Table 6.15 Port Selection Matrix for Tamil Nadu & Pondicherry
TN TN TN TN Pondich
erry
Parameter Weightage
Cuddalore Nagapatinam
Colachal
Valinokkam
Pondicherry
All Weather / Fair Weather 10 3 4 4 5 3
Draft at Channel / Berth/
Anchorage
10 5 4 5 1 5
Rail / Road Connectivity 15 5 5 2 1 5
Cargo Potential 25 3 2 1 1 1
Storage Area 15 4 2 1 4 3
Existing Infrastructure 5 2 1 1 1 2
Operating Climate 10 4 2 3 2 4
Proximity to Major Port 10 4 5 5 2 4
Overall Score 100 3.80 3.10 2.45 2.05 3.15
For Tamil Nadu the final selection was restricted to only Cuddalore.This is attributed to
the fact that Pondicherry and Cuddalore are in close proximity to each other and are
competing for cargo emanating from a common hinterland and consequently the selection
of only the highest scoring port i.e. Cuddalore may be recommended for immediate
development.
The Afzalpurkar Working Group on Coastal Shipping set up by the Central Government
in its report while highlighting attention on various legal, administrative and financial
Chapter 6: Selection of Minor Ports
6- 13
constraints had made 12 substantive recommendations. One of these advocated
“Widening and Deepening of Pamban Canal”. Of its 12 recommendations 11 were
accepted by the Shipping Ministry. The one related to widening and deepening of Pamban
Canal was not implemented presumably for security reasons. If this project materialises it
would give a fillip to the development of several minor ports in the region. The port of
Valinnokam and Kudankalam being some of them. The Sagarmala program may take this
aspect into consideration.
6.5.4 Kerala
This state, situated on the south West Coast of India is known as “God’s Own
Country”and has hundreds of short flowing rivers of Western Ghats, bounded on the east,
branching out into numerous tributaries, which drain into countless canals, lakes, lagoons
and backwaters of the Arabian Sea. The state is a heady mix of land and water offering a
variety of options for transporting men and materials from one land mass to another.
Besides these inland waters, the state has 570 Kms of coastline with nine coastal districts
having direct access to the Arabian Sea. These are Kasargode, Kannur (Cannanore),
Kozhikode (Calicut), Malappuram, Trissur (Trichur), Ernakulam, Alappuzha (Alleppey),
Kollam (Quilon) and Thiruvanathapuram (Trivandrum) from north to south.
Table 6.16 Port Selection Matrix for Kerala
Parameter Weightage Vizhingham
Thangassery
Neendakara
Beyp-ore Azhikkal
Ponnani
All Weather / Fair
Weather
10 5 3 3 3 3 3
Draft at Channel /
Berth/ Anchorage
10 2 2 5 1 2 1
Rail / Road
Connectivity
15 4 5 5 5 3 4
Cargo Potential 25 1 2 1 2 2 1
Storage Area 15 3 2 1 3 3 2
Existing Infrastructure 5 3 1 3 3 3 1
Operating Climate 10 3 2 2 3 3 2
Proximity to Major
Port
10 5 4 3 4 4 3
Overall Score 100 2.95 2.70 2.60 2.95 2.75 2.10
In the above selection matrix, Beypore scores more on the weighted average but after an
in-depth study of the characteristics of the port it was however found that Beypore is
located on hard rock surface in the river basin where dredging is possible upto a depth of
3.5 M (not upto the desired depth of 8.0 M to facilitate direct berthing of coastal vessels
of 10000 DWT) .In comparison though Azzhikal scores lower than Beypore it enjoys the
same hinterland as Beypore and can easily be dredged to the depth of 8.0 m to facilitate
direct berthing of coastal vessels. The Consultants are therefore of the opinion that
Azzhikal be developed as the second port in Kerala after Vizhinjam.
Chapter 6: Selection of Minor Ports
6- 14
6.5.5 Karnataka & Goa
The state of Karnataka emerged for the first time in the marine states of India in 1956
following the reorganization of States. For improving conservancy, maintenance and
development a new department called Karnataka Ports Department was formed in
1957.The state has a maritime coastline of 280 Kms with 9 minor ports and the major port
of New Mangalore.
The prestigious Naval Project “ Seabird” coming next to Karwar port and its
corresponding activities is expected to increase significantly in the years to come.
The state of Goa has about 555 Kms of Inland Waterways out of which only 255 Kms are
navigable through rivers Mandovi, Zuari and their tributaries. These waterways are
mainly used by the mining industry for transport of iron ore from the riverside loading
points to Mormugao port or Panaji Outer Harbour anchorage.
The ports of Goa are riverine in nature and caters mainly to shipments of only one
commodity i.e. iron ore.
Table 6.17 Port Selection Matrix for Karnataka & Goa
Goa Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka Parameter Weightage
Panaji Karwar Malpe Old Mangalore
All Weather / Fair Weather 10 3 5 3 3
Draft at Channel / Berth/
Anchorage
10 1 5 1 1
Rail / Road Connectivity 15 3 5 4 5
Cargo Potential 25 4 1 1 1
Storage Area 15 1 2 4 3
Existing Infrastructure 5 3 4 3 3
Operating Climate 10 2 4 4 4
Proximity to Major Port 10 1 3 2 1
Overall Score 100 2.45 3.20 2.60 2.50
Karwar’s development is likely to be low key because of restrictive policies of
development in the future considering the sensitive nature of the ongoing “ Sea Bird”
Naval project. As Karwar is being proposed as a coastal port it would not have a major
bearing in the selection as only in and out movements from Indian ports is being
considered. Keeping in view the constraints of the Naval project Karwar cannot take up
the mantle of being a hub port servicing international trade and feedering to other ports in
the West Coast.
6.5.6 Maharashtra
Maharashtra has a coastline dotted with 53 notified minor ports. The total cargo handled
at these ports during 2001-02 was 4.96 MT as compared to 5.90 MT in 2000-01.The
decline of 15.93percent in traffic covers both overseas and coastal traffic. The
Chapter 6: Selection of Minor Ports
6- 15
contribution of the State to the total cargo handled by all state owned ports is around 5.21
percent in 2001-02 as against 6.76 percent in the previous year.
Table 6.18 Port Selection Matrix for Maharashtra
Parameter Weightage
Dharamtar
Rewas Dighi Jaigad Redi Ranpar Ratnagiri
All Weather / Fair
Weather
10 3 3 3 1 1 3 2
Draft at Channel / Berth/
Anchorage
10 4 1 1 4 4 4 2
Rail / Road Connectivity 15 4 1 1 1 2 1 3
Cargo Potential 25 5 1 1 1 1 1 3
Storage Area 15 2 5 5 3 1 1 2
Existing Infrastructure 5 3 1 1 1 1 1 3
Operating Climate 10 4 3 3 3 2 2 4
Proximity to Major Port 10 1 1 2 5 2 4 5
Overall Score 100 3.50 2.00 2.10 2.20 1.65 1.90 2.95
Dabhol, a captive port built by Enron has not been taken into the matrix because of the
ongoing litigation.
6.5.7 Gujarat
Gujarat the principal maritime State is endowed with a natural coastline of approximately
1200 Kms, which is approximately 29 percent of India’s total coastline. Gujarat has the
added advantage of a vast hinterland covering the Northern and Central Indian States and
as a result there is high demand for services offered by the minor ports. The State has 40
ports and the Gujarat Maritime Board set up in April 1982 controls all the minor ports and
is responsible for the development and operations of these ports. These ports have
witnessed impressive development and handle significant volumes of both international
and coastal cargo.
Table 6.19 Port Selection Matrix for Gujarat
Parameter Weigh
tage
Bhavnagar
Jafra
bad
Pipav
av
Navla
khi
Bedi Sikka Okha Porb
ander
Mun
dra
Dahej Magd
alla
All Weather / Fair
Weather
10 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 3 3
Draft at Channel /
Berth/ Anchorage
10 2 2 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 5 4
Rail / Road
Connectivity
15 4 3 5 2 4 4 2 4 4 1 4
Cargo Potential 25 4 5 4 1 3 5 2 2 2 2 5
Storage Area 15 4 2 5 4 4 4 3 3 5 4 5
Existing Infrastructure 5 5 4 5 2 3 5 5 5 5 5 5
Operating Climate 10 2 3 5 2 5 5 4 5 5 5 5
Proximity to Major
Port
10 5 5 5 2 2 2 4 5 2 5 5
Overall Score 100 3.85 3.70 4.75 2.45 3.70 4.40 3.20 3.70 3.80 3.30 4.55
Chapter 6: Selection of Minor Ports
6- 16
While selecting ports due consideration has been given to the physical topography of the
state. While dividing the State into four zones representing Southern Gujarat, Saurashtra
East and West and the Kutch region which caters to a vast northern hinterland of the
country the Consultants have chosen the highest scoring port from each of these zones.
The ports finally selected are Magdalla, Pipavav, Sikka and Mundra (GAPL).
6.6 FINAL LIST OF SELECTED MINOR PORTS
The following minor ports have qualified for inclusion in the first phase of intensive
development on the basis of the detailed analysis made in the preceding sections,
1. Gopalpur
2. Kakinada Deep Water Port (Kakinada Seaports Private Limited)
3. Krishnapatnam
4. Cuddalore
5. Vizhinjam
6. Azzhikal
7. Malpe
8. Karwar
9. Ratnagiri
10. Dharamtar
11. Magdalla
12. Sikka
13. Pipavav ( Gujarat Pipavav Port Limited)
14. Mundra (Gujarat Adani Port Limited)
Figure 6.1 depicts the state wise selected ports.
6.6.1 List of ports for future development
The Consultants also feel that once these 14 ports reach a threshold traffic demand of 50
percent of their capacity a new set of ports may be taken up for development. The next set
of ports identified by the Consultants from the model are those that meet the criterion of
achieving 50 percent of the maximum achievable rating i.e. a rating of 2.5 and above.
Hence all those ports that achieve this threshold rating of 2.5 are listed below
1. Kulpi
2. Dhamra
3. Kakinada Anchorage Port
4. Nagapattinam
5. Pondicherry
6. Thangassery
7. Neendakara
8. Old Mangalore
9. Bhavnagar
10. Jafrabad
11. Dahej
12. Porbandar
13. Bedi
14. Okha
Chapter 6: Selection of Minor Ports
6- 17
For Maharashtra State since no other ports from the model are meeting this threshold
criterion but giving due cognizance to the fact that it has the largest number of minor
ports in the country either the minor port of Vadhavan or Dabhol or Jaigad can be
considered for future development depending on the industrial progress of the influence
area of these ports and subject to them meeting the necessary environmental clearances.
6.6.2 Sensitivity Analysis
As part of the workshop proceedings and comments received by various stakeholders
different sensitivity exercises were carried out to study the impact on the final selected
ports. The sensitivity tests included
a) Assigning a different set of weight to the parameters.
The following three different weightage sets was applied to the model for each State
Parameter Weightage
A
Weightage
B
Weightage
C
All Weather / Fair Weather 15 15 10
Draft at Channel / Berth/ Anchorage 5 5 10
Rail / Road Connectivity 20 15 15
Cargo Potential 25 30 20
Storage Area 15 10 15
Existing Infrastructure 10 10 10
Operating Climate 5 10 10
Proximity to Major Port 5 5 10
Overall Score 100 100 100
Sensitivity Analysis with weightage A: There is no impact in the final selected list of
minor ports.
Sensitivity Analysis with weightage B: There is no significant impact in the final
selected list of minor ports except instead of Malpe, the port of Panaji achieves a better
scorecard. However, the Consultants are of the opinion that since the Padubidri thermal
plant is being commissioned near Malpe this port shall have a better future than Panaji
which constitutes a number of private jetties catering to movement of iron ore from their
mines to Mormugao Port through rivers Zuari and Mandovi.
Sensitivity Analysis with weightage C: There is no impact in the final selected list of
minor ports.
b) If existing ports total traffic values are put instead of the coastal cargo potential there is
no impact in the final selected list of minor ports.
6.7 MAJOR PORTS AS ALTERNATIVE TO MINOR PORTS
The Consultants also examined the scope for channeling coastal traffic through major
ports and the conclusions arrived at were
