented extensive analyses and proposed many projects.
However, it was not always clear which ideas originated from the Port and which
ideas were contributed by the Consultant. Many projects were derived from the
NMDP programme, while few innovative ideas were proposed.
Final Conclusions
There is high growth;
There is strong demand;
There are sufficient funds within the ports;
There are sufficient private funds;
Main players have strong interest in India.
ix
Although it will be an exercise of major magnitude, involving a long process, it is

clear that the main boundary conditions are there to establish a new port system
and to implement major works which would transform the Indian Major Ports into
world class facilities.
Contents
1
2
Introduction.......................................................................................... 1
Observations on the project .................................................................... 3
2.1 Aim of the project and parties involved ............................................. 3
2.2 Phasing ........................................................................................ 4
2.3 Results ......................................................................................... 5
3 Vision and Strategy ............................................................................... 8
4 Competition ........................................................................................ 11
4.1 Benchmarking ............................................................................. 11
4.1.1 Characteristics Major Ports in India and NW-Europe ................ 11
4.1.2 Generations of ports ........................................................... 14
4.1.3 Employment ...................................................................... 15
4.1.4 SWOT-Analysis .................................................................. 15
5 Cargo Forecast.................................................................................... 18
5.1 General ...................................................................................... 18
5.2 POL............................................................................................ 23
5.3 Iron Ore ..................................................................................... 24
5.4 Coal ........................................................................................... 25
5.5 Containers .................................................................................. 26
5.6 Fertilisers.................................................................................... 27
5.7 Other cargo................................................................................. 28
5.8 Main observations cargo forecasts .................................................. 29
5.8.1 Port of Kandla.................................................................... 30
5.8.2 Port of Mumbai .................................................................. 31
5.8.3 Jawaharlal Nehru Port ......................................................... 31
5.8.4 Port of Mormugao............................................................... 32
5.8.5 Port of New Mangalore ........................................................ 32
5.8.6 Port of Cochin .................................................................... 33
5.8.7 Port of Tuticorin ................................................................. 33
5.8.8 Port of Chennai .................................................................. 34
5.8.9 Port of Ennore ................................................................... 34
5.8.10 Port of Visakhapatnam ........................................................ 35
5.8.11 Port of Paradip ................................................................... 35
5.8.12 Port of Kolkata ................................................................... 36
6 Port facilities....................................................................................... 37
6.1 General ...................................................................................... 37
6.2 Terminal capacity......................................................................... 37
6.3 Berth Occupancy Factor (BOF) ....................................................... 37
6.4 Benchmarks ................................................................................ 38
For further information reference is made to Annexure 4 of this report. ............ 39
7 Port planning ...................................................................................... 40
7.1 General ...................................................................................... 40
7.2 Port of Kandla.............................................................................. 41
7.2.1 Proposed projects............................................................... 41
7.2.2 Kandla Port layout .............................................................. 41
7.2.3 Main observations .............................................................. 42
7.3 Port of Mumbai ............................................................................ 43
7.3.2 Mumbai Port layout ............................................................ 43
7.4 Jawaharlal Nehru Port ................................................................... 44
7.4.2 Jawaharlal Nehru Port layout................................................ 44
xi
7.5
Port of Mormugao ........................................................................ 46

7.5.2 Mormugao Port layout......................................................... 46
7.6 Port of New Mangalore .................................................................. 49
7.6.2 New Mangalore Port layout .................................................. 49
7.7 Port of Cochin.............................................................................. 51
7.7.2 Cochin Port layout .............................................................. 51
7.8 Port of Tuticorin ........................................................................... 53
7.8.2 Tuticorin Port layout ........................................................... 53
7.9 Port of Chennai ............................................................................ 55
7.9.2 Chennai Port layout ............................................................ 55
7.10 Port of Ennore ............................................................................. 56
7.10.2 Ennore Port layout.............................................................. 56
7.11 Port of Visakhapatnam .................................................................. 57
7.11.2 Visakhapatnam Port layout .................................................. 57
7.12 Port of Paradip............................................................................. 59
7.12.2 Paradip Port layout ............................................................. 59
7.13 Port of Kolkata............................................................................. 61
7.13.2 Kolkata Port layout ............................................................. 61
8 Hinterland connectivity......................................................................... 63
8.1 General ...................................................................................... 63
8.2 Highways .................................................................................... 63
8.3 Railways ..................................................................................... 64
8.4 Inland waterways......................................................................... 64
8.5 Coastal transport and transhipment ................................................ 65
9 Port organisation ................................................................................. 66
9.1 Port organisation.......................................................................... 66
9.2 Port management models.............................................................. 66
9.3 Institutional setting and port reform processes ................................. 67
9.4 Possible future institutional setting ................................................. 70
10 Financial issues ................................................................................... 73
10.1 General ...................................................................................... 73
10.2 Projects ...................................................................................... 74
10.2.1 Investments in fixed assets ................................................. 74
10.2.2 Financial Performance ......................................................... 75
10.2.3 Operating revenue.............................................................. 76
10.2.4 Operating costs.................................................................. 78
10.2.5 Operating margin ............................................................... 80
10.2.6 Total costs ........................................................................ 81
xii
10.2.7 Profit after tax ................................................................... 81

10.3 Financial Situation ........................................................................ 82
10.3.1 Overview .......................................................................... 82
10.3.2 Fixed assets ...................................................................... 83
10.3.3 Investments and liquid means.............................................. 83
10.3.4 Solvency ........................................................................... 84
10.3.5 Long term loans ................................................................. 85
10.4 Comparison with Rotterdam........................................................... 86
10.4.1 General............................................................................. 86
10.4.2 Traffic Forecasts................................................................. 86
10.4.3 Investments in fixed assets ................................................. 87
10.4.4 Revenues .......................................................................... 88
10.4.5 Operating expenses ............................................................ 88
10.4.6 Financial performance: Operating margin and PAT .................. 89
10.4.7 Financial position ............................................................... 90
10.4.8 Solvency ........................................................................... 91
10.5 Financial strategy......................................................................... 91
10.5.1 General............................................................................. 91
10.5.2 Financial Strategy per port .................................................. 93
10.6 Sensitivity analyses ...................................................................... 93
10.6.1 General............................................................................. 93
10.6.2 Revenue share maximized at 20% ........................................ 94
10.6.3 20% Decrease in vessel related charges ................................ 95
10.6.4 20% Decrease in cargo related charges ................................. 96
10.6.5 10% Increase in salary costs ............................................... 96
10.7 TAMP.......................................................................................... 97
10.8 Conclusion .................................................................................. 98
Annex 1 Guidelines to arrive at concessions for Port Services......................... 99
Annex 2 Projects Major Ports in India ........................................................ 105
Annex 3 Projected Profit and Loss account 12 major Ports ............................ 113
Annex 4 Benchmarks .............................................................................. 114
xiii
List of Tables
Table 3.1 Missions & Visions of the 12 Major Ports .................................................. 10
Table 4.1 Comparison KK-range and HH-range ....................................................... 12
Table 4.2 Advisors SWOT-analysis for all major Ports in India .................................. 17
Table 5.1 Consolidated traffic forecasts for three reference periods in M tons .............. 19
Table 5.2 Consultants cargo throughput projections per port in M tons ...................... 20
Table 5.3 Consolidated forecast for POL in M tons ................................................... 23
Table 5.4 Consolidated forecast for Iron Ore in M tons ............................................. 24
Table 5.5 Consolidated forecast for Coal in M tons................................................... 25
Table 5.6 Consolidated forecast for Containers in M tons .......................................... 26
Table 5.7 Consolidated forecast for Fertilisers in M tons ........................................... 27
Table 5.8 Consolidated forecast for Other Cargo in M tons........................................ 28
Table 5.9 Comparison of forecasts per commodity for Major Ports for the reference year
2011-12 in M tons .............................................................................................. 29
Table 5.10 Cargo forecast Port of Kandla in M tons.................................................. 30
Table 5.11 Cargo forecast Port of Mumbai in M tons ................................................ 31
Table 5.12 Cargo forecast Jawaharlal Nehru Port in M tons ....................................... 31
Table 5.13 Cargo forecast Port of Mormugao in M tons ............................................ 32
Table 5.14 Cargo forecast Port of New Mangalore in M tons ...................................... 32
Table 5.15 Cargo forecast Port of Cochin in M tons .................................................. 33
Table 5.16 Cargo forecast Port of Tuticorin in M tons ............................................... 33
Table 5.17 Cargo forecast Port of Chennai in M tons ................................................ 34
Table 5.18 Cargo forecast Port of Ennore in M tons ................................................. 34
Table 5.19 Cargo forecast Port of Visakhapatnam in M tons ...................................... 35
Table 5.20 Cargo forecast Port of Paradip in M tons................................................. 35
Table 5.21 Cargo forecast Port of Kolkata in M tons................................................. 36
Table 6.1 UNCTAD guidelines for BOF for conventional general cargoes ...................... 38
Table 6.2 Reported guidelines for BOF for Major Ports India...................................... 38
Table 6.3 Benchmarks container quay capacity resulting from analysis of Consultants
(TEU/m/yr) ....................................................................................................... 38
Table 6.4 benchmarks container quay capacity (TEU/m/yr) ...................................... 39
Table 6.5 benchmarks productivity iron ore loading ports (tons/hour/loading unit)....... 39
Table 6.6 benchmarks pump capacity crude oil (m3/hour)........................................ 39
Table 10.1 Investments in fixed assets financed by internal resources of the 12 Major
Ports in Rs Crores............................................................................................... 74
Table 10.2 Investments in fixed assets financed by private sector in Rs Crores............ 75
Table 10.3 Extract projected profit and loss account 12 Major Ports in Rs Crores ......... 75
Table 10.4 Revenues all Major Ports 2007-14 in Rs Crores ....................................... 76
Table 10.5 Increase in revenue per category in the period 2007-08 to 2013-14 for all
Major Ports........................................................................................................ 77
Table 10.6 Increase in revenue per Port for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14, in Rs Crores
....................................................................................................................... 77
Table 10.7 Operational revenue at the end of the 13-year period for the 12 Major Ports in
Rs Crores .......................................................................................................... 78
Table 10.8 Operating expenses for the 12 Major Ports for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14
in Rs Crores ...................................................................................................... 78
Table 10.9 Increase in revenue per category in the period 2007-08 to 2013/14 for all
Major Ports........................................................................................................ 79
Table 10.10 Operational expenditure at the end of the 13-year period for the 12 Major
Ports in Rs Crores............................................................................................... 79
Table 10.11 Operating margin for the 12 major Ports for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14
in Rs Crores ...................................................................................................... 80
Table 10.12 Operating margin per port for the years 2007-8 and 2013-14, amounts in Rs
Crores .............................................................................................................. 80
xiv
Table 10.13 Total expenses for 12 Major Ports 2007-08 2013-14 in Rs Crores .......... 81
Table 10.14 Projected profit after tax for the 12 Major Ports for the 7-year period and as
a percentage of revenue, in Rs Crores ................................................................... 81
Table 10.15 Projected profit after tax per port 2007-08 2013-14 in Rs Crores .......... 82
Table 10.16 Projected balance sheet 12 Major Ports 2007-08 2013-14 in Rs Crores .. 83
Table 10.17 Available funds in Rs Crores ............................................................... 84
Table 10.18 Solvency of the 12 Major Ports 2007-08 to 2013-14............................... 84
Table 10.19 Solvency per port.............................................................................. 85
Table 10.20 Long-term loans in Rs Crores.............................................................. 85
Table 10.21 Long term loans per port in Rs Crores .................................................. 85
Table 10.22 Traffic forecast in the Major Ports and in Rotterdam in M tons ................. 86
Table 10.23 Comparison of Revenues Major Ports in India and Rotterdam in Rs Crores. 88
Table 10.24 Operating expenses in Rs Crores ......................................................... 88
Table 10.25 Operating margin in Rs Crores ............................................................ 89
Table 10.26 Profit after tax in Rs Crores ................................................................ 89
Table 10.27 Solvency Major Ports and Rotterdam ................................................... 91
Table 10.28 Available funds for investments in fixed assets in Rs Crores .................... 92
Table 10.29 Investments and funding in Rs Crores .................................................. 93
Table 10.30 Correction revenue share per Port and per year in Rs Crores ................... 94
Table 10.31 Effects of a 20% maximum revenue share in Rs Crores .......................... 95
Table 10.32 Effects of a 20% decrease in vessel related charges in Rs Crores ............. 95
Table 10.33 Effects of a 20% decrease in cargo related charges in Rs Crores .............. 96
Table 10.34 Effects of a 10% increase in salary costs in Rs Crores............................. 97
xv
List of Figures
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
2.1 Scope of the Project .............................................................................. 3

4.1 The 12 Major Ports of India................................................................... 11
4.2 The HH-Range .................................................................................... 12
4.3 Strategy Development Process .............................................................. 16
5.1 consolidated growth per commodity (combined Major Ports)...................... 19
5.2 Throughput per Port in M tons............................................................... 20
5.3 POL-Products & Crude 2007-08 ............................................................. 21
5.4 POL-Products & Crude 2025-26 ............................................................. 21
5.5 Iron ore 2007-08 ................................................................................ 21
5.6 Iron Ore 2025-26 ................................................................................ 21
5.7 Coal 2007-08...................................................................................... 22
5.8 Coal 2025-26...................................................................................... 22
5.9 Container 2007-08 .............................................................................. 22
5.10 Container 2025-26............................................................................. 22
5.11 Market share per Major Port in handling POL ......................................... 23
5.12 Market share per Major Port in handling Iron Ore ................................... 24
5.13 Market share per Major Port in handling Coal ......................................... 25
5.14 Market share per Major Port for handling of Containers ........................... 26
5.15 Market share per Port for handling of Fertilisers ..................................... 27
5.16 Market share per Port for handling of Other Cargo .................................. 28
5.17 Comparison of forecasts per port for reference year 2011-12 ................... 30
7.1 Present layout Port of Kandla ................................................................ 41
7.2 Future layout Port of Kandla ................................................................. 42
7.3 Layout Port of Mumbai ......................................................................... 43
7.4 Present layout Jawaharlal Nehru Port ..................................................... 44
7.5 Future layout Jawaharlal Nehru Port....................................................... 45
7.6 Present layout Port of Mormugao ........................................................... 46
7.7 Possible alternative Masterplan for the Port of Mormugao .......................... 47
7.8 Future layout extension Port of Mormugao (2014).................................... 47
7.9 Future layout extension Port of Mormugao (2025).................................... 48
7.10 Present layout Port of New Mangalore................................................... 49
7.11 Future layout Port of New Mangalore .................................................... 50
7.12 Present layout Port of Cochin............................................................... 51
7.13 Future layout Port of Cochin ................................................................ 52
7.14 Future layout Port of Tuticorin ............................................................. 53
7.15 Masterplan Port of Tuticorin ................................................................ 54
7.16 Present layout Port of Chennai............................................................. 55
7.17 Future layout Port of Ennore ............................................................... 56
7.18 Present layout Port of Visakhapatnam................................................... 57
7.19 Future layout Port of Visakhapatnam .................................................... 58
7.20 Present layout Port of Paradip ............................................................. 59
7.21 Future layout Port of Paradip (one of Masterplan options) ........................ 60
7.22 Present layout Port of Kolkata (NSD) .................................................... 61
7.23 Present layout Port of Kolkata (Haldia) ................................................. 62
9.1 Port Management Models...................................................................... 67
9.2 Port Reform processes and options ........................................................ 68
16
Introduction
The national economic development of India requires a well functioning seaport
system. India has 12 major seaports and 185 minor seaports along a coastline of
over 7.000 km. The 12 Major Ports handle some 75% of the total Indian port
traffic. Due to the foreseen national economic development in the coming decades,
a strong further growth of the Indian port sector is expected.
To be able to cope with the above, the Government of India not only decided to
improve the seaport and hinterland infrastructure but also the institutional and
organisational structure of the port sector.
The overall goal of the development of Business Plans for the 12 Major Ports was:
To transform Indian ports into world class facilities suited to the
requirements of the future economy of India
The Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways (MOSRTH), which Ministry
is responsible for overseeing the 12 Major Ports in the country, has mandated that
each of the 12 Major Ports develop a Business Plan. Subsequently each of the 12
Major Ports engaged consortia of international and national Consultants to:
1. Prepare a Business Plan for the port that can be implemented without any
government financial support;
2. Install a process for monitoring and reporting progress in achieving results;
3. Provide the capability to update the plan annually to reflect changing
circumstances.
The Indian Ports Association awarded the Port of Rotterdam in March 2006 the
contract to act as Advisor to review the process and results of the preparation of
the Business Plans of the 12 Major Ports. The Final Business Plans of the 12 Major
Ports were submitted in the period of March-April 2007.
This consolidated port development plan provides an overview of the work done
by the Consultants. Where the Consultants presented a helicopter view for each
port for the next 7 years, the Advisor herewith presents the overall picture or
satellite view for all Major Ports.
The following remarks need to be made with respect to this report:
This report, consisting of 2 volumes, is kept as condensed as possible, in
view of the enormous scope of the project. It is written for the Indian Ports
Association / MOSRTH and other readers are expected to have a basic
knowledge of the Indian port sector. For more detailed information,
reference is made to the 12 Final Business Plans and where needed to the
underlying Interim Reports and Inception Reports;
Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India
Volume I, the main report, presents the findings, conclusions and

recommendations of the Advisor, based on the 12 Final Business Plans. The
cargo forecasts, the financial projections, the mission statements etc have
been gathered, and for the overall Major Port sector analyses have been
made;
It was not the task of the Advisor to appoint locations for new port
development or to indicate which activities need to be carried out by each
Major Port;
In Volume II the Advisor has summarised each Final Business Plan in an
Annex for each port. It should be noted that most parts in Volume II are
therefore quotes from the Business Plans made by the Consultant. Where
needed the Advisor has presented his specific comments. Each Annex is
finalised by the review made by the Advisor on the Final Business Plan.
This review has been submitted before, directly after the approval of the
Final Business Plan;
When in this report the Port Trusts are mentioned in general terms, it
means that also the Port of Ennore is included, although the Port of Ennore
is a Port Company;
The currency used in this report is Indian Rupee. Ten million rupees or Rs 1
Crore is approximately USD 213.000 (August 2007);
Small differences in tallying for the Cargo Forecasts are the result of
rounding off by the software used;
Starting points for the Traffic Forecasts might be different, however this
does not affect the forecasts.
Observations on the project
2.1
Aim of the project and parties involved

The Ministry of Shipping in MOSRTH of the Government of India has mandated
that each of the 12 Major Ports should develop a Business Plan that:
States a long-term vision for the port that builds on its core strengths;
Establishes the goals to be achieved over the next seven years to satisfy
this vision;
Describes the strategy to be followed to achieve these goals;
Provides a detailed plan of action to implement the strategy;
Identifies sources of financing for all proposed investments.
To this end each Major Port selected a Consultant. As can be seen from the figure
below, the Port Trust concluded a contract with this Consultant. On behalf of the
Ministry of MOSRTH, the Indian Ports Association (IPA) concluded a Contract with
the Advisor. The Consultant therefore officially reported to the Port Trust, while
the Advisor reported to the IPA. Obviously there was also much contact between
the parties along the non-official lines, which was in favour of the progress of the
project.
Indian
Ports
Association
Major Port
Trusts
Contract
Advisor
Contract
Consultant
Port of Rotterdam
Figure 2.1 Scope of the Project
The implementation of the assignment started in March 2006 with a meeting in

Mumbai where all Major Ports were represented and where the Advisor assisted
the Port Trusts in the process to select Consultants. The activities of the Advisor
were executed in close co-operation with the nodal officer being the Managing
Director of IPA and his staff.
The role of the Consultant was to:
Provide a fresh look on port development;
Compare with international benchmarks;
Provide an independent validation of the Business Plan;
Involve counterpart personnel and transfer knowledge.
The Business Plan should include:
A long term vision for the port;
The goals to be achieved over the next 7 years;
The strategy to achieve these goals;

A detailed plan of action;
Financial projections;
A foundation for an annual planning process (the financial model).
For the 12 Major Ports Consultant teams from seven different Consultancy
companies were selected. Most teams were from well known international
companies with a good reputation. In general the Indian branch offices from these
companies conducted the work, whereby in some cases experts from abroad were
involved. In case the Consultancy company was not represented by a branch
office in India, it teamed up with a local Consultancy company. The Consultants
had various backgrounds, unfortunately not all related to strategic port planning
processes. In some cases this resulted in reports which focused too much on the
less relevant core-business of the Consultant, or in reports whereby essential
topics were not covered. This lead to necessary extra work and time, resulting in
revised reports.
The scope of work for the Advisor was:
To assist the Port Trusts in developing a shortlist of Consultants;
To provide a briefing on the approach and planning of the project in each
port;
To review the reports of the Consultants and participate in presentations to
the ports,
To ensure counterpart personnel is involved;
To visit all ports;
To prepare a consolidated port development plan;
To organise seminar on the findings of the project, in co-operation with IPA.
2.2
Phasing
The review of the reports submitted by the Consultants was by far the most timeconsuming part of the assignment. The preparation of the Business Plans was
executed in four phases, each concluded with a report.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Inception phase, providing a description of the actual situation;

Interim phase, providing an overview of planned improvements;
Draft final phase, providing a draft Final Business Plan;
Final phase, providing a substantiated Business Plan.
The Inception phase was concluded in October 2006 and main observations were
reported by the Advisor to IPA. The Interim phase was concluded in December
2006 with presentations by the Consultants for each of the 12 ports. The Draft
Final phase was concluded in March 2007 with the presentations given by the
Consultants on their work. The Final phase was concluded in the beginning of April
2007.
On the 4th of April the Advisor presented his findings during an internal seminar in
Delhi, inaugurated by the Honourable Minister Baalu of MOSRTH and chaired by
the Secretary of Shipping Mr Mohapatra. During this seminar Ministry officials,
port officials, the Consultants and the Advisor were present.
2.3
Results
As stated above, the reports differed substantially due to the various backgrounds
and related experience of the Consultants and not all reports were of sufficient
quality from the start. In a few cases a major effort needed to be made by the
Consultant to improve the report. Nevertheless, in general the Consultants did a
good job under a high time pressure.
The advantages of appointing an Advisor to co-ordinate and monitor the work
done by the Consultants also became clear during the process, in particular after
the Inception phase. The Advisor could control a certain quality level for all
Business Plans, an approach to be followed in all ports and a format which
facilitated the drafting of a consolidated port development plan. In addition, the
Advisor could pay special attention in cases of a combination of a less critical Port
Trust and a less experienced Consultant, to avoid a Business Plan of insufficient
quality. Other regular activities were the participation in the discussions in India
during meetings and presentations of the results of findings by Consultants. In
addition the Advisor provided - where needed recommendations and
suggestions with respect to various issues of the project, such as long term
masterplanning, port land use, calculation reviews on cargo handling operations,
logical sequencing in the set up of the Business Plan, reviews of calculation
financial feasibility, relation between the projects and the financial accounts,
consistency of financial data etc.
The monitoring and review process of this major exercise can be summarised as
follows:
The Consultants have taken the comments made by the Advisor into
account. Thanks to the IPA and the Port Trusts, the phases of the
development of the Business Plans were followed parallel, whereby not one
of the ports was lagging too much behind, compared to the other ports;
The aim of the Business Plan was to provide a stand-alone report in which
all aspects that need to be included were covered. This meant that the
Consultant needed to include parts of the Inception and Interim Report in
order to be complete, but in a condensed or summarised way. Many
Consultants summarised too little of these parts of earlier submitted
reports, with the result that the some Business Plans are too bulky, with
too many details and not well structured;
Obviously the quality of the Business Plans varies to some extent. Most
reports are informative and contain many analyses. Some reports are of
high quality. The format as provided by the Advisor was followed by all
Consultants;
In spite of improvements made during the process, in general illustrative
material was of moderate quality; maps of ports and hinterland regions,
port lay outs, expansion plans, master plans, operations and logistics
schemes, etc;
Vision, mission and strategy have been defined for all ports, but in earlier
stages of the project, these were not always translated into port
development plans and projects. All missions and visions appeared to be
ambitious and most of the ports want to become the most important or
best port in their regions. The port user however, is not mentioned very
often in these missions and visions;
The cargo forecasts were generally of good quality. Most Consultants based
the forecast on an analysis by commodity of historic trends; international,
national and local developments; and competitive position. Most
Consultants took the existing cargo mix as a basis for future forecasts;
some also considered development of new cargo types. Iron ore and
containers are the most competitive markets and the forecasts for these
commodities were subject to most discussions. In particular iron ore is
difficult to forecast, since the policy of the Government on this commodity
is still uncertain. This led to Consultants taking into account a decrease in
iron ore throughput, while others forecasted a strong increase;
During the earlier phases of the project, cargo forecasts were often not
translated in a transparent way into requirements for additional quays,
improved cargo handling facilities or hinterland connectivity. This was
corrected afterwards;
A land use plan was developed in most ports. However, a clear vision on
port planning and phased development is lacking for some ports.
Development of a detailed strategic port master plan beyond the scope of
this project was recommended for a few ports;
All Consultants presented extensive analyses and proposed many projects.
However, it was not always clear which ideas originated from the Port and
which ideas were contributed by the Consultant. Many projects were
derived from the NMDP programme, while few innovative ideas were
proposed;
It was the impression of the Advisor that the co-operation between the
Port Trusts and the Consultants had improved during the process. Some
Consultants and Port Trusts acted as one team. There were also Port Trusts
who were not on one line with the Consultant;
Near the old city ports of Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata new satellite port
have been developed (JNPT, Ennore, Haldia) to allow future expansion,
deep draft and high volume cargo handling. In general little synergy
between the ports were proposed. In particular in the case of Mumbai and
JNPT this was expected since both Business Plans were prepared by the
same Consultant;
In a number of cases the profitability of the Port Trust as State Enterprises
has been highlighted in the considerations on port planning and action
plans. Visions and goals refer in general to more ambitious strategies to
facilitate trade, national and regional economic developments. In general
investments of the facilitating Port Trust are minimal compared to those
indicated for port terminal companies and port users;
The financial models prepared by the Consultants were in general of good

quality. It is essential however that the working of this model is explained
extensively to the counterpart team of the Port Trust in order to adjust the
Business Plans in the near future;
In general several organisational improvements were presented, however
institutional improvements were mostly not included in the report;
The Consultant has performed his scope of work as outlined in the briefing
to the Consultants by IPA and Advisor at the start of the project, to a
satisfactory level. Although the Advisor could not be involved in the day-today co-operation between the Consultant and the Port Trust, the Advisor is
of the opinion that counterpart personnel of the Port Trust has been
sufficiently involved. Furthermore the Advisor considers that the Financial
Model as prepared by the Consultant can serve as a management tool to
adjust the Business Plan in the future where needed.
Vision and Strategy

Not all ports have presented their mission, vision and strategy in this strict sense,
in some cases one of the three is lacking or objectives and/or goals have been
added. Nevertheless, it is clear what the ambitions of the 12 Major Ports are. They
are listed in the table below:
Kandla
Vision:
Kandla Port will emerge as a vibrant, world class, multi-cargo
port offering services at multiple locations and having a
dominant share of regional cargoby virtue of its ability to
effectively leverage its locations and land resources for
facilitating growth of economic activities and investments, with
the objective of developing mutually beneficial and sustainable
linkages with port based industries and users, thereby making
Kandla the driver of economic growth in the region
Mumbai
Vision:
To be amongst the leading world-class multipurpose city-based
ports in South-East Asia by 2025
JNPT
Vision:
To be recognized as India's premier container port providing
integrated logistics services to the best interest of trade and
customers
Mormugao
Vision:
MPT wishes to be the preferred port for the region, recognised
for its environmental policies, efficiency in cargo handling and
service to customers, providing quality of life for the workforce
and support the community
New
Mangalore
Mission:
To become a leading liquid and multi-cargo port by adopting
state-of-the-art technology infrastructure and cargo handling
systems, complying with environmental, social, safety and
security standards
Cochin
Vision:
To be a professional provider of Port Infrastructure and
Services of world class standards
Mission:
The Port of Cochin is the gateway to the West Coast of India
Vision:
The vision of Cochin Port Trust is to see itself, over the next
twenty years, serving the country as:
1. A Business Enterprise
2. An Economic Development Facilitator
3. An Environmental Conservator
4. A Public Service Provider
Tuticorin
Vision:
To be the Preferred Distribution Hub of India
Mission:
TPT shall be South Indias Quality leader in General and Bulk
cargo and the High Speed Container Pipeline Provider for the
Indian backbone
Chennai
Vision:
To be recognized as a futuristic port with foresight
Mission:
Achieve excellence in port operations with state-of-theart technologies.
Enhance competence and enthuse workforce to maximise
customer satisfaction
Anticipate and adapt to the changing global scenario
Act as a catalyst for sustained development of the
region
Ennore
Vision:
Develop as a mega port with world class facilities to become
the Eastern gateway Port of India
Mission:
To execute the following projects (see Volume 2, ch 9.1)
selected to meet the traffic demands and to provide the
supporting infrastructure
Visakhapatnam
Vision:
VPT to be the most preferred port in South Asia offering
services of global standards
Mission statement:
To be a major partner in meeting the logistics requirements of
the importers and exporters in the region
Brand:
The East Coast Gateway
Paradip
Mission:
to facilitate the trade with cost effective services while
maximizing the taxpayers funds
Paradip Port Trust (PPT) has a high potential to become
a leading Hub Port of the Indian East Coast and an
economic thrust engine for the Eastern part of India
within the next 15 to 20 years
This can be attained by leveraging core strengths and
values such as the high draught potential, the rich
minerals hinterland, and the developing economy
PPT is a Public service entity, hence, adding value to the
stakeholders (People of the Country) by facilitating the
economic development and offering cost-effective
services, should be the key mission of the Port

For PPT, the market offers a potential volume of 130 to
190 million tonnes (M tons) of cargo at a Compounded
Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 6% to 8% in the next 20
years. This would place the Paradip as a leading bulk
terminal Port in the world
The Port will have a stable and sustainable growth
during 2017 to 2027 at a CAGR of 4% to 6%
Kolkata
Mission statement:
The mission for KoPT is to be at the top of 3 Major Ports of the
country in terms of profitability starting by 2008 by highlighting
the focus on efficiency along with high traffic volumes.
Vision:
Kolkata Port should be developed as a customer friendly self
sustaining port providing integrated quality services to its
customers while retaining its position as a major sea-river
gateway for the Eastern region of India.
Table 3.1 Missions & Visions of the 12 Major Ports
Summarised, the key words of these statements are the following:

Kandla: world class, multi-cargo, driver of economic growth;
Mumbai: leading world class, multipurpose city based port in SE Asia;
JNPT: Indias premier container port with integrated logistic services;
Mormugao: preferred port for the region;
New Mangalore: a leading liquid and multi-cargo port;
Cochin: gateway to the West Coast of India;
Tuticorin: preferred distribution hub of India;
Chennai: futuristic port with a foresight;
Ennore: to develop as a mega port, Eastern gateway;
Visak: the most preferred port in South Asia;
Paradip: cost effective, maximise taxpayers funds;
Kolkata: major sea-river gateway, quality services.
An analysis of these statements provides the following picture:
All ports are ambitious, all have an offensive approach, not one is
defensive in the sense of trying to maintain markets share for example;
Quality of services and facilities is mentioned ten times;
Nine of the Major Ports want to become the leading or best port in the
region, India, or South East Asia;
(Only) seven ports mention their orientation towards the customers;
In two ports the making of profit is one of the main driving forces.
The following chapters will deal with the translation from these mission
statements into (improved) port facilities, infrastructure and organisation.
10
Competition
4.1
Benchmarking
4.1.1
Characteristics Major Ports in India and NW-Europe

Since the overall goal of the development of Business Plans was that the Indian
ports should be transformed into world class facilities, one of the important
aspects the Consultant had to cover in his work was to provide benchmarks.
In this respect the Advisor also made a comparison between the Indian ports in
general and the Northwest European ports. In India there are 12 Major Ports in
the Kandla Kolkata range, over a coastline of some 7.000 km, while the
Northwest European so called H-H range (Hamburg Le Havre) covers 11 Major
Ports over a coastline of some 1.000 km (see figures below).
Figure 4.1 The 12 Major Ports of India
11
Wilhelmshaven
Amsterdam
Zeebrugge
Bremerhaven
Rotterdam
Antwerp
Ghent
Le Havre
Figure 4.2 The HH-Range
The following comparisons can be made:

KK-range (Kandla Kolkata)
HH-range (Hamburg Le
Havre)
Coastline
Number of Major Ports
Cargo handled in 2006
Hinterland - population
Competition
Port management
7.000 km
12
420 M tons
1.100 million
limited
Public services ports with private
terminals
1.000 km
11
1.020 M tons
200 million
strong
Mostly landlord
Role of the private sector

Cargo handling equipment
Port infrastructure
Marine services
Hinterland connections
weak
Mostly outdated
(almost) at capacity
Public, mostly old equipment
Road and rail, insufficient supply
strong
modern
Spare capacity available
Mostly private
Road, rail, IWT and
pipeline, fierce competition
Industrial port clusters
absent
Logistic clusters
Coming up (SEZs)
Several (a.o. Rotterdam,

Antwerp)
Available, also within the
ports
Table 4.1 Comparison KK-range and HH-range
12
Worldwide the trends with respect to port infrastructure are:

Port development takes place in deeper water due to the trend of larger
vessels applied;
Economy of scale is applied with the focus to decrease the costs per unit,
which lead to larger projects;
Industrial clusters are established to obtain synergy and achieve more
efficiency;
Logistic clusters are established in or near ports, also to achieve more
efficiency;
The role of the private sector is increasing.
Looking at these trends it is clear that the trend towards economy of scale fits
perfectly with the Indian situation. The availability of natural deep water is a
problem, but there is room for large scale industrial and logistic clusters, while the
Government also promotes an increasing role of the private sector. Hence several
boundary conditions for the Indian ports to be transformed into world class
facilities are there, but there is still a major effort to be made. At present the
Indian port sector can be characterised as follows:
The port sector is quite a peculiar market: the 12 Major Ports, falling under
the Ministry of MOSRTH, have a market share of some 75%, and therewith
form a kind of cartel. Major decisions with respect to tariff setting and
investments to be made in infrastructure for example, are made in Delhi.
Traffic forecasts are made in Delhi as well and in some ports there is the
feeling that these forecasts are a target or obligation that needs to be
fulfilled. The Major Ports do not or hardly compete with each other, and all
or most information is shared, including strategic objectives and goals.
There is a limited level of autonomy;
Due to scarcity of port facilities, the port sector is a demand market;
This is also reflected in the role of the private sector: huge revenue shares
are offered to the Port Trusts in order to obtain the possibility to become
operational in the port. The BOT principle, almost nowhere applied in its
purest sense, namely that the private sector invests in all infrastructure, is
applied in India. As such the Port Trust has limited investments to make
mostly dredging but in return receives high revenue shares from the
private sector;
In general and at least until recently, the ports were berth minded. This
means that as soon as a port was reaching capacity, the decision was
taken to construct (an) extra berth(s). The present performance or
efficiency on the berths was not often taken into account, while here the
cheapest and fastest port capacity increase could be achieved;
Minor ports, public ports falling under the States, are sometimes becoming
a fierce competitor for the Major Ports;
The biggest threat is the development of private ports, not hampered by
old infrastructure, bureaucratic procedures and inefficient cargo handling
systems;
Fortunately the newest Major Ports like JNPT and Ennore, serve as an
example for the other Major Ports with respect to efficient cargo handling
operations. JNPT in fact already reached the goal of becoming a world class
13
facility. Ennore, still having much port area, has the potential to become a
world class facility, on the condition that careful long term planning is
taken into account.
4.1.2
Generations of ports
From the comparison of the markets it is clear that India, with its strong economic
growth, is on the brink of a strong increase of cargo throughput in the ports. It is
doubtful whether the Major Ports are able to match this future flow and therefore
it is expected that at least on the short term the Major Ports will lose market
share in favour of the minor ports and the private ports.
An interesting comparison between the Major Ports in India and Northwest Europe
can also be made on the basis of classification of ports according to generations,
as is developed by UNCTAD in the past. This classification should not be confused
between main ports and feeder ports. The size of the port is not the decisive
factor but the character of the port and the attitude and the approach of the port
management related to port development play an important role. The generations
are as follows:
The first generation of ports relate to ports where only cargo handling
takes place. This is the classical type of port, where only the core-activity
of a port is carried out. None of the Major Ports in Northwest Europe still is
of this generation, while in India most of the Major Ports can be classified
as such;
The second generation of ports relate to ports where, apart from cargo
handling of course, also an industrial cluster is established. The industries
import raw materials or half-products and process these to semi-finished or
finished products which are exported again. Often the product of an
industry is used as feedstock for a neighbouring industry, hence optimum
use is made and synergy achieved between industries, industrial services
providers and port facilities. In most Northwest European ports an
industrial cluster of some size is present, while in the Indian Major Ports
these are mostly absent. There are some industries in some ports, but to a
limited extent and mostly existing of power plants and refineries;
In a third generation port the cargo handling remains the backbone of the
port. Besides representing an industrial cluster, the port is also an
integrated platform for trade, logistics and distribution activities. The
characteristics of such a port are:
o Change in management approach from a rather passive offerer of
facilities and services to active concern and participation in overall
trade process;
o Modern handling equipment;
o Availability of industrial, environmental, administrative, and
commercial services;
o Logistic/ distribution services: districentres, EDI, value adding
activities, simplified custom regulations.
From the mission statement of JNPT (see chapter 3) it is clear that the
ambition is to become a port of the third generation. Other Major Ports
have not (yet) expressed this ambition.
14
4.1.3
Employment
Another interesting comparison can be made with respect to employment in the
port. In the final Business Plan for the Port of Kolkata, the total number of
employees in the Major Ports are presented for the year 2005. Since the total
amount of cargo handled in the Major Ports in that year was almost the same as
the cargo handled in the Port of Rotterdam (370 M tons), an interesting
comparison can be made. The differences are considerable:
Employment: in the 11 Port Trusts the total number of employees in
2005 reached 66.000 persons. The Port of Rotterdam Authority
employs 1.200 persons, which obviously is far less due to the fact that
the port is a landlord port. The Port of Rotterdam Authority is therefore
not engaged in cargo handling activities and most of the nautical
services;
Out of the 66.000 persons mentioned above, 21.200 persons were
cargo handling workers. Not included in this number are the cargo
handling workers employed by private BOT operators. Total number of
cargo handling workers in the Port of Rotterdam reaches 6.000. These
are employed by private port operators. This is a remarkable difference,
since the total mixture of commodities in the Major Ports and
Rotterdam is comparable. The main reason for this difference is the
highly mechanised and automated cargo handling systems applied in
Rotterdam;
The total direct employment generated by the Port of Rotterdam is
70.000 persons (authorities, private port operators, agencies, customs,
nautical service providers, industries etc). This figure is of the same
order of magnitude as the 66,000 persons employed by the 11 Port
Trusts, but the difference is that they are divided over many companies,
authorities and organisations;
The total number of indirect employment in Rotterdam is 300.000
persons. Hence for every job within the port, four jobs outside the port
are generated. As a third generation port and therewith a platform for
international trade, the Port of Rotterdam serves as a generator of
employment. The port contributes for 7% to the Dutch GNP, which is
US$ 46 billion. Figures for indirect employment in India are not known.
4.1.4
SWOT-Analysis
Looking at the competitive situation in the Major Ports in India, the following can
be mentioned:
Inter-port competition is limited as far as the other Major Ports are
taken into account. The inter-port competition with the private ports is
getting stronger;
Intermodal transport competition: there is road and rail, but supply is
insufficient and inefficient;
Within port competition: mostly absent (JNPT is an exception, with
three container terminals);
15
Competition with international ports: for a ship call of a 3000 TEU

vessel JNPT is four times more expensive as Colombo. This is
comparable with the other major Ports, hence the Indian ports are not
attractive for international transhipment.
All Consultants have made a SWOT analysis for their port. Many of these analyses
have been performed through workshops involving the various stakeholders of the
ports. Other Major Ports were usually taken into account, also because the ports
are well informed about each others plans and strategies. Other developments
such as the construction of new private ports was usually briefly mentioned and
the impact on the respective port could not, or in most cases was not, established.
Only once, and then in the interim phase of the process, a port made estimates of
the future market shares, thereby taking into account minor as well as private
ports. The role of minor ports as present or future competitors was not mentioned
very often.
EXTERNAL
ANALYSIS
OPPORTUNITIES +
THREATS
SUB-EXTERNAL
ANALYSIS
PORT
SELECTION
CRITERIA
SWOT
MISSION
VISION
STRATEGIE
S
OPTIMAL
BUSINESS
PROFILE
INTERNAL
ANALYSIS
STRENGTHS +
WEAKNESSES
Figure 4.3 Strategy Development Process
In general the Consultants have followed the scheme shown above, which is more
or less the internationally applied methodology for a SWOT analysis.
In this methodology a list of opportunities and threats are obtained from an
external analysis (macro-economic situation, trends and expected relevant
changes) and a sub-external analysis (port related, involving the transport
business, technological, industrial and logistic developments, trends related to the
various commodities, competition, etc). A list of strengths and weaknesses is
obtained from an internal analysis, looking at the overall performance and
facilities of the port, the commercial attitude of the management etc, and these
compared with the optimal business profile the world outside, the port users,
would like the port to have. On the basis of the strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats a realistic mission statement, vision and strategies can
be determined. For the 12 Major Ports these have been listed in chapter 3. As has
been outlined in this chapter, all ports are ambitious, focusing on growth, which
16
seem to be justified taking into account the strong economic growth in the
country.
For the SWOT analyses of the 12 Major Ports reference is made to Volume II. The
Advisor herewith presents his own SWOT analysis of all Major Ports:
Strengths
High growth
High market share
Financial means available
Most ports located at
strategic locations
Weaknesses
Old infrastructure
Limited water depth
Old and inefficient cargo handling
systems
Poor hinterland connections
Rigid institutional framework
High tariffs
Poor quality of services / business
attitude
Overstaffing
Lack of capacity
Lack of extension possibilities
Opportunities
Introduce competition
Huge Indian market, and
landlocked countries in the
North
Improve organisation:
training, IT, downsizing
Port reform more
autonomy
PPP other than BOT
Invest in infrastructure,
lower costs for port users
Invest in total transport
chain
Threats
Private ports
Minor ports
Bureaucracy
Time
Table 4.2 Advisors SWOT-analysis for all major Ports in India
17
Cargo Forecast
5.1
General
The Consultants prepared Final Reports including cargo forecasts for the individual
ports. The horizon of the cargo forecasts appears to be the reference years 202526.
The methods of determining the cargo forecasts in the Final Reports have basically
taken into account the following main factors:
Historic and actual throughputs in terms of types and volumes of
commodities;
Growth of GDP of India and the region;
Particular developments in the hinterland of ports.
Based on these factors the potential forecast of a region or a port was assessed.
In order to realise the potential forecasts possible limitations of the individual
ports were assessed. These limitations can be of different nature.
Physical limitations;
Institutional limitations;
Competition.
Examples of physical limitations are limited water depth, shortage of space, poor
hinterland connections, environmental restrictions, surrounding urban areas. An
example of institutional limitation is the possible restriction set by the GoI on the
exports of the highly demanded iron ore for the benefit of the steel producing
industries in India. With the strong growth of the economy and of the potential
forecast, it is logical that competition is introduced. Existing and/or new minor
(state) and or private ports will be developed aiming at the same sources of
cargoes and aiming at serving the Indian producers and consumers.
In these considerations captive markets have been defined as those market
segments of goods more or less forced to use the port for their supply chain of
goods. The captive market determines the catchment area within which cargo will
be routed via the port in general without hesitation.
The expected traffic scenarios for the individual ports are generated by the various
Consultants taking into account these considerations to various extents.
The main commodities handled via the Indian Major Ports are the following:
Dry bulk: Iron ore and coal;
Liquid bulk: Crude oil and oil products (POL);
Containers.
Apart from these main products a large range of raw materials, semi finished
products and general cargoes appeared in the individual forecasts.
18
The forecasts for the individual ports as prepared by Consultants have been
consolidated as an overall forecast for India per main commodity. This
consolidated forecast per main commodity for all Indian Major Ports is indicated in
Table 5.1 for three reference years. The figures have been given in M tons per
year. From the table it can be seen that in particular the growth expectation of
container throughput is high beyond 2011-12. This particular trend is visualised in
Figure 5.1.
2007-08
160,66
95,64
74,49
83,88
15,34
80,44
510,47
POL
Iron Ore
Coal
Containers
Fertilisers
Other Cargo
Total
2011-12
216,51
108,97
126,68
161,38
19,76
106,11
739,41
2025-26
335,95
139,52
189,61
679,97
37,20
212,82
1595,07
Table 5.1 Consolidated traffic forecasts for three reference periods in M tons
in mTon
Consolidated growth per commodity

800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
POL
Iron Ore
Coal
Containers
Fertilizers
Other Cargo
2007-08
2011-12
2025-26
Year
Figure 5.1 consolidated growth per commodity (combined Major Ports)
In addition to the figures for the consolidated forecast for the main commodities
for all Major Ports, the total cargo throughput projections per individual ports have
been indicated in Figure 5.2 and Table 5.2. The Figure 5.2 indicates particular
strong growth expectations in JNPT, Kolkata, Ennore and Kandla.
19
2007-08
70,63
52,38
49,98
49,15
37,41
15,36
21,20
54,75
11,30
57,70
45,60
45,01
510,47
Kandla
Mumbai
JNPT
Mormugao
New Mangalore
Cochin
Tuticorin
Chennai
Ennore
Visak
Paradip
Kolkata
2011-12
98,13
76,13
88,77
52,25
52,17
24,63
30,80
64,17
40,64
81,70
71,55
58,47
739,41
2025-26
204,51
128,61
305,99
78,30
84,14
53,49
71,80
87,11
136,40
146,80
125,60
172,32
1595,07
Table 5.2 Consultants cargo throughput projections per port in M tons
Throughput per Port
2007-08
2011-12
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2025-26
Figure 5.2 Throughput per Port in M tons
For the main commodity groups as listed in Table 5.1, figures have been prepared
based on the data provided by Consultants on the throughput per port in the
reference years 2007-08 and 2025-26. Reference is made from Figure 5.3 to
Figure 5.10.
Note: the arrows in these figures represent the total of the import as well
as the export flows in the ports.
20
Images of projected POL-traffic, to and from, the most relevant Major Ports are
indicated for the reference years 2007-08 and 2025-26.
Figure 5.3 POL-Products & Crude 2007-08
Figure 5.4 POL-Products & Crude 2025-26
Images of projected Iron Ore traffic, to and from, the most relevant Major Ports
are indicated for the reference years 2007-08 and 2025-26.
Figure 5.5 Iron ore 2007-08
Figure 5.6 Iron Ore 2025-26
21
Images of projected Coal traffic, to and from, the most relevant Major Ports are
indicated for the reference years 2007-08 and 2025-26.
Figure 5.7 Coal 2007-08
Figure 5.8 Coal 2025-26
Images of projected Container traffic, to and from, the most relevant Major Ports
are indicated for the reference years 2007-08 and 2025-26.
Figure 5.9 Container 2007-08
Figure 5.10 Container 2025-26
In the next sections, the Advisor will go more in depth on the forecast of the main
commodities.
22
5.2
POL
India is an important energy consuming country. Oil and gas with a total share of
40% appear to be primary energy sources. POL import amount to some 25% of
the total import of India and POL export some 8% of the total export.
Total
2007-08
160,66
2011-12
216,51
2025-26
335,95
Table 5.3 Consolidated forecast for POL in M tons
Marketshares per Port for POL
40,0%
35,0%
30,0%
25,0%
20,0%
15,0%
10,0%
5,0%
2007-08
2011-12
2025-26
Figure 5.11 Market share per Major Port in handling POL
Table 5.3 shows the consolidated forecast for POL throughput for all Major Ports
as derived from the reports of Consultants. Figures 5.3 and 5.4 indicate the
forecast of POL throughput for the individual ports. The northwest ports of Kandla
and Mumbai and to a less extent the west New Mangalore Port Trust appear to be
the prime ports for POL. The location of these ports relative to the Middle East is
an explanation.
23
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
0,0%
5.3
Iron Ore
Global trade in iron ore has increased with some 505 M tons in the period from
2001 to 2005. Iron ore import by China has grown by 31% per year in this period
in order to feed Chinas steel industry. Australia and Brazil are prime sources of
iron ore. India is another main producer of iron ore catering for the Indian
domestic (steel producing) market and for export. The main mining areas are
located largely in Eastern and Central India (Jharkand, Orissa and Chhatisgarh)
and in Karnataka in South India. Goa and Andhra Pradesh are other iron ore
producing areas.
Total
2007-08
2011-12
2025-26
95,64
108,97
139,52
Table 5.4 Consolidated forecast for Iron Ore in M tons
Market share per Port for Iron Ore
45,0%
40,0%
35,0%
30,0%
25,0%
20,0%
15,0%
10,0%
5,0%
0,0%
2007-08
2011-12
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
2025-26
Figure 5.12 Market share per Major Port in handling Iron Ore
Table 5.4 shows the consolidated forecast for iron ore throughput for all Major
Ports as derived from the reports of Consultants. Figure 5.12 indicates the market
share of iron ore throughput for the individual ports. The Port of Mormugao
located near Karnataka and Goa is the dominant iron ore port. The ports of
Paradip and Visakhapatnam compete for the overlapping hinterland in East India.
Ennore seems to take over the role of Chennai with respect to iron ore exports.
24
5.4
Coal
Coal production is nationalised at present and private investment in coal mining is
only allowed for captive mines supplying coal to designated sectors as power,
steel and cement.
Next to crude oil, thermal coal mainly from Orissa is another key energy resource
for the power sector. Indias coking coal usually lacks the quality needed for steel
production. Poor quality domestic coking coal therefore is blended with imported
coal.
Total
74,49
126,68
189,61
2007-08
2011-12
2025-26
Table 5.5 Consolidated forecast for Coal in M tons
Market share per Port for Coal

30,0%
25,0%
20,0%
2007-08
15,0%
2011-12
10,0%
2025-26
5,0%
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
0,0%
Figure 5.13 Market share per Major Port in handling Coal
Table 5.5 shows the consolidated forecast for coal throughput for all Major Ports
as derived from the reports of Consultants. Figure 5.13 indicates the forecast of
iron ore market share for the individual ports. The ports at the East coast near the
mining areas in particular Paradip appear to be and remain the main coal handling
ports.
25
5.5
Containers
The economic modernisation in India has resulted in strong growth in the value of
Indias exports. Indias export mix is changing with higher value goods (e.g. high
tech, pharmaceuticals, engineering and automotive components) growing at a
faster pace than resource based and agricultural products. The growth and
changing mix of cargoes will logically result in further unitisation of the countrys
general cargo trades.
Total
83,88
161,38
679,97
2007-08
2011-12
2025-26
Table 5.6 Consolidated forecast for Containers in M tons
Market share per Port for Containers

60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
2007-08
30,0%
2011-12
20,0%
2025-26
10,0%
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
0,0%
Figure 5.14 Market share per Major Port for handling of Containers
Table 5.6 shows the consolidated forecast for container throughput for all Major Ports as
derived from the reports of Consultants. Figure 5.14 indicates the forecast of container
market share for the individual ports. Jawaharlal Nehru Port in the northwest with its
favourable location towards north India and Delhi is assumed to remain the main
container centre of India, although some market share loss is expected. In particular
Ennore is seen as a potential container port in the South next to the established centre
Chennai.
26
5.6
Fertilisers
With respect to agriculture, the Government of India policy is focussed on
agricultural growth. India is the third largest producer and consumer of fertilisers
in the world. Some 60 large size plants in the country manufacture a range of
fertilisers. The most widely used fertilisers include nitrogenous (N), phosphoric (P)
and potosi (K). Potosi fertiliser is not manufactured in India and is imported. The
industry relies heavily on imports for its requirement of raw material. Monsoon
holds the key to the future prospects of the fertiliser industry. A good monsoon
will spurt food grains production and consequently the demand for fertilisers.
Total
15,34
19,76
37,20
2007-08
2011-12
2025-26
Table 5.7 Consolidated forecast for Fertilisers in M tons
Market share per Port for Fertilisers

30,0%
25,0%
20,0%
2007-08
15,0%
2011-12
10,0%
2025-26
5,0%
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
0,0%
Figure 5.15 Market share per Port for handling of Fertilisers
Table 5.7 shows the consolidated forecast for fertiliser throughput for all Major
Ports as derived from the reports of Consultants. Figure 5.15 indicates the
forecast of fertiliser market share for the individual ports. The ports at the north
east coast appear to be the main fertiliser ports. The location of large agricultural
areas in the direct hinterland are an explanation of the phenomena.
27
5.7
Other cargo
Apart from the main commodities many other commodities are being handled and
will be handled in the Major Ports. The following table and figure are related to
this variety of commodities.
2007-08
2011-12
2025-26
Total
80,44
106,11
212,82
Table 5.8 Consolidated forecast for Other Cargo in M tons
Market share per Port for Other Cargo

25,0%
20,0%
2007-08
15,0%
2011-12
10,0%
2025-26
5,0%
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
JNPT
Mumbai
Kandla
0,0%
Figure 5.16 Market share per Port for handling of Other Cargo
Table 5.8 shows the consolidated forecast for other cargoes throughput for all
Major Ports as derived from the reports of Consultants. Figure 5.16 indicates the
forecast of other cargoes market share for the individual ports. The port of Kandla,
Visakhapatnam and Kolkata appear to be and remain ports with a strong multi
commodity character. Chennai seems to give up this position in line with its
planned focus on containers.
28
5.8
Main observations cargo forecasts

In the framework of the definition of NMDP projects a document was prepared by
MSRTH indicating a comparable forecast for the individual Major Ports and an
overall forecast. A comparison of the overall forecasts per commodity as a result
of the forecasts of Consultants and the MSRTH forecast of 2005 is provided in
Table 5.9.
Consultants
NMDP
Drewry
POL
216,51
183,50
Iron Ore
108,97
87,50
Coal
126,68
103,50
Containers
161,38
140,40
19,76
15,60
106,11
85,20
739,41
615,70
13,30
11,70
Fertilisers
Other Cargo
Total in M tons
Containers M TEU
8,40-10,80
Table 5.9 Comparison of forecasts per commodity for Major Ports for the reference year
2011-12 in M tons
Deviations are apparent with a higher overall forecast foreseen by Consultants for
all listed commodities. This difference can be explained by two main reasons. In
the first place the forecast of Consultants has been prepared in 2006 two years
later than the one of MSRTH NMDP. These last two years showed a strong
growth of the Indian economy and consequently of a strong growth in trade and
transport. The 2006 forecast obviously takes into account the positive experiences
of the last two years. Secondly the individual ports are aiming at market shares in
overlapping parts of the potential hinterland. Potential cargoes from these
overlapping areas may have been taken into consideration in the forecast of more
than one port. For this reason the overall forecast for all ports may be too
ambitious.
Similarly comparisons can be made between the forecasts for the individual ports
as prepared by Consultants and those as prepared by MSRTH in 2004.
29
Comparison market share

16,0%
14,0%
12,0%
10,0%
in % 8,0%
6,0%
4,0%
NMDP Projection per port 2011-12
Consultant projection per port for 2011-12
Figure 5.17 Comparison of forecasts per port for reference year 2011-12
From Figure 5.17 it can be seen that the forecasts of Consultants foresee higher
throughputs for the northwest and west ports of India (Kandla to New Mangalore).
The Consultants of the northeast ports are less optimistic with lower overall
forecasts for Kolkata to Visakhapatnam. Consultants for Chennai are ambitious
compared to NMDP, while the opposite is true for Cochin.
The following topics will be more specific with regards to ports.
5.8.1
Port of Kandla
The traffic projections for the Port of Kandla are presented in the table below:
POL Product & Crude

Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
49,05
0,00
0,52
4,13
2,52
14,41
70,63
0,21
2011-12
61,47
0,00
7,36
4,51
6,84
17,95
98,13
0,57
2025-26
118,60
0,00
7,36
6,15
42,00
30,40
204,51
3,50
Table 5.10 Cargo forecast Port of Kandla in M tons

Good opportunities to capture part of the market of North India (Delhi
region);
Severe competition from minor ports in Gujarat.
30
Kolkata
Paradip
Visak
Ennore
Chennai
Tuticorin
Cochin
New
Mangalore
Mormugao
Mumbai
Kandla
0,0%
JNPT
2,0%
5.8.2
Port of Mumbai
The traffic projections for the Port of Mumbai are presented in the table below:
POL Product & Crude

Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
31,88
0,00
2,86
0,20
2,64
14,80
52,38
0,22
2011-12
43,14
0,00
4,79
0,25
8,16
19,79
76,13
0,68
2025-26
56,61
0,00
5,84
0,39
30,00
35,77
128,61
2,50
Table 5.11 Cargo forecast Port of Mumbai in M tons
Note: Consultant applied an average of 16 tons per TEU, which is exceptional.

The world average is 12 tons per TEU, which has been used in this table.
Severe competition from minor ports in Gujarat;
No synergy with Jawaharlal Nehru Port considered;
Large base volume liquid bulk.
5.8.3
Jawaharlal Nehru Port

The traffic projections for the Jawaharlal Nehru Port are presented in the table
below:
POL Product &

Crude
Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
3,70
2011-12
6,30
2025-26
12,80
0,00
0,00
0,00
45,24
1,04
49,98
3,77
0,00
0,00
0,00
81,00
1,47
88,77
6,75
0,00
0,00
0,00
290,52
2,67
305,99
24,21
Table 5.12 Cargo forecast Jawaharlal Nehru Port in M tons

Favourable location for container terminal operations;
No synergy with Port of Mumbai considered.
31
5.8.4
Port of Mormugao
The traffic projections for the Port of Mormugao are presented in the table below:
POL Product &

Crude
Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
1,12
2011-12
1,49
2025-26
3,02
37,72
6,70
0,00
0,16
3,45
49,15
0,02
39,02
7,40
0,00
0,23
4,11
52,25
0,02
50,47
14,43
0,00
0,61
9,77
78,30
0,06
Table 5.13 Cargo forecast Port of Mormugao in M tons

Dependence on iron ore exports makes Port of Mormugao vulnerable;
Uncertainty on policy GoI on iron ore exports;
Conservative view on container forecast.
5.8.5
Port of New Mangalore

The traffic projections for the Port of New Mangalore are presented in the table
below:
POL Product &

Crude
Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
22,55
2011-12
27,20
2025-26
31,57
7,30
1,00
1,28
0,47
4,81
37,41
0,03
10,20
4,30
2,09
1,25
7,13
52,17
0,08
20,09
7,00
4,33
3,83
17,32
84,14
0,23
Table 5.14 Cargo forecast Port of New Mangalore in M tons
32
5.8.6
Port of Cochin
The traffic projections for the Port of Cochin are presented in the table below:
POL Product & Crude

Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
9,47
0,00
0,26
0,63
3,84
1,16
15,36
0,32
2011-12
11,97
0,00
0,84
0,71
6,00
5,11
24,63
0,50
2025-26
12,64
0,00
0,36
0,76
29,16
10,57
53,49
2,43
Table 5.15 Cargo forecast Port of Cochin in M tons

Uncertainty on policy GoI on cabotage.
5.8.7
Port of Tuticorin
The traffic projections for the Port of Tuticorin are presented in the table below:
POL Product &

Crude
Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
0,80
2011-12
0,90
2025-26
1,40
0,00
7,50
1,50
4,90
6,50
21,20
0,46
0,00
11,40
1,70
9,10
7,70
30,80
0,84
0,00
20,20
2,50
36,80
10,90
71,80
3,08
Table 5.16 Cargo forecast Port of Tuticorin in M tons
33
5.8.8
Port of Chennai
The traffic projections for the Port of Chennai are presented in the table below:
POL Product & Crude

Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
14,01
10,66
1,43
0,00
15,84
12,81
54,75
1,32
2011-12
15,00
11,09
1,43
0,00
27,68
8,97
64,17
2,31
2025-26
20,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
57,64
9,47
87,11
4,80
Table 5.17 Cargo forecast Port of Chennai in M tons
Note: Forecast for POL Product & Crude is excluded imports via pipeline
*An average of 16 tons per TEU has been taken, which is exceptional. The
world average is 12 tons per TEU.
Major decision to abandon the handling of dirty bulk cargoes (coal and iron
ore) goods from the port;
No synergy with Port of Ennore considered;
Optimism with regard to competitive position regarding container handling
market.
5.8.9
Port of Ennore
The traffic projections for the Port of Ennore are presented in the table below:
POL Product &

Crude
Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
0,00
2011-12
0,00
2025-26
0,00
2,00
9,00
0,00
0,00
0,30
11,30
7,90
25,80
0,00
5,40
1,54
40,64
0,45
12,00
35,30
0,00
86,76
2,34
136,40
7,23
Table 5.18 Cargo forecast Port of Ennore in M tons

No synergy with Port of Chennai is considered;
34
Uncertainty on policy GoI on iron ore exports.
5.8.10 Port of Visakhapatnam

The traffic projections for the Port of Visakhapatnam are presented in the table
below:
POL Product & Crude

Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
12,80
17,50
12,70
3,90
1,30
9,50
57,70
0,11
2011-12
19,10
20,00
16,20
5,20
3,50
17,70
81,70
0,29
2025-26
23,70
29,50
26,40
9,20
13,80
44,20
146,80
1,15
Table 5.19 Cargo forecast Port of Visakhapatnam in M tons

Thermal coal forecast heavily affected by competition of Port of Paradip;
Forecast considerations include competition with west coast ports for North
India container market;
Competition foreseen for bulk market from Port of Gangavaram.
5.8.11 Port of Paradip

The traffic projections for the Port of Paradip are presented in the table below:
POL Product & Crude

Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
5,30
12,80
20,50
3,70
0,08
3,20
45,60
0,07
2011-12
17,60
16,10
27,70
5,30
0,25
4,60
71,55
0,02
2025-26
33,70
22,80
47,80
7,80
3,50
10,00
125,60
0,29
Table 5.20 Cargo forecast Port of Paradip in M tons
35
Thermal coal forecast affected by competition from Port of Visakhapatnam;

Forecast considerations include competition with west coast ports for North
India container market.
5.8.12 Port of Kolkata

The traffic projections for the Port of Kolkata are presented in the table below:
POL Product &

Crude
Iron Ore
Coal
Fertilisers
Container Traffic
Other Cargo
Total Throughput
Container M TEU
2007-08
9,98
2011-12
12,34
2025-26
21,91
7,66
12,02
0,00
6,89
8,46
45,01
0,57
4,66
19,46
0,00
11,97
10,04
58,47
1,00
4,66
24,92
6,07
85,35
29,41
172,32
7,11
Table 5.21 Cargo forecast Port of Kolkata in M tons

Long term forecast for Kolkata heavily affected by potential deepsea hub
development and by development of Kulpi Port;
No synergy between Saugor/Haldia and Kolkata Docks considered.
36
Port facilities
6.1
General
In order to realise the potential forecast, port and terminal facilities are required.
In case the capacities of existing facilities are not sufficient, these need to be
restructured, improved, overhauled or extended. The construction of complete
new facilities is another option to increase the port and terminal capacity. The
Final Reports include many projects to boost the capacity of existing facilities and
to construct new facilities.
The following port and terminal requirements can be distinguished:
Basic port infrastructure; port area, access channel, breakwaters;
Quay walls, jetties;
Ship to shore equipment; loaders, unloaders, quay cranes;
Open and covered storage areas;
Yard equipment; stackers, reclaimers, Rubber Tyred Gantries, reach
stackers, lift trucks;
Rail terminal;
Truck interface and gate facilities;
Connections to road and rail networks.
6.2
Terminal capacity
Though benchmarks do exist, the translation from forecast to terminal
requirements is not a straightforward calculation. Many factors play a role in such
a translation exercise. For defining the required ship-to-shore capacity not only
the expected volume however also the following parameters play a role for
example:
Vessel characteristics; fleet mix, vessel sizes, call sizes;
Cargo characteristics; unit weight of unitised cargoes, density of bulk
cargoes;
Crane productivity often expressed in tons/hr or containers/hr;
Working times; number of shifts a day, working time per shift excluding
time lost due to shift changes, mealbreaks, etc, number of working days
per week; down times due to for example adverse weather conditions or
equipment breakdowns;
Acceptable Berth Occupancy Factor (BOF).
6.3
Berth Occupancy Factor (BOF)

The berth occupancy factor is the time that the berth is utilised divided by the
total available time. The combining of physically distinct groups of berths into one
berthing plan for the stream of traffic results in more flexibility and in a reduction
in ship waiting time. The greater risk of queuing when groups of berths are
treated independently arises as a result of the possibility of a ship having to queue
for a berth in one group at a time when there is actually a vacant berth in another
group.
37
UNCTAD in the manual Port Development presents figures for recommended

maximum berth occupancy factors as per
Table 6.1 for conventional general cargo operations. UNCTAD states that these
figures are based on a ratio of ship cost to berth cost of 4 to 1.
Number of berths
Max BOF
1
2
3
4
5
6 10
40%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
Table 6.1 UNCTAD guidelines for BOF for conventional general cargoes
With respect to the BOF the Consultants in general applied standards listed in one
of the Consultants reports as being common for Indian ports and as indicated in
Table 6.2.
Max BOF
Dedicated berths
One berth
More than one berth
Common berths
Up to 3 berths
More than 3 berths
60%
70%
70%
75%
Table 6.2 Reported guidelines for BOF for Major Ports India
6.4
Benchmarks
The mix of parameters including the BOF as adopted by the Consultants result in
the benchmarks for quay capacity:
(TEU/m/yr)
JNPT
Mumbai
Cochin
Tuticorin
Chennai
Ennore
Kandla
present
2.000
1.400
1.200
900
1.200
projected
2.400
1.200
1.700
1.500
1.350
1.500
2.250
(TEU/m/yr)
38
These benchmarks were used by Consultants to define the ship-to-shore capacity

of container terminals in the Indian Major Ports or are the result of calculations
from the reverse calculations when capacities and quay length were provided by
Consultants.
Comparable benchmarks for international ports have been provided by various
Consultants. Reference is made to the table below.
Hongkong
Singapore
West Europe
present
2.050
1.920
1.950
Table 6.4 benchmarks container quay capacity (TEU/m/yr)
Productivity figures for general cargoes are subject to large deviations in view of
various conditions (type of cargo, equipment size, vessel size, etc). In spite of this,
indicative benchmarks have been provided by various Consultants.
Australia
Visakhapatnam
Paradip
present
4.500 9.000
4,000
2.500 4.000
Table 6.5 benchmarks productivity iron ore loading ports (tons/hour/loading unit)
Type of vessel (dwt)

200.000 dwt
100.000 dwt
50.000 dwt
25.000 dwt
present
12.000
7,000
4.500
3.500
Table 6.6 benchmarks pump capacity crude oil (m3/hour)
For further information reference is made to Annexure 4 of this report.
39
Port planning
7.1
General
In the process to prepare the Business Plans for the 12 Major Ports, the
Consultants translated the port and terminal requirements into short term and
long term projects. In most cases a Masterplan was defined indicating the long
term overall planning of the port. Based on the forecast for the short term (period
from 2007 to 2013) the short term projects were defined under the condition that
the short term projects fit well in the Masterplan for the long term.
The entire list of projects defined for the 12 Major Ports and proposed by
Consultants is enclosed in Volume II. In this Chapter the main proposed projects
have been listed per port. For the lay outs of the ports and the project locations
reference is made to the Figure 7.1 to
Figure 7.23. Observations of the Advisor per port have been included.
40
7.2
Port of Kandla
7.2.1
Proposed projects
Container Terminal 1 (restructuring of berths 11 and 12);
Container Terminals 2 and 3 (restructuring berths 7 to 10);
Multi cargo berths 13 to 16;
Expansion of the existing liquid bulk cargo jetty;
Deepening of the access channel (Kandla Creek);
Coal and multi cargo berths at Tuna;
Crude oil import facilities at Vadinar;
Road and Rail connectivity projects and programmes.
7.2.2
Kandla Port layout
Figure 7.1 Present layout Port of Kandla
41
Figure 7.2 Future layout Port of Kandla
7.2.3
Main observations
The ultimate capacity of the port is restricted by the nautical capacity of the
access channel (Kandla Creek);
Expansion possibilities are available at Tuna and Vadinar (sea side of Kandla
Creek);
Estimates on the capacity of container terminals are optimistic as a result of
relative high adopted benchmarks.
42
7.3
Port of Mumbai
7.3.1
Proposed projects
Offshore Container Terminals 1 and 2;
CFSs, off-dock Container Yards and Empty Depots;
5th oil Berth at Butcher Island;
Cruise Terminal;
Second Chemical Terminal;
Road and Rail connectivity projects and programmes of main importance.
7.3.2
Mumbai Port layout
Figure 7.3 Layout Port of Mumbai
7.3.3
Main observations
The capacity of the port is restricted by the surrounding urban area and the
resulting problems related to hinterland connectivity;
The planned container operations at OCT include long horizontal transport
haulage;
Consultant did not foresee plans on a transfer of port area to urban area.
43
7.4
Jawaharlal Nehru Port
7.4.1
Proposed projects
Completion of Container Terminal GTI;
Expansion berth towards NSICT;
Container Terminal 4;
Marine Chemical Terminal;
Second Chemical Terminal;
Road, Rail and pipeline connectivity projects and programmes.
7.4.2
Jawaharlal Nehru Port layout
Figure 7.4 Present layout Jawaharlal Nehru Port
44
Figure 7.5 Future layout Jawaharlal Nehru Port
7.4.3
Main observations
Mid and long term container terminal requirements have not been considered
sufficiently;
Estimates on capacity of container terminals are optimistic as a result of
adopted relative high productivity benchmarks;
Increased application of the door-to-door concept for container transport has
not been considered.
45
7.5
Port of Mormugao
7.5.1
Proposed projects
Integration of berth 8 and 9 for iron ore handling;
Introduction railway wagon tippler for iron ore transfer;
Additional iron ore storage capacity;
Additional mooring dolphins;
Mobile crane for general cargo berth 11;
New coal berth;
Liquid bulk berths;
Cruise vessel berth
Port craft jetty.
7.5.2
Mormugao Port layout
Figure 7.6 Present layout Port of Mormugao
46
Figure 7.7 Possible alternative Masterplan for the Port of Mormugao
Figure 7.8 Future layout extension Port of Mormugao (2014)
47
Figure 7.9 Future layout extension Port of Mormugao (2025)
7.5.3
Main observations
Storage capacity iron ore and large number of (small) traders are constraints
for iron ore throughput;
Medium and long term development is difficult in the limited existing port area;
Heavy social impacts are related to port developments in Vasco Bay and Baina
Bay.
48
7.6
Port of New Mangalore
7.6.1
Proposed projects
Mechanisation of the new iron ore berth 14;
Berth 15 of new Western Dock for handling coal;
Restructuring of berth 1 and 2 for container handling;
Construction/conversion of berth 13 for handling liquid bulk;
Deepening of channel and turning basin;
Marshalling yard near new Western Dock;
Development of SBM facilities for crude oil imports;
LNG Terminal;
Container terminal in Western Dock;
National road and railway connectivity plans.
7.6.2
New Mangalore Port layout
Figure 7.10 Present layout Port of New Mangalore
49
Figure 7.11 Future layout Port of New Mangalore
7.6.3
Main observations
No expansion of iron ore handling and storage capacity possible at berth 14
after present capacity is reached in 2013;
Proposed container handling capacity does not indicate great ambition.
50
7.7
Port of Cochin
7.7.1
Proposed projects
Development of SBM facilities for crude oil imports;
LNG and LPG Terminals;
Bunkering Terminal;
Vallarpadam Container Terminal;
Cruise Terminal;
Upgrading Willingdon Island;
National road and railway connectivity plans.
7.7.2
Cochin Port layout
Figure 7.12 Present layout Port of Cochin
51
Figure 7.13 Future layout Port of Cochin
7.7.3
Main observations
Future function of Cochin Oil Terminal (COT) is not clear with the planned
development of the SBM for the import of crude oil;
Interesting Railway backbone concept for south India;
State border problems are being encountered with regard to hinterland
transport via road modality.
52
7.8
Port of Tuticorin
7.8.1
Proposed projects
Deepening of existing channel and harbour basin;
Development of outer harbour;
Onversion of berth 8 into Container Terminal;
North Cargo Berth for thermal coal handling.
7.8.2
Tuticorin Port layout
Figure 7.14 Future layout Port of Tuticorin
53
Figure 7.15 Masterplan Port of Tuticorin
7.8.3
Main observations
Outer harbour developments requires long and expensive breakwaters;
Terminal development is focussed on expansion container handling facilities;
Interesting Railway backbone concept for South India;
Feasibility of application of fly ash for land reclamation needs to be
investigated;
Impact of outer harbour on tidal currents needs to be investigated.
54
7.9
Port of Chennai
7.9.1
Proposed projects
Development of Container Terminals 2, 3, 4 and 5;
Off-dock facility Tondiarpet;
Ennore Manali Road;
Elevated Expressway to Poonamallee;
Railway Terminal at Tondiarpet and shuttle train connection between Port and
Railway Terminal;
Cruise Terminal;
Car Terminal and car parking facility.
7.9.2
Chennai Port layout
Figure 7.16 Present layout Port of Chennai
7.9.3
Main observations
Good maps are provided of the future lay out, but could not be copied into this
document. Reference is made to the Final Business Plan;
Stacking areas are limited;
Off-dock solutions for stacking result in double handling and are therefore
expensive;
National and state road and railway connectivity plans of prime importance.
55
7.10
Port of Ennore
7.10.1 Proposed projects

Upgrading existing Coal berths for handling thermal coal;
Common User Coal Terminal;
Marine Liquid Terminal;
Container Terminal;
Dredging and reclamation works;
National and state road and railway connectivity plans.
7.10.2 Ennore Port layout
Figure 7.17 Future layout Port of Ennore
7.10.3 Main observations

Major expansion possibilities;
Masterplan for long term is missing (pipeline, creek).
56
7.11
Port of Visakhapatnam

Inner harbour
Export facility for bulk cargoes at West Quay 1 and 2;
Reorganisation of fertiliser handling at East Quay;
East Dock and strengthening East Quays;
Deepening entrance channel to inner basin.
Outer harbour
Mechanisation General Cargo Berth;
Upgrading iron ore jetty;
Handling facility for crude oil and POL (SBM);
Extension Container Terminal.
7.11.2 Visakhapatnam Port layout
Figure 7.18 Present layout Port of Visakhapatnam
57
Figure 7.19 Future layout Port of Visakhapatnam

Extension of inner harbour has been selected by Consultant as long
term port development in spite of presence of Navy facilities in the area.
58
7.12
Port of Paradip

Deepening of entrance channel;
Extension of breakwater;
Iron ore and coal mechanised terminals;
Container Terminal;
Fertiliser Terminal.
7.12.2 Paradip Port layout
Figure 7.20 Present layout Port of Paradip
59
Figure 7.21 Future layout Port of Paradip (one of Masterplan options)

Positive development of railway transport through dedicated railway line
between mines and port;
Various long term port development plans (Masterplans) proposed.
60
7.13
Port of Kolkata

Two riverine multipurpose jetties near Haldia Dock Complex;
Three riverine multipurpose jetties at Diamond Harbour;
Three riverine multipurpose jetties at Saugor.
7.13.2 Kolkata Port layout
Figure 7.22 Present layout Port of Kolkata (NSD)
61
Figure 7.23 Present layout Port of Kolkata (Haldia)

No expansion of Haldia Dock foreseen in spite of demand for capacity increase;
No proposals indicated on development of Kidderpore Docks (deepsea, IWT or
urban area);
National and state road and railway connectivity plans.
62
Hinterland connectivity
8.1
General
As in many other countries, probably the most important transport/logistics
challenge facing India is its infrastructure. While considerable private sector
investment is now being directed into the development, expansion and
modernisation of Indian ports, the countrys road, rail and inland waterway
systems have suffered from years of neglect and under-investment.
The average cost of freight is relatively high and Indias inadequate transport
infrastructure is holding back economic growth according to Drewry.
The system of distribution containers and containerised cargoes is highly
concentrated with most containers for Delhi and north India being routed through
the Mumbai/JNPT port complex. This route is already one of the busiest domestic
freight arteries in the country. With new container terminal developments in
Gujarat and with decent rail connections to and from the ports of Mundra and
Pipapav this situation is changing gradually.
8.2
Highways
The Indian highway network is limited and many of the roads are in poor condition.
A World Bank Report (Indias Transport Sector 2002) identified in 2002 only
some 2% of the national highway system as being 4 lanes with the remaining
98% being double, single or intermediate. In the regional network, no state
highways were 4 lanes and only 23% comprised 2 lanes. The backlog of years of
under-maintenance is huge. The same report listed that 25% of state and national
highways are congested.
In the latter years capital expenditure on roads has been increasing amongst
others for improvements to the national highway system.
The regulatory environment and the reliance on regional/provincial operating
agreements and licences has resulted in a very fragmented road haulage industry
characterised by the presence of many small companies employing just a few
trucks and by a shortage of modern specialised freight transport equipment.
A number of schemes targeted at improving connections between main ports and
the national highway network are either underway or in a planning stage. The
majority of these projects are being realised through Special Purpose Vehicles
(SPVs) set up between various (government) agencies.
In this respect JNPT formed an SPV with NHAI (National Highway Authority of
India) and CIDCO (City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra
Ltd).
To improve road connectivity at Chennai, the Port Trust formed an SPV with NHAI
and the government of Tamil Nadu Chennai Ennore Port Road Company Ltd.
63
One of the largest and most ambitious projects being implemented is the Golden
Quadrangle and North-South and East-West Corridors project, which is being
administered by the NHAI. The project involves the construction of four-lane road
links between the four main cities of India (Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata)
with a view to improve speed and raise safety and security standards for
passengers and cargo.
8.3
Railways
Indian Railways is a vast network. The importance of rail to the Indian transport
market is obvious. Good rail connectivity is essential as large volumes of cargoes
move to and from the port hinterlands.
Currently Mumbai port complex is one of the main rail cargo transfer centres in
India. Congestion is experienced in the region due to lack of track capacity,
shortage of rail cars and capacity limitations in rail cargo depots. Ocean carriers
for this reason have been looking for alternative port gateways in the Northwest
part of India as Mundra, Hazira and Pipapav in Gujarat.
Another disadvantage of the railway system is the multi gauge character which
often does not support through transport and seamless services and the relative
high cost. Some progress is made in conversion of narrow gauge track to broad
gauge, however progress is slow.
The provision of rail services is being liberalised with the Indian Government
ending the monopoly of Concor on moving containers by rail.
In 2004-05 rail transport figures indicated that 30% of Indias international
container traffic was moved by rail.
8.4
Inland waterways
Indias navigable inland waterways comprise almost 14.500 km, of which 5.200
km of major rivers and some 500 km of canals are suitable for mechanised craft.
Inland waterway transport (IWT) is limited to only 1% of total inland cargo
transport.
A structural development of a IWT system/network could help to remove
substantial volumes of bulk cargo from the road and rail networks.
The application of the IWT mode has been analysed and described by the
Consultants for the ports of Mormugao and Cochin. Iron ore is transported in large
volumes from the jetties near the mines and from consolidation points along the
river Zurai to Mormugao with inland barges to the iron ore loading facilities at
Mormugao and Panjim. At Mormugao the barge unloading facility has been
described as well. Fertiliser Raw Material is shipped with inland barges via the
backwater system to a fertiliser plant along the waterway.
The IWT system in the northeast along Hooghly, Ganga and Bhramaputra from
Kolkata to as far as the northern states (e.g. Assam) has been described. No
present or potential cargo volumes related to IWT have been included for Kolkata
though.
64
8.5
Coastal transport and transhipment

In order to enable the Indian ports to develop a significant hub role, more than
capacity and efficiency is required. The present regulations stipulate that coastal
shipments, whether international feeder or pure domestic cabotage, need to be
undertaken under Indian flag vessels. International carriers cannot be involved in
the coastal transport and are therefore not attracted to use Indian ports as
centres for their transhipment services.
Similar to IWT, a strong development of coastal transport could relax the burden
on the landside infrastructure since the countrys geography would naturally
promote North South coastal shipping and feeding international traffic.
65
Port organisation
9.1
Port organisation
The Consultants have all examined the situation with respect to the internal
organisation of the Port Trusts and recommended many projects for
improvements. Most projects related to:
(The establishment of) the Human Resources Department;
(The establishment of) the Marketing Department;
The improvement of the Information Technology structure.
Reference is made to Volume II and in particular to the Business Plans of the ports.
The character of the recommendations made coincide with the general problems
encountered in public service ports. Port marketing and user responsiveness for
example, are often considered to be unnecessary for a public port, which is there
to serve all users.
In the following sections the port management models will be explained and
suggestions for changes will be presented.
9.2
Port management models

In a port there are many functions to be performed:
Landlord function;
Regulatory function;
Planning function;
Nautical function;
Port marketing and promotion function;
Cargo handling function;
General functions.
The way in which these functions are divided between the parties active in a port,
determines the port management model. The distinction between the three types
of port management models as outlined in the table below, is mainly determined
by:
The ownership of the infrastructure, including all wet and dry areas in the
port, including the quay walls;
The ownership of the superstructure (in particular ship/shore handling
equipment), including pavement, all buildings, constructions and
equipment;
Employment of stevedoring labour (in particular on board the ship), the
workforce required for the (un)loading of the vessels.
66
Type
Infrastructure
Superstructure
Private
Stevedoring
/ labour
Private
Other
functions
Public/Private
Landlord
port
(Rotterdam)
Tool port
Public
service port
Private
service port
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Public/Private
Majority
public
Majority
private
Figure 9.1 Port Management Models
The Major Ports in India are public service ports with private elements within,
such as the BOT operators active in these ports. From the Business Plans of the
12 Major Ports there is a clear intention to shift towards the landlord port
management model.
This would lead to the following situation:
The core activities of the Port Trust would be reduced to: provision of
infrastructure, responsibility of nautical safety and environment, strategic
long term port planning;
The infrastructure of the port would remain in public hands, but would
then be leased out to private operators on the basis of long term contracts;
These private operators would be responsible for investments in
superstructure and maintenance. They would provide offices, sheds,
warehouses, CFSs, workshops, cranes, equipment, conveyor belts etc,
following the core activities of the company concerned;
The private operators would also employ their own stevedoring labour;
All other activities related to the handling of vessels and cargo would also
become the responsibility of private companies. To this category belong
activities such as bunkering, mooring and unmooring, pilotage, towage,
shipping agency.
Obviously a shift to another port management model, in this case the landlord
type model, would be a project of major magnitude and a process of several years
to implement. The economic and social impact would be substantial. A detailed
port reform process was beyond the scope of the development of the Business
Plans for the Major Ports. Nevertheless it is worthwhile to analyse the institutional
setting of the port sector in India, and provide some suggestions for changes. This
will be dealt with in the following section.
9.3
Institutional setting and port reform processes

As mentioned above, all Consultants have provided recommendations for
improvements of the internal structure of the Port Trusts. Unfortunately only few
Consultants have looked at the larger picture, which is the relations with the
Ministry, the division of responsibilities and tasks between the Ministry and the
Port Trust, the necessary level of autonomy, and suggestions for a stronger
involvement of the private sector in the Indian ports.
67
The port reform process can be summarised in the scheme below:
PORT FUNCTIONS
PORT MANAGEMENT MODEL
BEST MODEL STRONG AND WEAK
POINT
CHANGING BOUNDARY
CONDITIONS:
PERFORMANCES
FINANCIAL REASONS
COMPETITION
WISH TO CHANGE:
MANAGEMENT AND/ OR
OWNERSHIP AND/OR
OPERATIONAL SYSTEM
PROCESSES
IMPROVEMENT OF PORT
ADMINISTRATION
LIBERALISATION OR DEREGULATION
COMMERCIALISATION:
CONTRACTING OUT
LEASING
CORPORATISATION
PRIVATISATION:
FULL / PARTIAL
JOINT VENTURE
MEBO
BOT
SALE OF ASSETS
PUBLIC OFFER
Figure 9.2 Port Reform processes and options
The port functions and port management models have already been dealt with in
the previous section. Worldwide there is the tendency to shift towards the landlord
port model, but this does not necessarily need to be the best model for every port.
Much depends on the financial means available (the port will have to invest in
infrastructure), the development of the private sector and the acceptance of a
strong presence of the private sector in strategic assets like ports.
Changing boundary conditions may lead to the wish to change the management
structure and/or the ownership structure and/or the operational system of the
port. In India the reasons for change would be:
The strong economic growth, requiring more efficiency in the ports;
The introduction of competition to reduce port tariffs;
To reduce bureaucracy;
To speed up the decision making process, needed to match the strong
economic growth.
Once it has been established and agreed upon between the respective authorities,
that changes in the management / ownership / operations will improve one or
more of the inefficiencies listed, the decision has to be taken which process of
change to adopt.
Taking into account the 5 principle port reform processes as presented in the
scheme above, the present situation within the 12 Major Ports is as follows:
68
Improvement of port administration

As stated above, recommendations are given by all Consultants. It should be
mentioned that this port reform option is not far-reaching. It assumes that
performance can be improved even in an environment of bureaucratic constraints.
The advantage is that certain changes can be made to the organisation relatively
easily, without changes in law or national policy. It is in fact the easiest option to
pursue, but for the Indian context it is considered to be insufficient to reach the
goal to become world class facilities.
Liberalisation
Liberalisation introduces a private organisation in certain port activities previously
reserved to the public sector, based on the belief that ports not subject to
competition have less pressure to be efficient and respond to port user demands.
An example of liberalisation is JNPT, where apart from the public container
terminal also two private terminals are operating (on a BOT basis). The public
terminal must be able to be at least as efficient as the private terminals in order
not to lose clients. The only danger in this situation is that JNPT might give
privilege to clients of its own terminal in certain occasions. A disadvantage of
liberalisation is that the Port Trust might cross-subsidise unprofitable services
from the profitable ones.
Commercialisation
Essentially, commercialisation creates an environment in which the port is
expected to run on a commercial basis. This involves a variety of business-like
decisions that need to be made promptly, without referring the issues to the
controlling authorities first. Commercialisation allows port management to conduct
its own affairs and most importantly, makes it accountable for its decisions and
performance.
In case it is decided that the landlord port management model should be the
preferred model for the Major Ports, commercialisation will be indispensable in the
process. This will include:
Delegation of powers and responsibilities from the Ministry to the ports. It
was beyond the scope of this exercise to determine in detail which powers
and authorities and to what extent, this should be further investigated. The
goals should be faster decision making and increasing competition between
the Major Ports;
The ports should contract out certain non core-business related functions
to the private sector (such as dredging, maintenance);
Leasing out of infrastructure to the private sector. This is already the case
in some of the Major Ports such as Ennore and Visag;
Invest in infrastructure, whereby new BOT concession contracts should be
avoided (this will be explained below).
Corporatisation
The Port of Ennore is the only corporatised Major Port in India, and it is with some
envy that the other Major Ports look at this situation. Ennore has more freedom (it
does not fall under the TAMP regulations for example) and operates as a landlord.
Corporatisation transforms public sector organisations into companies operating
as if they were a private sector company, while the shares of the new company
are still in the hands of the public sector. The purpose is to distance the enterprise
from direct government control. This process can be a catalyst for
commercialisation and is, in fact, privatisation without divestment. Corporatisation
is high on the agenda in India, but it is recommendable to focus on
commercialisation first.
69
Privatisation
In this type of port reform, the transfer of ownership, and therewith a flow of
funds from the private sector to the public sector, is involved.
The major goal is overall improvement of the functioning of a port, but in fact it
provides the same flexibility to management as commercialisation. In the past
decades governments were sometimes too eager to follow the concept of
privatisation, while it is the most complex one of all port reform options.
There are various forms of privatisations: there is a flow of money involved and/or
investments made by the private sector in the case of selling shares to a company
or consortium (full or partial), joint ventures, management-employee buy-outs,
sale of assets, public offers, and BOT-type concessions.
The BOT principle needs special attention since it is widely promoted in the Major
Ports. The private company invests in all infrastructure (including the quay wall)
and superstructure and employs its own labour. In this sense the Indian BOT
represents its purest sense, while worldwide the public port authorities invest
normally also in the basic infrastructure, at least the quay wall. In India the Port
Trusts generally invest in dredging only. On top of the investments made by the
BOT operator, he also offers the Port Trust a revenue share, which is often in the
range of 40-50%. This implies that the costs for the port users become very high
and therefore it is not surprising that the Indian ports are notorious for their high
tariffs. Moreover, private companies apply a much shorter pack-back period on
their investments than public entities, which is another cost-raising element. Since
there are sufficient funds available within the Port Trusts, the port users would
benefit from a situation whereby the Port Trust would invest in infrastructure
instead of a BOT operator, thereby following the principle of a landlord port.
9.4
Possible future institutional setting

Taking the above port reform options into account as well as the intention of the
Indian Major Ports to shift towards the landlord port model, it can be concluded
that there are several reasons to justify such a process:
India is in the stage of becoming a developed country, economic growth is
high leading to huge growth of cargo in the ports;
There are sufficient resources available within the ports to make a landlord
port management model possible;
There is a national policy to increase the role of the private sector in the
ports.
The following suggestions for implementations are made. Obviously these are
rough outlines and need to be further studied and detailed:
The ministry delegates (part of) its powers, in order to provide more
autonomy to the Port Trust, with the aim to increase competition, improve
efficiency and speed up the decision making process;
The Ministry will not invest in port infrastructure, this should be done by
the Port Trusts. Apart from ample available funds, most Port Trust also
have sufficient borrowing capacity;
70
The Port Trust could invest in infrastructure, thereby avoiding the BOT
concept. The private sector will then lease port area from the Port Trust,
including the quay wall, on the basis of a long term contract;
The lease could be a flat-rate lease and in case the Port Trust wants to
cover its investments risk, some kind of combination of flat-rate with
revenue share could be applied. In all cases the lease income for the Port
Trust should reflect its investments made on which a reasonable return can
be made;
The Port Trust will sell its superstructural assets to private operators who
tender for specific terminals or activities;
Port workers employed by the Port Trust should have the possibility to
choose between a transfer to the private port operator or accept a certain
voluntary retirement scheme which need to be drafted with the utmost
care. Since the private port operators will tend to employ the least possible
number of workers, also a labour pool could be established in the port that
could serve all operators in peak periods;
The Port Trust will contract out non-core business to the private sector
such as dredging, pilotage, towing, mooring and unmooring;
The Port Trust will pay more attention to the boundary conditions in which
the private sector can function best. This could vary from a joint marketing
effort to attract cargo to the port, to a joint venture with a private operator
in hinterland connectivity projects, to safeguard the transport facilities to
the hinterland.
In the process the issue will be how to define the governments role so that it is
not a significant barrier to port performance and efficiency, but on the contrary a
facilitator of trade and a promoter of port competition.
Commercialisation, corporatisation and privatisation may introduce monopolistic
effects by private operators and may encourage the strategy of strict,
contractually assured control over tariffs (TAMP), charges and quality of services.
In giving private operators reasonable room in setting tariffs, the issue is how to
preserve the ability of private operators to make a reasonable profit, maintain
adequate service to the users and yet protect shipping from excessive charges.
The IPA could play an important role in this respect.
Possible roles of the IPA in the new situation could be:
Focus less on port planning (this will be a task of each port), but more on
the overall interests of the Indian ports;
Encourage competition;
Guard over possible arising private sector monopolies and control these by
means of tariff agreements;
Encourage improvements in hinterland connectivity;
Encourage transition to the landlord concept;
Work with the Ministry on deregulation and possible corporatisation;
Encourage an equal level playing field with the private and minor ports.
As an example of the overall interests of the Indian Ports, IPA might evaluate and
promote the required and possible co-operation between Port Trusts and other
Central-, State-, City- and local governments. The Port of Mormugao for example
is limited in port area. Co-operation between Port Trust, State Government and
71
Inland Waterway Authority in an Estuary Agency or Authority might lead to port

development options outside the present Port Trust boundaries.
72
10
Financial issues
10.1
General
The Consultants of the individual ports produced a Final Report, which included
the Business Plan of the individual port. The backbone of each Business Plan was
formed by the financial projections. The financial projections were summarized in
projected financial statements.
At the start of the process the Advisor produced an information outline in which a
format for the statements was given. Consultants have used this format.
These statements comprise of a:
Projected profit and loss account;
Projected balance sheet;
Projected cash flow statement.
These statements were made for a period of 20 years starting in the financial year
2007-2008 and ending in the financial year 2025-2026.
In order to make a consolidated Business Plan for the 12 Major Ports, the Advisor
used the figures coming from the financial accounts, without making changes or
eliminations. The figures of the 12 ports were compiled.
The first 7 years of the projections were in line with the 7-year action plan. Most
of the emphasis of the Consultants has put on this 7-year period.
In general the Advisor found the next trends followed by most of the Consultants
for the second period (13 years):
Revenues have been calculated by extrapolating the trend in the first
period;
Few projects has been defined;
Tariffs have been kept constant or have been inflated.
As a result the last 13 years of the financial statements did not produce a realistic
financial picture. The outcome for this period shows:
Relative high net earnings;
Huge amount of available funds in the later year of the projections;
High solvency.
The figures that the Advisor shows over the last 13-year period and especially
over the year 2025-26 are meant as an illustration and not as a reliable projection.
The Advisors conclusions are only based on the first 7-year period and never
based on the second period.
73
10.2
Projects
10.2.1 Investments in fixed assets

Many projects have been identified for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14. An
overview is presented in Annex 2.
The investments in fixed assets for the 12 Major Ports are expected to be financed
by the internal reserves of the Ports and amount to Rs 16.059 Crores for this
period.
The details over the years and over the ports are as follows:
200708
84
200809
132
JNPT
421
1.000
832
768
720
Mumbai
277
767
673
439
359
Mormugao
284
140
90
10
10
New
Mangalore
Cochin
60
93
88
48
28
595
493
75
Kandla
200910
167
201011
71
201112
74
75
201
280
Tuticorin
270
295
572
Chennai
197
68
120
68
96
166
250
209
27
Visak
170
275
266
180
159
Paradip
363
221
98
183
Kolkata
83
365
175
128
2.380
3.723
3.611
2.699
15%
23%
22%
17%
Ennore
Total
Percentage
201213
30
201314
42
Total
600
perc
4%
511
127
4.379
27%
223
159
2.897
18%
10
10
554
3%
25
25
367
2%
556
3%
18
2.318
14%
453
3%
748
5%
7%
45
1.096
94
68
170
1.197
7%
104
20
19
894
6%
2.068
1.007
571
16.059
100%
13%
6%
4%
100%
Table 10.1 Investments in fixed assets financed by internal resources of the 12 Major Ports
in Rs Crores
The investments reach the highest level in the years 2008-09 and 2009-10,
after these years the investments are declining to Rs 571 Crores in 201314;
The highest level of investments for the individual ports was for JNPT, Rs
4.378 Crores (which is 27% of the investments of all 12 Ports) followed by
Mumbai and Tuticorin;
In Cochin, New Mangalore, Mormugao and Chennai the level of
investments from their own resources was relatively low. For each of these
ports it was 3% or less of the total of all 12 Ports.
74
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
180
404
3.984
2.678
981
2.905
3.879
250
250
734
162
207
224
91
55
319
109
50
30
Kandla
JNPT
Mumbai
Mormugao
140
New Mangalore
889
Cochin
Tuticorin
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
65
390
5.023
19%
279
10.722
41%
142
1.634
6%
96
30
30
Total
140
1%
5%
465
2%
318
1%
45
0%
298
2.576
10%
270
1.667
6%
29
1.639
6%
608
2%
39
45
Ennore
538
1.090
Visak
187
940
30
240
581
239
239
345
105
Paradip
158
650
perc
1.320
30
Chennai
Kolkata
2013-14
551
Total
26.157
Table 10.2 Investments in fixed assets financed by private sector in Rs Crores
10.2.2 Financial Performance

The projected financial performance for the 7-year period is highlighted in the
projected profit and loss account. The complete overview, in line with the before
mentioned format, is presented in Annex 3. An extract is presented in the
following table.
Projected profit and

loss account
200708
200809
200910
201011
201112
201213
201314
Operating revenue
5.446
6.246
6.775
7.589
8.108
8.747
9.375
Operating costs
3.729
3.975
3.761
4.047
4.121
4.209
4.441
1.717
2.270
3.014
3.542
3.987
4.537
4.934
Other income
949
1.006
1.060
1.130
1.237
1.406
1.544
Depreciation
-369
-437
-546
-593
-629
-692
-699
Interest
-169
-220
-274
-262
-297
-348
-308
2.129
2.619
3.255
3.817
4.297
4.904
5.470
-635
-747
-983
-1.084
-1.186
-1.362
-1.520
1.494
1.872
2.272
2.733
3.112
3.542
3.950
Operating margin
Profit before tax

Tax
Profit after tax
Table 10.3 Extract projected profit and loss account 12 Major Ports in Rs Crores
The following items will be worked out hereafter:

Operating revenue;
Operating costs;
Operating margin;
75
Total costs;
Profit after tax.
10.2.3 Operating revenue

The operating revenue is given in the following categories:
Vessel related charges including:
o Port dues;
o Other dues, such as berth hire, towage, pilotage.
Cargo related charges including:
o Storage;
o Wharf handling;
o Stevedoring revenue.
Concession fee including:
o Revenue share;
o Lease.
Other operational income including:
o Railway;
o Real estate.
An overview is given in the following table:
Operating revenue
200708
200809
200910
201011
201112
201213
201314
% 201314
Vessel related charges
1.564
1.724
1.848
2.162
2.303
2.480
2.664
28%
Cargo related charges
2.561
2.839
2.784
2.747
2.898
3.044
3.184
34%
Concession fee and lease
598
813
1.119
1.574
1.732
1.933
2.146
23%
Other operational income
722
870
1.024
1.106
1.175
1.291
1.380
15%
5.446
6.246
6.775
7.589
8.108
8.747
9.375
100%
Total operating revenue
Table 10.4 Revenues all Major Ports 2007-14 in Rs Crores
Cargo related charges is the most important category of revenue, in 200708 this was Rs 2.561 Crores, in 2013/14 it was Rs 3.184 Crores, this was
34% of total revenue;
Vessel related charges form the second category in importance. It was Rs
2.664 Crores in 2013-14, which is 28% of revenue;
All ports planned to use BOT contracts for development in terminals. As a
result the incremental revenue for cargo related charges will be collected
by the BOT operator on his account. The port will receive a concession fee
in the form of revenue share and/or lease;
The importance of concession fee for the Port will increase.
The relative increase in the different categories of revenue will be shown in the
following table:
76
Revenue increase
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
10%
7%
17%
7%
8%
7%
11%
-2%
-1%
5%
5%
5%
36%
38%
41%
10%
12%
11%
20%
18%
8%
6%
10%
7%
Total revenue increase
15%
8%
12%
7%
8%
7%
Table 10.5 Increase in revenue per category in the period 2007-08 to 2013-14 for all Major
Ports
The vessel related charges show a stable increase in each year of the
projected period. In the year 2010-11 there is an incidental high increase;
The cargo related charges show a decline in the years 2009-10 and 201011, in these years most BOT contracts will be commissioned;
The high increase in concession fee is caused by a number of new BOT
contracts that will be commissioned and BOT contracts that have been
commissioned recently;
Other operational income shows a high increase in the first 2 years and a
stable increase after that.
For each Port this pattern is different, in the next table the increase per Port is
shown:
Port Trust
Kand
JNPT
Mumb
Morm
Mang
Coch
Operating revenue
2007-2008
266
838
950
287
261
199
2013-2014
753
1.841
1.537
354
345
502
Increase in 7 years
183%
120%
62%
24%
32%
153%
increase per year
31%
20%
10%
4%
5%
25%
Tuti
Chen
Enno
Visak
Para
Kolk
Total
2007-2008
203
521
125
515
616
664
5.446
2013-2014
389
735
546
755
769
848
9.375
Increase in 7 years
91%
41%
337%
46%
25%
28%
72%
increase per year
15%
7%
56%
8%
4%
5%
12%
Port Trust
Operating revenue
Table 10.6 Increase in revenue per Port for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14, in Rs Crores
Total increase in operating revenue for the 7-year period was 72%; this is
12% per year;
The highest increase comes from Ennore, however the starting point for
Ennore is rather low since this a relatively new port;
Other ports with high increases are Kandla, JNPT, Cochin and Tuticorin;
Relatively low increases are coming from Paradip and Mormugao (each 4%
per year).
As elaborated before the outcome for the 13-year period cannot be regarded as
being realistic. Nevertheless the figures are given as an illustration in the next
table.
77
Revenue
2007-08
2013-14
2025-26
1.564
2.664
5.046
2.561
3.184
4.711
598
2.146
5.064
722
1.380
2.245
5.446
9.375
17.066
Total revenue
Table 10.7 Operational revenue at the end of the 13-year period for the 12 Major Ports in Rs
Crores
In the 20-year period the total operational revenue is projected to increase

threefold to Rs 17.066 Crores in the year 2025-26;
The highest increase is projected to be in concession fees and lease, an 8
fold increase to Rs 5.064 Crores, which makes it the most important
category of revenues.
10.2.4 Operating costs

The operating expenses will be given in the following categories:
Salaries;
Social charges and pension premiums;
Running costs including dredging costs minus dredging reimbursements;
Administrative costs;
Other costs.
An overview is given in the following table:
200708
Salaries
Social charges
and pension
premiums
Running costs
Administrative
costs
Other costs
Total
operating
expenses
200809
200910
201011
201112
201213
201314
1.466
1.503
1.476
1.529
1.542
1.581
1.617
201314
36%
809
839
765
790
723
567
599
13%
1.096
1.246
1.043
1.264
1.417
1.587
1.720
39%
206
224
231
254
261
279
294
7%
153
163
245
211
178
195
210
5%
3.729
3.975
3.761
4.047
4.121
4.209
4.441
100%
Table 10.8 Operating expenses for the 12 Major Ports for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14 in
Rs Crores
Total operating expenses increased from Rs 3.729 Crores in 2007-08 to Rs

4.441 Crores in 2013-14;
78
The most important category is salaries. The number of employees is

expected to decrease due to vtary retirement programmes and
mechanization projects;
All ports have created Pension funds All ports transferred their pension
liabilities and the relevant investments in financial assets to a separate
fund. Some ports have fully contributed and in some ports there are
backlogs;
The social charges and pension premiums are relatively high in the first 4
years due to a backlog in the related separate pension funds;
Acturial valuations were the basis of backlog;
The running costs are influenced by the dredging costs in Kolkata and the
reimbursements of the dredging costs in Kolkata by the Government of
India;
The fluctuation in dredging costs and the fluctuation in the reimbursements
influence the spread over the year. This factor is also the cause of the
fluctuations in the total of the operational costs.
The relative increase in the different categories of expenses will be shown in the
following table:
Expenses increase
Salaries
Social charges and pension premiums
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
3%
-2%
4%
1%
3%
2%
4%
-9%
3%
-9%
-22%
6%
14%
-16%
21%
12%
12%
8%
Administrative costs
9%
3%
10%
3%
7%
5%
Other costs
7%
50%
-14%
-15%
9%
8%
Total increase in operating expenses
7%
-5%
8%
2%
2%
5%
Running costs
Table 10.9 Increase in revenue per category in the period 2007-08 to 2013/14 for all Major
Ports
The total operating expenses show a modest increase in the 7-year period;
The voluntary retierment programmes influence the fluctuation in salaries.
The outcome for the 13-year period cannot be regarded as being realistic
nevertheless the figures are given as an illustration in the next table:
Salaries
Social charges and pension premiums
Running costs
2007-08
2013-14
2025-26
1.466
1.617
2.489
809
599
611
1.096
1.720
3.484
206
294
555
Other costs
153
210
430
3.729
4.441
7.568
Total operating expenses
Table 10.10 Operational expenditure at the end of the 13-year period for the 12 Major Ports
in Rs Crores
79
The total operating expenses double in the 20 year period;

The highest increase is in the running costs as most of the costs in this
category are to a certain degree variable and experience more influence
from the high growth in throughput compared with the other cost category,
which have a more fixed character.
10.2.5 Operating margin

The operating margin is defined as the operating revenue minus the operating
costs. It is important to notice that interest and depreciation form no element in
the operating margin.
In the following table the operating margin is shown:
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
1.717
2.270
3.014
3.542
3.987
4.537
4.934
32%
33%
17%
13%
14%
9%
Operating margin
increase operational margin
Table 10.11 Operating margin for the 12 major Ports for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14 in
Rs Crores
The operating margin increases from Rs 1.717 in 2007-08 to Rs 4.934

Crores in 2013-14; this is nearly three-fold;
The increase is most spectacular in the first 3 years, after that the increase
flattens but maintains a high level.
The difference per port can be seen in the following table:
Port Trust
operating margin
Kand
JNPT
Mumb
2007-2008
135
538
-44
2013-2014
586
1.367
Mang
Coch
54
113
31
576
117
166
290
335%
154%
1405%
118%
47%
821%
increase per year
56%
26%
234%
20%
8%
137%
Port Trust
operating margin
Tuti
Chen
Enno
Visak
Para
Kolk
Total
2007-2008
121
173
95
96
246
159
1.717
2013-2014
250
281
497
412
420
-27
4.934
Increase in 7 years
106%
63%
423%
327%
71%
-117%
187%
increase per year
18%
10%
71%
55%
12%
-19%
31%
Increase in 7 years
Morm
Table 10.12 Operating margin per port for the years 2007-8 and 2013-14, amounts in Rs
Crores
80
The highest operating margin is projected for JNPT (Rs 1.367 Crores in
2013-14);
The highest increase is for Mumbai, but this port started with a negative
operating margin. Kolkata Port Trust is the only port with a negative
margin in 2013-14.
10.2.6 Total costs

The total expenses for all 12 Major Ports consist of:
Operating expenses;
Depreciation;
Interest.
200708
200809
200910
201011
201112
201213
201314
3.729
3.975
3.761
4.047
4.121
4.209
4.441
82%
13%
2013-14
Operating
expenses
Depreciation
369
437
546
593
629
692
699
169
220
274
262
297
348
308
6%
4.266
4.632
4.581
4.902
5.047
5.249
5.448
100%
Interest
Total expenses
Table 10.13 Total expenses for 12 Major Ports 2007-08 2013-14 in Rs Crores
The operating expenses form 82% of the total expenses in 2013-14;

depreciation is 13% and interest 6%.
10.2.7 Profit after tax

Projected profit after tax over the 7-year period is presented in the following table:
PAT
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
1.494
1.872
2.272
2.733
3.112
3.542
3.950
25%
21%
20%
14%
14%
12%
5.446
6.246
6.775
7.589
8.108
8.747
9.375
27%
30%
34%
36%
38%
40%
42%
increase PAT
Revenue
PAT in % of revenue
Table 10.14 Projected profit after tax for the 12 Major Ports for the 7-year period and as a
percentage of revenue, in Rs Crores
Profit after tax (net earnings) for the 12 Major Ports of India is projected at
Rs 1.494 Crores in 2007-08, rising to Rs 3.950 in 2013-14;
The highest increase is in the first 3 years. After that the increase stabilizes;
In relation to revenue the PAT is 27% in 2007-08 and increases to 42% in
2013-14;
The high increases are in line with the monopolistic situation of the Ports;
Such a situation is directly at the expense of the port users.
The PAT per port is presented in the following table:
81
Port Trust
PAT
Kand
JNPT
Mumb
Morm
Mang
Coch
2007-08
167
378
176
33
97
32
2013-14
650
993
572
91
134
208
290%
163%
224%
177%
39%
544%
48%
27%
37%
29%
6%
91%
Increase in 7 years
increase per year
Port Trust
PAT
Tuti
Chen
Enno
Visak
Para
Kolk
Total
2007-2008
83
132
44
56
172
125
1.494
2013-2014
55
239
403
249
258
98
3.950
-34%
80%
825%
347%
50%
-22%
164%
-6%
13%
137%
58%
8%
-4%
27%
Increase in 7 years
increase per year
Table 10.15 Projected profit after tax per port 2007-08 2013-14 in Rs Crores
The highest increase is in Ennore with 137% each year, followed by Cochin.
(91% per year);
Only Kolkata and Tuticorin are projected with a decrease in PAT.
10.3
Financial Situation
10.3.1 Overview
The projected financial situation for the 12 Major Ports can be derived from the
projected Balance sheet.
82
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Assets
Fixed assets
9.849
13.095
16.227
18.196
19.563
19.850
19.805
Investments
11.097
10.791
10.897
11.593
12.768
14.780
17.085
5.415
5.783
5.787
6.162
6.458
6.840
7.256
Current assets
Liquid means
3.587
3.485
3.576
3.806
4.404
5.250
6.623
Total assets
29.948
33.154
36.487
39.757
43.193
46.720
50.769
1.473
1.843
2.155
2.424
2.624
2.699
2.704
Equity and liabilities

Equity
Reserves
17.808
19.752
22.129
24.755
27.878
31.456
35.529
19.281
21.595
24.283
27.178
30.502
34.155
38.233
Provisions
2.522
2.667
2.717
2.766
2.933
3.108
3.267
Long term loans
2.278
2.848
3.364
3.538
3.432
2.956
2.605
Short term liabilities
5.868
6.044
6.123
6.275
6.326
6.501
6.664
29.948
33.154
36.487
39.758
43.194
46.720
50.769
Total own equity
Total equity and liabilities
Table 10.16 Projected balance sheet 12 Major Ports 2007-08 2013-14 in Rs Crores
The projected balance sheet shows a healthy picture, and over liquidity. The
important elements will be analyzed hereunder.
10.3.2 Fixed assets

The change in fixed assets over the period in the projection was as follows:
Book value at start
Investments in fixed assets
Depreciation
Book value at the end
Rs 7.720 Crores
Rs 16.050 Crores
Rs 3.965 Crores
Rs 19.805 Crores
10.3.3 Investments and liquid means

Investments (financial fixed assets) and liquid means are available for future
investments in fixed assets as far as they are not blocked to secure pensions and
other reserves.
The available funds (not taking into account the blocked funds) are as follows:
83
Available funds
200708
200809
200910
201011
201112
201213
201314
Investments
11.097
10.791
10.897
11.593
12.768
14.780
17.085
3.587
3.485
3.576
3.806
4.404
5.250
6.623
14.684
14.276
14.473
15.399
17.172
20.030
23.708
Liquid means
Total available
funds.
Table 10.17 Available funds in Rs Crores
The available funds increase from Rs 14.684 Crores in 2007-08 to Rs

23.708 Crores in 2013-14;
According to an email received from IPA at the 10th April 2007, the
available funds for investments in fixed assets at 31-3-2007 were Rs 7.370
Crores. The interpretation of the Advisor is that in 2007-8 an amount of Rs
7.314 Crores is blocked to secure pension funds and other reserves;
The available funds for investments at the end of the 7-year projection
period will be Rs 23.708 Crores minus Rs 7.314 Crores; this is more than
Rs 16.000 Crores;
The increase in the year 2007-08 is not known and has been neglected.
As some of the ports have not contributed fully to Pension Fund there will
be some some more transfer to Pension Fund in the coming years (see
section 10.2.24).
10.3.4 Solvency
The solvency of the 12 Major Ports in the 7-year period of the projections can be
defined as the total of own equity divided by the total of all assets.
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Own equity
19.281
21.595
24.283
27.178
30.502
34.155
38.233
Total assets
29.948
33.154
36.487
39.757
43.193
46.720
50.769
Solvency
64%
65%
67%
68%
71%
73%
75%
Table 10.18 Solvency of the 12 Major Ports 2007-08 to 2013-14
The solvency increases from 64% in 2007-08 to 75% in 2013-14;

The solvency ratio is rather high.
The solvency for the individual ports is as follows:
84
Port Trust
solvency
Kand
JNPT
Mumb
Morm
Mang
Coch
2007-2008
95%
78%
75%
52%
68%
34%
2013-2014
98%
98%
78%
60%
81%
72%
Port Trust
solvency
Tuti
Chen
Enno
Visak
Para
Kolk
Total
2007-2008
65%
50%
43%
70%
55%
49%
64%
2013-2014
42%
56%
88%
76%
75%
57%
75%
Table 10.19 Solvency per port
The solvency for Kandla and JNPT will increase to 98% in 2013-14;
The solvency for all Ports will increase except for Tuticorin;
In Tuticorin the solvency will decrease to 42%, which will be the lowest
ratio of all ports.
10.3.5 Long term loans

The borrowing capacity of all Major Ports based on above mentioned solvency is
high. Nevertheless long-term loans are relatively low.
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2.278
2.848
3.364
3.538
3.432
2.956
2.605
Long term loans
Table 10.20 Long-term loans in Rs Crores
In the first years of the 7-year projection period the loans increase with about
50%; but due to repayments at the end of the period the loans are nearly reduced
to the starting level.
Port Trust
Kand
JNPT
2007-2008
16
400
2013-2014
16
Mumb
Morm
Mang
Coch
170
78
324
191
136
long term loans
Port Trust
Tuti
Chen
Enno
Visak
Para
Kolk
Total
long term loans

2007-2008
287
16
389
206
281
111
2.278
2013-2014
1450
162
313
295
41
2.605
Table 10.21 Long term loans per port in Rs Crores
At the end of the 7-year period there are 4 ports without long-term loans;
these ports did not use the borrowing capacity;
Only one port (Tuticorin) increased their long-term loans with a substantial
amount.
85
10.4
Comparison with Rotterdam
10.4.1 General
In this part of the report a comparison has been made between the aggregated
financial figures of the Major Ports of India with the Port of Rotterdam. Of course
one has to be careful with benchmarking because there is always the risk of
comparing apples with oranges. Therefore it is good to be conscious of the
differences and similarities between the Major Ports and the Port of Rotterdam.
Major differences:
The Major Ports are first and second generation (service) ports; The Port of
Rotterdam is a third generation (landlord) port;
There is a fierce competition between the ports in Western Europe, while
the competition between the Indian ports is still limited;
There is a difference in economic growth rates in India and Western Europe;
The Indian economy grows with 8% per year while the economy in
Western Europe only grows with 2% per year.
Major similarities:
The cargo volumes are approximately similar. In 2006 the traffic volume in
Rotterdam was at 90% of the total traffic volume of the Major Ports in
India;
Rotterdam is a multicargo port that handles all commodities that are
handled by the Major ports in India;
In India, as well as in Rotterdam, there is an emphasis on bulk cargo;
The Major Ports and the Port of Rotterdam both have expansion plans and
face high investments in the near future to accommodate the growing
cargo volumes.
10.4.2 Traffic Forecasts

In 2005-06 the Major Ports in India together handled 420 M tons: in Rotterdam
this was 380 M tons. At this moment Rotterdam handles 90% of the cargo volume
that is handled by the Major Ports in India. However, the volumes in India are
increasing much faster than in Rotterdam.
In 2013 the Major Ports already will handle twice as much cargo as will be the
case in Rotterdam.
2006
2013
2026
2006-2026
Major Ports India
420
814
1.450
245%
Port of Rotterdam
380
430
595
60%
Table 10.22 Traffic forecast in the Major Ports and in Rotterdam in M tons
86
10.4.3 Investments in fixed assets

The enormous growth in cargo volumes is reflected in the investments in fixed
assets.
In the next 7 years, the Major Ports in India will be investing 16.000 Crores. In
the same period the investments in Rotterdam will add up to 14.000 Crores (85%
of the Indian investments).
The focus in India is on the first 3 years. The focus in Rotterdam is somewhat
broader:
Large investments are not only planned in the first 3 years, but also in the
last year of the projected period (and even beyond this period).
Long term planning is important to anticipate on the traffic forecasts.
4.000,0
3.500,0
3.000,0
2.500,0
2.000,0
1.500,0
1.000,0
500,0
0,0
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Total investment 12 Major Ports India
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Port of Rotterdam
Figure 10.1 Comparison investments Major Ports in India and Rotterdam in Rs Crores
87
10.4.4 Revenues
2007-08
2013-14
Growth
Major Ports India
5.400
9.400
74% (12% pa)
Port of Rotterdam
2.800
3.600
29% (5% pa)
Table 10.23 Comparison of Revenues Major Ports in India and Rotterdam in Rs Crores
The revenues of the Major ports are at this moment approximately twice as
high as the revenues of the Port of Rotterdam;
In the next 7 years the revenues of the Major Ports will almost double
while the revenues of the POR only will grow with 30%.
10.4.5 Operating expenses

2007-08
2013-14
Growth
Major Ports India
3.700
4.400
19% (3% pa)
Port of Rotterdam
1.300
1.600
23% (4% pa)
Table 10.24 Operating expenses in Rs Crores
The operating expenses of the Major Ports are approximately 3 times

higher than in the Port of Rotterdam. The most important component of
the operating expenses of the Major ports are salaries and social charges.
In Rotterdam this cost component is relatively small. The reason is that the
Major Ports are service ports and the Port of Rotterdam is a landlord port;
The growth of the operating expenses at the Major Ports is moderate, 19%
in the 7-year period. Most ports are downsizing the number of employees
in this period and new terminals are BOT contracts;
The growth of operating expenses in the 7-year period at the Port of
Rotterdam is slightly higher, 23%, mainly because of increasing
maintenance costs.
88
10.4.6 Financial performance: Operating margin and PAT
6.000
in Rs Crores
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0
Operating margin
PAT
Major Ports in India 2007-08
Port of Rotterdam 2007-08
Figure 10.2 Operating margin and PAT in Rs Crores
Concentrating on the operating margin, which is revenue less operating

expenses, it can be concluded that the operating margin in the year 2007-08
is approximately at the same level for the Major Port and the Port of
Rotterdam;
But in 7 years the growth of the revenues of the Major Ports is enormous. In
Rotterdam the growth is much more modest;
The PAT in 2007-08 of the Major Ports is already much higher than in
Rotterdam;
The growth in the 7 year period for the Indian ports is also much higher.
2007-08
2013-14
Growth
Major Ports India
1.700
4.900
188% (31% pa)
Port of Rotterdam
1.500
2.100
40% (7% pa)
Table 10.25 Operating margin in Rs Crores
The exact figures show a growth of the operating margin at the Indian ports of
188%, against 40% in Rotterdam.
2007-08
Major Ports India
Port of Rotterdam
2013-14
Growth
1.500
4.000
167% (28% pa)
300
470
57% (9% pa)
Table 10.26 Profit after tax in Rs Crores
89
The PAT in the Major Indian Ports at the moment is 5 times higher than in
Rotterdam. In 7 years time the PAT is 10 times higher than in Rotterdam;
When considering the growth in profit margin and PAT, which is much higher
in India, it is good to take into account that the investments in fixed assets in
the projected period dont differ very much. Investments in India lead to much
higher growth in profits than in Rotterdam.
10.4.7 Financial position

25.000
in Rs Crores
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
Fixed assets
Available funds
Figure 10.3 Fixed assets and available funds in Rs Crores
This figure shows the developments of the level of the fixed assets and the
available funds on the balance sheets.
In India and Rotterdam the level of fixed assets is growing, which is caused
by the investments in the 7 year period. The absolute level in Rotterdam in
2013-14 is still slightly higher than in the Major Ports but the growth in
India is much faster;
At the right side of the graph the available funds are presented. It shows
that during the period of investments the level of available funds in the
Major Ports is increasing;
In Rotterdam there are no available funds. This means that in periods of
high investments the Port of Rotterdam has to raise debt;
The solvency ratio in the Major Ports is steadily rising. In Rotterdam the
solvency rate is decreasing from 66% to 48% in the next 7 years.
90
10.4.8 Solvency
2008-09
2013-14
2025-26
Major Ports India
65%
75%
90%
Port of Rotterdam
66%
48%
66%
Table 10.27 Solvency Major Ports and Rotterdam
10.5
Financial strategy
10.5.1 General
The 12 Major Ports of India project to invest more then Rs 16.000 Crores
from their own resources during the 7-year period;
Over the same period the 12 major Ports expect the private sector to
invest some Rs 25.000 Crores via BOT contracts;
At the end of the 7- year period the internal funds available for
investments in fixed assets have augmented to Rs 16.000 Crores;
The own equity for the 12 Major Ports at the end of the 7-year period
amounted to more than Rs 38.000 Crores. The Advisor assumes a normal
debt equity ratio as 1 to 1 (in line with TAMP); which indicates a borrowing
capacity of Rs 38.000 Crores;
At the end of the 7-year period the outstanding long term loans amounted
to Rs 2.605 Crores. The unused part of the borrowing capacity is more
than Rs 35.000 Crores;
The financial strategy used by the Consultants and the Ports for the 7
year period resulted in an amount of over Rs 55.000 Crores of unused
funds. The Advisor concludes that this is not in line with the core function
of a public port.
The Advisor summarizes the amount of usable funds at the end of the 7- year
period as follows:
91
Elements
Available funds 2007 (investments and liquid means)
Rs Crores
14.684
Available for investments IPA 10-4
7.370
blocked for pensions etc
7.314
Investments in financial assets 2014
17.085
Liquid means 2014

Available funds
6.623
23.708
Blocked for pensions
7.314
Available for investments 2014
16.394
Equity = borrowing capacity
38.233
Existing loans
Balance
2.605
35.628
Available in 2014 in funds and borrowing capacity

Net from investments and liquid
16.394
From unused borrowing capacity
35.628
Total available for investments in fixed assets in 2014
52.022
Table 10.28 Available funds for investments in fixed assets in Rs Crores
An alternative financial strategy in the 7 year period could absorb these funds.
Apart from a few ports who have limited available funds, the following alternative
strategy could be followed:
operators;
for the port users;
92
10.5.2 Financial Strategy per port

Funding
Total
Investments in
fixed assets
2007-14
5.623
Internal
Resources
Private
Sector
600
5.023
Available Funds
for investments
in fixed assets
2014
8.463
15.101
4.379
10.722
7.963
Mumbai
4.531
2.897
1.634
10.607
Mormugao
2.790
554
140
New
Mangalore
Cochin
1.687
367
1.320
2.633
1.021
556
465
2.155
Tuticorin
2.636
2.318
318
-308
518
453
45
Ennore
3.324
748
2.576
2.291
Visak
2.763
1.096
1.667
2.776
Paradip
3.610
1.197
1.639
4.352
Kolkata
2.107
894
608
Kandla
JNPT
Chennai
GOV
Debt
2.094
890
20
551
5.115
54
5.045
Table 10.29 Investments and funding in Rs Crores
Apart from Tuticorin (negative available funds in 2014) the following alternative
strategy could be followed by all Major Ports:
operators;
for the port users;
10.6
Sensitivity analyses
10.6.1 General
The Advisor concluded that the assumptions made by the Consultants in
establishing the Business Plans were realistic; however these assumptions are
placed in a monopolistic situation. The Advisor expects that competition in and
between Ports in India will increase which will have effect on the revenues.
The effects of a decrease in revenue share and in tariffs will be calculated in the
sensitivity analyses.
93
The Consultants projections for the ports included a reduction of the number of
employees. It is questionable whether this effect can be realized. The effects of an
increase in salary costs will be calculated in the sensitivity analyses.
The sensitivity analyses are calculated by the Advisor for 4 situations:
The
The
The
The
revenue share for new BOT contracts will be maximized at 20%;

vessel related charges will be decreased with 20%;
cargo related charges will be decreased with 20%;
salary costs will be increased with 10%.
For each of these analyses the effect will be given for:

Profit after tax;
Available funds (investments and liquid means);
Own equity.
10.6.2 Revenue share maximized at 20%

Assumptions:
Revenue share for existing contracts will not change;
Revenue share for new contracts will be maximized at 20%.
The Advisor has examined the various BOT contracts on the basis of the financial
models provided by the Consultants. The corrections on the revenue share are
presented in the following table:
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
JNPT
Mumbai
26
27
33
39
Ennore
20
96
107
118
127
Kandla
Visak
New Mangolore
Chennai
47
54
61
68
Paradip
Mormugao
Kolkata
Tuticorin
11
16
Cochin
12
Total corrections
11
37
189
211
239
281
Table 10.30 Correction revenue share per Port and per year in Rs Crores
The new contracts with high revenue shares are expected to be operational from
2011 on; hence the corrections are in the later part of the 7 year period. The
majority of the corrections were for the contracts in Ennore and Chennai.
The effects are as follows:
94
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Concession fee base case
598
813
1.119
1.574
1.732
1.933
2.146
Concession fee max 20%
589
802
1.082
1.384
1.521
1.693
1.866
11
37
189
211
239
281
PAT base case
1.494
1.872
2.272
2.733
3.112
3.542
3.950
PAT max 20%
1.486
1.861
2.235
2.544
2.901
3.302
3.669
Available funds base case
14.684
14.276
14.473
15.399
17.172
20.030
23.708
Available funds max 20%
14.676
14.257
14.417
15.154
16.716
19.334
22.732
Own equity base case
19.281
21.595
24.283
27.178
30.502
34.155
38.233
Own equity Max 20%
19.272
21.576
24.227
26.933
30.046
33.460
37.257
Difference
Table 10.31 Effects of a 20% maximum revenue share in Rs Crores
In the year 2013-14 the profit after tax will decrease with Rs 281 Crores (7%).
The cumulative effect on the available funds and the own equity is approximately
Rs 1.000 Crores. The Advisor regards this as a minor effect.
10.6.3 20% Decrease in vessel related charges

Assumption:
All vessel related charges will be decreased with 20% for all Major Ports
and for the years in the 7 year period.
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Vessel related charges base case
1.564
1.724
1.848
2.162
2.303
2.480
2.664
Vessel related charges minus 20%
1.252
1.379
1.478
1.730
1.842
1.984
2.131
313
345
370
432
461
496
533
PAT base case
1.494
1.872
2.272
2.733
3.112
3.542
3.950
PAT minus 20%
1.181
1.527
1.902
2.301
2.651
3.046
3.417
14.684
14.276
14.473
15.399
17.172
20.030
23.708
Available funds minus 20%
14.371
13.618
13.446
13.940
15.252
17.614
20.759
19.281
21.595
24.283
27.178
30.502
34.155
38.233
Own equity minus 20%
18.968
20.938
23.256
25.719
28.582
31.739
35.284
Difference
Table 10.32 Effects of a 20% decrease in vessel related charges in Rs Crores
95
The cumulative effect on the available funds and the own equity is about Rs 3.000
Crores. The Advisor regards this as a minor effect.
10.6.4 20% Decrease in cargo related charges

Assumption:
All cargo related charges will be decreased with 20% for all Major Ports
and for the years in the 7 year period.
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Cargo related charges base case
2.561
2.839
2.784
2.747
2.898
3.044
3.184
Cargo related charges minus 20%
2.049
2.271
2.227
2.198
2.318
2.435
2.548
512
568
557
549
580
609
637
1.494
1.872
2.272
2.733
3.112
3.542
3.950
982
1.304
1.715
2.184
2.532
2.933
3.313
14.684
14.276
14.473
15.399
17.172
20.030
23.708
Available funds minus 20%
14.172
13.196
12.836
13.213
14.406
16.655
19.696
19.281
21.595
24.283
27.178
30.502
34.155
38.233
Own equity minus 20%
18.769
20.515
22.646
24.992
27.736
30.780
34.222
Difference
PAT base case
PAT minus 20%
Table 10.33 Effects of a 20% decrease in cargo related charges in Rs Crores
Crores. The Advisor regards this as a minor effect.
10.6.5 10% Increase in salary costs

Assumption:
All salary costs will be increased with 10% for all Major Ports and for the
years in the 7 year period.
96
2007-8
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Salary costs base case
2.275
2.342
2.241
2.319
2.265
2.148
2.217
Salary costs + 10%
2.275
2.502
2.753
3.028
3.331
3.664
4.030
-160
-512
-709
-1.066
-1.515
-1.813
PAT base case
1.494
1.872
2.272
2.733
3.112
3.542
3.950
PAT + 10%
1.494
1.711
1.760
2.024
2.046
2.026
2.136
Difference
14.684
14.276
14.473
15.399
17.172
20.030
23.708
Available funds + 10%
14.684
14.115
13.801
14.018
14.725
16.067
17.932
19.281
21.595
24.283
27.178
30.502
34.155
38.233
Own equity + 10%
19.281
21.435
23.611
25.797
28.055
30.193
32.458
Table 10.34 Effects of a 10% increase in salary costs in Rs Crores
In the year 2013-14 the profit after tax will decrease with Rs 1.813 Crores (45%).
Crores. The Advisor regards this as a moderate effect.
10.7
TAMP
TAMP is a Government institute that is setting a maximum to tariffs to secure that
prices and profits do not become excessive.
An institute like TAMP is necessary in a monopolistic situation. When the Major
Ports are operating in a more competitive situation, the function of TAMP could be
changed into an institute that aims at avoiding unfair competition.
TAMP uses a cost plus model to calculate the maximum level of the tariffs used by
the Indian Port Trusts.
A cost plus model could enhance a ban on efficiency. In a cost plus model there
should be two elements:
Cost estimation;
Actual costing.
The cost estimation does not harm efficiency, but can be subjective to the profit
drive of the Port Trust or the port operator.
The actual costing bans efficiency if actual costs without any correction are used
to calculate the tariffs.
A combination of both elements could overcome both problems, following the next
procedure:
Initially the tariff is set on the basis of cost estimation;
Benchmarks can be used to avoid errors;
After a period the subsequent calculation can be matched with the cost
estimation;
Analysis of the 2 elements should produce:
97
Efficiency differences;
Volume differences;
Price differences.
These differences can form a basis for the final tariff setting where:
Efficiency differences are no basis for correction;
Price differences are a basis for correction;
Volume differences are a basis for negotiation and can result in a
correction.
Cross subsidising between activities is a well-known problem that could be actual
in project selection and in tariff setting. There is no general solution for this
problem, because it is highly dependent on the exact situation and on the internal
policy of the port Trust.
A detailed study could be carried out to develop a system that overcomes the
disadvantages of the current system.
10.8
Conclusion
The sensitivity analyses for the 3 revenue reduction scenarios: each in itself shows
only a minor impact on the combined financial situation of the 12 Major Ports.
Even a complete combination of all 3 elements gives a moderate impact.
The sensitivity analysis for an increase in salary costs shows in itself a moderate
effect on the financial situation of the 12 Major Ports.
The outcome of the above three sensitivity analyses strengthens the Advisors
recommendations on the financial strategy:
operations;
for the port users;
98
Annex 1 Guidelines to arrive at concessions for Port

Services
Introduction
These guidelines refers to a specific request from IPA and deals with the practice of
granting concessions to Private Companies for rendering certain specified Port
Services.
A concession is a tool used by governments to enable private participation in the
supply of infrastructure or services, while maintaining a form of control. A
concession is governed by a contract, safeguarding that a government has control
over the concessionaire to such an extent that the pursuit of its objectives is
facilitated or in any event not jeopardised.
Port Services are services with a commercial value, rendered to port users against
charges normally not included in the dues levied for the right to enter the port
and/or to carry out certain activities in the port. Port Services are nautical services
(vessel traffic services, pilotage, tugboat services, mooring services), cargo
handling services (loading, unloading, stevedoring, administrative services) and
passenger services (embarkation and disembarkation services).
TYPES OF CONCESSIONS
Although many different kinds of concessions exist, depending on the type of
business, political situation, etc., three main types of concession may be
distinguished, depending on the extent of privatisation or more precise on the
nature and size of the risk transferred from a government entity to a concessionaire.
These are:
Pure concessions, i.e. BOTs and Rehabilitate-Operate-Transfers (ROTs) where
the concessionaire undertakes operations and investments, whereby risks
involved in operations and investments are to a considerable extent transferred
to the concessionaire;
Lease type concessions, where the concessionaire carries out the operations and
the government remains responsible for the investments. Hence the
concessionaire takes the operating profits and the operating risk is transferred
to the concessionaire. The government remains responsible for the investment
risks;
Management concessions, with a performance related fee. In this case, although
a part of the operating risks is transferred to the concessionaire, as the fee of
the concessionaire varies with the performance of the operational unit, the
government still bears substantial operational risk.
Combinations of these are possible. The differences in the concession type are
reflected in the clauses of the concession contract, i.e. in the provisions dealing with
exclusivity, risk transfer, duration, etc.
CONCESSION PROCESS
An important requirement for the process leading to granting a concession to a
private enterprise is that it must be transparent. Hence, the conditions and criteria
must be transparent, non-discriminative, objective, relevant and proportionate.
99
It is recommended to adopt a phased concession process. It must be done in a

step-by-step manner, every step to be taken with utmost care, keeping in mind a
feasible timeframe.
Start;
Preparation;
Tendering;
Awarding, Management and Evaluation;
Start
The start of the project is a political key decision. The decision is based on the
objectives of the Port Trust derived from the Governments main objectives. It is
important to formulate the objectives for privatisation/concessioning as clear as
possible, because in the results of the next stages these objectives must be
reflected to a large extent, e.g.:
Better quality of Port Services;
More efficient Port Services ;
Minimise port operational risk;
Minimise port investment risk;
Rationalise port work force;
Improve port operational safety;
Increase return from port investments.
Preparation
In the preparation stage of the concession process the bases for the concession is
provided. The project strategy, project organisation, project planning and
concession conditions have to be defined and agreed upon. The necessary
documents for the next stage need to be prepared and approved.
Project Strategy
This strategy can encompass a number of issues, to be taken by the top
management of the Port Trust. Issues covered by the strategy are for instance:
Whether or not competitively auction a concession;
Whether or not tendering with prequalification is followed;
Set a time frame for the concession process;
How to structure the Project Organisation;
To establish the required Project Organisation.
Project organisation
A solid project organisation is of paramount importance. In order to arrive at a
satisfactory concession process within an acceptable time frame the set up of a
project organisation is recommended consisting of a Concession Project Team and a
Steering Committee with representatives of relevant entities.
The products of the Project Team are among others planning documents, tender
documents and concession contract(s)
Project Planning
The set up of the project planning is the first task of the Concession Project Team.
It should contain in detail the activities and milestones of the various steps in the
process.
A summary of activities as a guideline for a planning is as follows, assuming that
the tendering with prequalification recommendation is followed.
100
Prepare publication of invitation to express interest in rendering Port Services

indicating the port, the type of service required, the competent authority, the
address to submit, the latest date to submit and a date for a site visit;
Prepare the Prequalification Tender Letter for rendering Port Services and other
tender documents;
Decision of Steering Committee to proceed;
Publication of Invitation to express interest in national and international media;
Send prequalification tender documents to candidate bidders that have timely
submitted expression of interest;
Escort site visits of candidate bidders;
Evaluate data received timely and in accordance with the instructions to
candidate bidders;
Prepare prequalification evaluation report recommending qualified bidders;
Decision of Steering Committee to proceed.
Send result of evaluation to all the candidate bidders;
Prepare Request for Quotation and other tender documents;
Send Request for Quotation and tender documents to qualified bidders;
Escort site visits and tender meeting(s) for bidders;
Collect verbal and written questions and answers during site visit and dispatch
to all bidders;
Open and evaluate technical proposals received timely and in accordance with
instructions etc;
Make evaluation report;
Decision of Steering Committee to proceed.
Open and evaluate financial proposals;
Prepare evaluation report and recommend best candidate;
Decision of Steering Committee to finalise contract;
Contract negotiations with the best candidate;
Prepare letter for all bidders after successful conclusion;
Decision of Steering Committee to sign contract;
Identify and define performance indicators for required services;
Identify and define service-monitoring requirements;
Set up department with monitoring responsibility;
Install monitoring department;
Sign contract;
Give discharge to the project organisation;
Monitor concessioned service.
Tendering
In this paragraph a guideline for the contents of tender documents is provided.
Prequalification
The prequalification tender contains at least:
A prequalification Tender Letter, submitting the prequalification tender
documents, requesting to submit qualification data and a statement of
(unconditioned) compliance with the tender procedure;
A concise description of the required services and detailed information on the
current situation;
A description of the tendering procedures;
A description of the project organisation of the Port Trust;
101
A list of data required from the candidate concessionaire, e.g., a relevant track
record of the candidate, their number of personnel and qualifications, balancesheets, types of insurances;
Instructions to candidate bidders regarding the submission of the required data,
with the latest date for submission and the address, with instructions how to
submit, the opportunity for a site survey, the language used, etc.;
The selection criteria, mapped on the above-mentioned data and the quality of
the written presentation.
The data to be submitted by the candidate suppliers of the services should at least
make clear their:
Professional qualifications, both of company and key personnel;
Financial circumstances and capacities;
Insurance coverage and extent of coverage;
Experience in the field of Port Services required;
Current involvement in Port Services;
Agreement with the tender procedure and the evaluation criteria.
Tendering for the concession
After the tender documents have been completed and agreed upon and the
qualified candidates have been identified, the tender documents can be sent to
these candidates. The tender documents include:
A Request For Quotation (RFQ), submitting the tender documents and requiring
a statement of (unconditioned) agreement with the tender procedures and
evaluation criteria;
A request for a technical proposal, mapped on the pro-forma concession
agreement, describing in full detail;
How the qualified bidder is to carry out the required Port Services;
What his personnel requirements are and how he will deal with the current work
force in the Port;
How he deals with the relevant legislation, e.g. the Port Law, Labour Law, Social
Security and Labour Safety legislation, the national and international rules and
regulations regarding safety of port operations, the safe use of port equipment
and protection of the port environment;
A Contingency Plan for fires and explosions on board of ships and the port area,
the occurrence of a natural disaster, etc.;
A Quality Assurance plan for operations;
A report on required infrastructure, superstructure and equipment;
A Maintenance Plan for superstructure and equipment, aiming at transferring the
equipment and superstructure back to the Port Trust in an operationally
adequate condition at the termination of the concession, enabling the Port Trust
to extend or to auction the concession at the then prevailing circumstances.
The possible use of subcontractors;
The RFQ furthermore requires a separate financial proposal, covering purchase
or lease of equipment and superstructure, the lease of the infrastructure,
throughput guarantee, royalties and a transparent cost-based tariff structure.
The tender documents furthermore comprise:
The tender evaluation criteria;
The pro-forma concession agreement with the concession conditions;
The instructions to bidders regarding the submission of their bid, containing the
latest date for submission, the address, how to submit, his liaison officer, the
possibility to make an appointment for a site survey. In case there are several
qualified bidders, a day for a site survey and a meeting to ask questions
102
regarding the tender for al the qualified bidders can be fixed in the Instructions
to bidders.
Awarding, management, evaluation
The key decision to award the contract can be taken when:
The winning concessionaire has been identified clearly and unambiguously,
based on the proposal and the subsequent discussions and/or negotiations;
The department of the Port Trust charged with the monitoring has been
identified/installed.
CONCESSION CONDITIONS
Hereafter a number of items to include in the concession agreement, to be used as
a guideline, are presented:
The size of the service package;
Duration;
Termination;
Tariff control;
Ownership of assets;
Safety;
Commercial Risk;
Applicable Law.
Check list for a Pro-forma Concession agreement
The Pro-forma agreement, to be annexed to the RFQ, automatically becomes the
Concession Agreement upon signing by both parties. It will have the following
structure, to be used as a guideline.
Definitions. All expressions and abbreviations used in the Agreement;
Scope. The Concessionaire will render to Port Users the Port Services as defined
in the agreement in <location> under the terms and conditions as defined in
this agreement;
Parties. The Port Trust, with <location telephone, address, etc> the
concessionaire with <organisation name, telephone, address, etc.>;
Representation. Communication on agreement daily matters only via the
explicitly mentioned representatives of the parties;
Change Management. In cases of change or update of specifications of the
agreement a change management procedure will be followed, resulting in a
contract revision sheet, to be annexed to the Agreement;
The infrastructure placed at the disposal of the concessionaire. In an annex a
recent status report;
General conditions. These need to be included in the Agreement as a number of
clauses;
Arbitration. In matters of dispute concerning interpretation or complaints
concerning the services rendered, Parties will settle the dispute by mutual
negotiation, if necessary assisted by specialists appointed by both Parties. Costs
for appointing specialists will be divided between Parties;
Services (Responsibilities and tasks). To be specified. When the Parties sign the
Agreement, the responsibilities and tasks as provided in the Technical Proposal
of the Concessionaire with amendments resulting from the previous contract
negotiations, are to be annexed to the Agreement;
Access to premises of authorised personnel of Port Trust to the infrastructure
and superstructure put at disposal of the concessionaire under the force of the
Agreement, to exercise its monitoring function must be possible at any time;
Service Levels. Office Hours, working hours, shifts;
103
Superstructure and equipment. Describing the infrastructure, which renders to

the required services;
Other obligations. Obligations related to the rendering of the Port Service, e.g.
streamlining of the port work force, maintenance;
Costs and Tariffs To be specified. When the Parties sign the Agreement, the
responsibilities and tasks as provided in the Financial Proposal of the
Concessionaire with amendments resulting from the previous contract
negotiations, are annexed to the Agreement;
Payment schedule;
Starting date of the Agreement;
Signature. For the concessionaire, name function date; For the Port Trust, name
function, date.
104
Annex 2 Projects Major Ports in India
105
Projects Kandla
RS Crores
Kandla
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
GOI
WACC
IRR (project)
Client related investment projects

Development of 12th Cargo berth and setting up of Container Terminal at Kandla
2007
330
150
180
Development of Container Terminal 2
2013
370
90
280
11%
40%
Development of Container Freight Station 1
2012
65
65
11%
13%
Development of dedicated Coal Berth at Tuna
2013
110
110
11%
16%
Development of Port Based Special Economic Zone (SEZ)
2010
3.984
3.984
9%
10%
Development of 13th to 16th multi caorgo berths at Kandla
2009
404
404
11%
13%
Expansion of capacity of liquid bulk cargo jetty
2009
Public Infrastructure Related Investment Projects

Development of Spur for Dedicated Freight Corridor
2010
234
234
18%
Single Level Car Parking (Ro-Ro)
2010
7,2
7,2
35%
186
Dredging the Sogal Channel
2007-2014
186
Modification of Bunder basin for barge handling facility
2007
10
10
Extension of Railway network in the rear of back up area from berth nos. 11 to 16
2008
17,4
17,4
Providing Railway network in newly added cargo jetty and proposed SEZ
2008
25
25
Road Over Bridges
2008
20
20
Cargo Gates
2010
0,6
0,6
Total investments in fixed assets

Correction investments for 7 year period
Total investments in fixed assets in financial model
5.763
740
140600
5.023
106
Projects Mumbai
RS Crores
Mumbai
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
GOI
WACC IRR MbPT NPV MbPT IRR BOT NPV BOT
Client related investments

13,04%
Development of Offshore Container Terminal:

Dredging
2007-08 to 2010-11
259
259
Filling and leveling of Prince's and Victoria docks
2007-08 to 2010-11
74
74
Navigational aids
2007-08 to 2010-11
2007-08 to 2010-11
Implementation of the EMP recommended bij the MoEF
2007-08 to 2010-11
Two Berths
2007-08 to 2010-11
167
Approach Trestle
2007-08 to 2010-11
89
89
Container stacking yard
2007-08 to 2010-11
163
163
Cargo handling equipment - 1st stage
2007-08 to 2010-11
284
284
2007-08 to 2010-11
11,20
711
167
15
15
Electrical equipment
2007-08 to 2010-11
12
12
Civil facilities
2007-08 to 2010-11
21
21
Container handling equipments
2012-13
134
134
Vehicles
2012-13
8
13,04%
Container Freight Stations (Large CFS)

Site development
2009-10
External developments - compound wall, gate building
2009-10
Warehouse of 5 ha
2009-10
41
41
Container yard of 16,5 ha
2009-10
27
27
Other core building facilities - truck parking, office, plumbing
2009-10
Other civil works - canteen, fire fighting facilities
2009-10
Electrical equipment
2009-10
Furnitures and fixtures
2009-10
Vehicles
2009-10
Plant and Machinery
2009-10
Preliminary and Pre-operative expenses
2009-10
Contingencies @ 2,5% project cost
2009-10
Dredging and navigational aids
2009-10 to 2010-11
80
Investments private operator
2009-10 to 2010-11
132
Land development cost
2009-10
23
Construction cost of Industrial Buildings and Storage Buildings
2009-10
226
226
2009-10
Investments in basic infrastructure
2009-12
134
35
99
Investments for Core Terminal and allied facilities
2009-12
254
66
188
22
22
20,58%
68
Fifth Oil Berth at Jawahar Dweep
23,79%
195
14,11%
22
80
132
Distriparks
49,78%
50,6
23
Empty Stacking Yards

Private investments
22,35%
Railway siding
Vehicles - 1st stage
9,32%
11,09%
14.10%
Cruise Terminals and related facilities
negative
41
Development on the Western Waterfront

Cost of Marina development
2006-11
Convention Centre
9%
24,38%
43,41
140
Public Related Investments

Phase I
Redevelopment of 18 to 21 ID Harbour Wall berths. Upgradation of the berths and
deepeming of the harbour wall to handle deep drafted General Cargo ships
259
Construction of 2nd berth for handling chemicals / specialised grade of POL at New Pir
Pau
90
Procurement of 2 Nos 32 tonne Bollard Pull Harbour Tugs
25
Replacement of Caisson Gate at HDD
13
Replcement of 3 Dock by 2 Dock Tugs
19
Procurement of 10 Nos 6 tonne ELL Wharf Cranes
30
Rail Connectivity between Wadala and Kurla
126
Road improvements within MbPT Estate
35
Road improvements outside MbPT Estate - Wadala Mahul to Truck Terminus Link
15
Road improvements outside MbPT Estate - Anik Panjarepole Link
152
Procurement of 2 Nos QGC's
63
Procurement of 3 Nos RTG's
22
Phase II
Capital Dredging for Deepening approach channel to 5th Oil berth at Jawahar Dweep
50
Capital Dredging for Deepening approach channel to 2nd Chemical Berth at Pir Pau
138
Redevelopment of BPX and BPS Berths
150
Development of Coastal Shipping
Second Chemical Berth
50
107
107
17,37%
93
Multi-level Car Parking Facility
2010-11
201
201
23,91%
504
18,30%
651
3rd Chemical Berth vs Double banking in 2nd Chemical Berth
2008-10
> 2014
Redevelopment of the Outer Harbour Wall at Indira Docks
2008-10
358
358
Development of Bunder Areas for Coastal Shipping and others
2010-13
44
44
Re-engineering of Indira Docks
na 2014
Upgradation of Apollo Bunder
2008-09
General Warehousing and Storage
2012-13
Development at Mahim Bunder
2008-09
Bird Observatory at Sewri Fort
2009-10

Normal costs of events
Proposed projects without cash flows (as in financial model)
Planned MbPT-projects without Cash Flows (as in financial model)
4.300
1.290
26658
439
535
2.896
1.634
107
Projects JNPT
RS Crores
JNPT
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
GOI
WACC
IRR (project)
NPV
Client related investment projects

Development of 32 Hectares of land for CFS
2007-08
212
330 m Extension of existing berth towards NSICT
2008-09
531
114,2
98
Development of 50 Hectares of land for empty depot operations
2008-09
235
Port Based Logistics and FTZ (lessee)
2009-10
1.700
Port Based Logistics and FTZ (port trust)
2009-10
722
Development of the first fase of 4th Container Terminal
2010-11
3.035
Marine Chemical Terminal - fase 1
2010-11
88
Development of 40 Hectares of land for empty depot operations
2012-13
227
173
54
Development of 56 Hectares of Land for CFS Operations
2012-13
468
243
225
531
185
13%
24%
470
13%
23%
137
9%
15%
348
3.035
13%
14%
280
88
13%
20%
56
50
1.700
722
Public investment projects

Common user pipelines
2007-08
174,7
174,7
Laning of SH - 54
2007-08
3.580
1.000
Grade separators at Karal and Guvan Phata
2008-09
800
400
Increase shallow berth moves to 16 moves per hour
2008-09
7,5
Additional link road
2009-10
1.680
475
Additional Evacution Road
2009-10
41
41
Dronagiri link road
2009-10
26
26,3
Dredging
2008-09
800
800
Increase RMQC moves at JNPT to 24 moves per hour
2009-10
120
120
Six Laning of NH4B
2010-11
450
50
Additional road linking port and highways
2010-11
45
45
33
33,3
4th container terminal link road
2010-11
Reduction in vessel unoperational hours
2010-11
Development of Sorting Yard
2010-11
356
Increase RMGC Moves per hour
2013-14

15.332
2.580
400
1205
400
356
4.610
2314.379
10.722
Projects Mormugao
RS Crores
Mormugoa
Investment costs
(Debt)
Private
Total Trust (IR)
Repair and strenghthening of breakwater
27
Deepening the approach channel and berth no. 9
65
Increasing the Iron ore handling capacity

Developing Vasco Bay to handle the liquid bulk
and other non cargo vessels
Construction of new berth no. 7
Increasing the capacity of handling miscellaneous
commodities
Improving the rail and road connectivity between
hinterland in Karnataka and Goa
Improving the road and rail connectivity within the
port premises
316
126
190
90
140
36
54
15
Computerization of the port

Miscellaneous
11
HAI
16
65
140
9
2.029
2.029
31
12
18
71
71
2.788
264
290
140
2.094
108
Projects New Mangalore

RS Crores
New Mangalore
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
Road connect to port
2007-08
895
Development of port based SEZ
2007-08
Mechanised Iron Ore handling berth 14
2008-09
197
Harbour crane (for bulk cargoes)
2008-09
30
10
GOI
WACC
IRR BOT
NPV BOT
885
197
30
30
8%
32%
Harbour tug No 1
2008-09
30
Development of bunker facilities
2008-09
10
10
Development of coal berth 15
2009-10
194
194
8%
22%
POL berth at oil dock, berth 13
2009-10
54
8%
29%
8%
45%
54
Development marshalling yard
2009-10
40
10
Container terminal to 100k TEU
2009-10
32
32
IT
2009-10
Pilot Launch
2009-10
Improvement internal roads
2010-11
50
50
Environment
2010-11
Multi purpose berth No 16
2010-11
50
50
KIOCL Berth nr 8 from 13 to 14 m
2011-12
18
18
Harbour tug No 2
2011-12
20
20
Bulk handling (ore/coal) Western dock, berth 17
2013-14
50
50
1.686
367
261
270
130
30
1.320
64
Projects Cochin
RS Crores
Cochin
Timing
Vallarpadam International Container Terminal (VICT)
2007
Single Buoy Mooring Facility for crude Oil Import (SBM)
2007
LNG Terminal
2009
LPG Terminal
2008
Bunkering Terminal (two phases)
2007-09
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
55
55
2017-19
38
38
GOI
WACC
IRR (project)
NPV
21%
25
International Cruise Terminal
2008-10
55
55
14%
Distribution Park
2007-08
36
36
22%
26,82
Business District
2006-07
149
149
18%
120,31
2009-10
133
133
4%
-26,18
Upgradation of Willingdon Island

Capital Dredging
2007-08
15
2010-11
60
2010
481
1.021
15
36
60
481
556
465
Projects Tuticorin
RS Crores
Tuticorin
Cargo berth No 9
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
GOI
IRR
2007-09
40
40
9%
Shallow Berth - 3 Nos
2007-09
30
30
15%
North Cargo Berths
2007-11
60
60
14%
Dredging
2007-09
450
450
7
Upgradation of CJ-II
2007-08
Conversion of CB8 to CT8 (Rs Crores 30 in 2006-07)
2006-09
150
Outer Harbour - Phase I
2009-14
1788
1638
150
12%
Outer Harbour - ICJ (Rs Crores 24 in 2014-15)
2013-15
36
18
18
12%
Provisions for investments
2012-13
75
75
2.636
23%
150
2.318
10%
318
109
Projects Chennai
RS Crores
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Chennai
Timing
Multilevel Car Parking and Cruise Terminal
2007-08
133
133
Dedicated Elevated Corridor
2007-08
40
20
Ennore Manali Expressway
2007-08
Various
2007-12
191
191
Development of container Terminal 2
2008-09
100
100
Converting Tondiarpet Housing Colonyinto Off-dock Container Stacking Facility
2012-13
50
45
518
453
45
Total
GOI
IRR
NPV
15,31%
41,54
17,40%
2,43
20
20
Projects Ennore
RS Crores
Ennore
Timing
Total
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
GOI
WACC
IRR
NPV
Private Investments
Existing Coal Berths (TNEB Coal)
2013-14
200
200
Common-user Coal Terminal
2007-09
400
400
Common-user Iron Ore Terminal
2007-09
480
480
Marine Liquid Terminal
2006-08
196
196
Container Terminal
2008-10
1.300
1.300
12%
27,30%
867
Public Investments
Capital Dredging phase 1
2007-08 to 2010-11
90
2007-08 to 2010-11
150
2007-08 to 2010-11
170
Road Connectivity
2007-08 to 2010-11
180
Rail connectivity to coal, iron ore, and container stackyards
2007-08 to 2009-10
63
Miscellaneous investments
2007-08 to 2009-10
45
Equity contribution to the SPV of Puttur-Attipattu new rail line
50
2.576
748
2.576
110
Projects Visakhapatnam
RS Crores
Visakhapatnam
Mobile Cranes 2*100t
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
2007
45
Mechanisation export facility WQ1/2 (VPT 23)
2008
106
Construction WQ-7
2008
Replacement Equipment IO Berths
2008
39
Deepening Entrance Channel and Inner Basin to 12,5 m
2008
40
Strengthening W. Quays to 12,5 m
2008
47
47
Mechanisation General Cargo Berth
2009
237
65
SBM facility for the handling of crude by VLCC
2009
540
12
WACC
IRR (project)
NPV
94
8%
20%
102
8%
12%
70
8%
18%
37
8%
< 0%
198-
8
39
40
172
540
Replacement tugs
2009
40
40
New tugs 75T BP
2009
90
90
Construction WQ 6
2009
45
East Docks, South Side
2009
119
Construction EQ 10
2009
35
Mechanised facilities coal handling East Docks South
2009
60
Liquids lines / Loading arms LPG Jetty
2009
23
Installation shiploader Alumina WQ7
2010
30
Construction WQ 8
2010
50
45
30
89
35
60
23
30
50
Procurement barges and launches
2010
Replacement 2 locos 1430 HP & 1 loco 3100 HP
2010
34
34
Extension Container Terminal
2011
120
Upgrading OR1-2
2011
50
Road
2011
229
Other works
2011
132
62
Rail
2011
129
129
Upgrading Iron Ore Jetty for 200.000 DWT (lengthening)
2012
50
50
Environmental
2012
45
45
Residual costs on VPT 4
2012
145
145
Deepening Entrance Channel and Inner Basin to 14 m
2014
150
150
Strengthening E. Quays to 14 m
2014
120
120
Mechanised import facility EQ1-3
2015
East Docks, North Side
2015
120
50
229
70
74
89
Total investments in fixed assets until 2014

GOI
45
89
2.763
2.852
1.096
1.098
1.668
1.831
Projects Paradip
RS Crores
Paradip
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
GOI
WACC
IRR
NPV
Deepening of the Channel
2008-09
716
373
343
15%
11%
Deep draft Iron Ore Berth Phase 1
2008-11
448
116
332
15%
16%
516
Deep draft Coking Coal Phase 1
2008-11
356
107
249
15%
17%
42
Deep draft Non-Coking Coal Phase 1
2008-11
218
83
135
15%
19%
50
Container Terminal Phase 1 & 2
2011-12
697
146
551
15%
16%
20
2014
41
12
29
15%
20%
20
2007-14
360
360
Fertilizer Terminal (dredging)

Other investment provision
451
Iron Ore Berth Phase 2
> 2018
504
504
15%
15%
190
Coking Coal Berth Phase 2
> 2018
270
270
15%
15%
Total investments in fixed assets until 2014

2.836
3.610
1.197
1.197
1.639
2.413
111
Projects Kolkata
RS Crores
Kolkata
Timing
Investment costs
Port Trust Private
Total
GOI
Debt
WACC
IRR
HDC Ongoing projects

River Regulaory (RR) Measures for improvement of Draft in Hooghly Estuary
421
Construction of Multipurpose berth (No. 2)
2006-07
Construction of Multipurpose berth (No. 13)
2006-07
421
47
47
40
40
Construction of two Holding Berths
20
20
Procurement of 2 RMQs for container handling
50
50
Procurement of 4RTGCs for container handling
24
24
Procurement of 2 nos. Stacker-cum-reclaimer
25
25
Development of Road Infrastructure
30
30
Improvement of Back Up Area with Railway connectivity
25
25
Development of additional storage area
50
50
Augmentation of railway siding and allied facilities in Haldia dock complex
24
24
HDC New Projects

Acquisition of new equipment
100
Dry Bulk Capacity Enhancement (berth 2 and 13)

Up-Grading Handling Capacity of Existing Berths
New Riverine Jeties - 2 nos
100
48
105
105
2007-08
48
48
2008-09
99
99
Pocurement/Replacement/Refurbishment of Cargo of handling equipment for handling Containers
23
23
Replacement/Refurbishment of various Cargo of handling equipment for handling Break Bulk
24
24
Construction of Pilotage facilities
14
14
Modernization/replacement for Port Craft viz. Grab Dredger & Tugs
42
12
16%
25,61%
10,38%
15,96%
10,38%
14,07%
KDS Ongoing projects
Replacement of SD Subarnarekha
30
130
Development of infrastructure for storage of break bulk
17
130
17
Up-gradation of Railway Track at KDS to handle break bulk
Development of infrastructure to store break bulk materials
19
19
Development of Energy Education/Environmental Awareness Park
10
9,9
Commercial utilization of Mechanical Engineering Workshop Facilities
15
15
KDC New Projects

3 New Berths at Diamond Harbour (BOT 313, rest PT?)
2006-07
16
2007-08
132
2008-09
167
2009-10
3 Riverine Jetties at Saugor (BOT 665, 35 PT)
46
350
Floating Terminals at Sagar/Sandheads

2009-10
140
2010-11
280
2011-12
280
Yard Development at NSD
50
1-30 T capacity ELL Crane

2.925
345
50
8
603
291
894
608
551
54
112
Annex 3 Projected Profit and Loss account 12 major Ports

In Rs Crores
200708
200809
200910
201011
201112
201213
201314
202526
Revenue
Port dues
621
688
741
860
910
975
1.050
2.026
Other dues
943
1.036
1.107
1.302
1.393
1.505
1.614
3.020
1.083
1.181
1.154
1.134
1.185
1.289
1.322
1.964
276
298
310
275
297
301
313
453
Wharf handling
1.203
1.360
1.321
1.339
1.416
1.454
1.550
2.293
Concession fee
598
813
1.119
1.574
1.732
1.933
2.146
5.064
722
870
1.024
1.106
1.175
1.291
1.380
2.245
5.446
6.246
6.775
7.589
8.108
8.747
9.375
17.066
1.466
1.503
1.476
1.529
1.542
1.581
1.617
2.489
809
839
765
790
723
567
599
611
1.096
1.246
1.043
1.264
1.417
1.587
1.720
3.484
206
224
231
254
261
279
294
555
Stevedoring revenu
Storage
Total operating revenue

Expenses
Salaries
Social charges and pension
premiums
Running costs
Other costs
153
163
245
211
178
195
210
430
Total operating costs
3.729
3.975
3.761
4.047
4.121
4.209
4.441
7.568
Operational net earnings before

DIT
1.717
2.270
3.014
3.542
3.987
4.537
4.934
9.497
949
1.006
1.060
1.130
1.237
1.406
1.544
3.970
2.666
3.276
4.075
4.672
5.224
5.943
6.478
13.467
369
437
546
593
629
692
699
1.208
2.298
2.839
3.529
4.079
4.595
5.251
5.779
12.259
-169
-220
-274
-262
-297
-348
-308
-107
2.129
2.619
3.255
3.817
4.297
4.904
5.470
12.151
635
747
983
1.084
1.186
1.362
1.520
3.773
1.494
1.872
2.272
2.733
3.112
3.542
3.950
8.378
Other income
Net earnings before DIT
depreciation
Net earnings before it
Interest
Net earnings before tax
Tax
Net earnings
113
Annex 4 Benchmarks
Benchmarks as provided in this annex are obtained from the Final Report
Development of business Plan for New Mangalore Port Trust.
114
115
116
117
118

Indian Port Association (IPA)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indian Port Association (IPA)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Indian Port Association (IPA)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

*OEJBO1PSUT"TTPDJBUJPO

Coordination of business plans for major ports in India

Main Report, final version

Prepared by Port of Rotterdam Authority, September 2007

* this page left blank *

Indian Port Development Plan, Volume 1

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

SWOT table for the 12 Major Ports

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Throughput per Port

Consolidated cargo forecast in M Tons

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

On the West coast it should be investigated whether new container port

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Ennore is a major opportunity to become a 3rd generation port on the East

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Port organisation and institutional setting

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Although it will be an exercise of major magnitude, involving a long process, it is

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Port of Mormugao ........................................................................ 46

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

10.2.7 Profit after tax ................................................................... 81

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

2.1 Scope of the Project .............................................................................. 3

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India, Volume 1

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

Volume I, the main report, presents the findings, conclusions and

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

Observations on the project

Aim of the project and parties involved

Figure 2.1 Scope of the Project

The implementation of the assignment started in March 2006 with a meeting in

The strategy to achieve these goals;

Inception phase, providing a description of the actual situation;

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

The financial models prepared by the Consultants were in general of good

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

Vision and Strategy

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

services, should be the key mission of the Port

Table 3.1 Missions & Visions of the 12 Major Ports

Summarised, the key words of these statements are the following:

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

Characteristics Major Ports in India and NW-Europe

Figure 4.1 The 12 Major Ports of India

Coordination of Business Plans Major Ports in India

Figure 4.2 The HH-Range

The following comparisons can be made:

Role of the private sector

Industrial port clusters

Several (a.o. Rotterdam,