Gopalpur Ports Limited Pre- feasibility Study for ...€¦ · Gopalpur Ports Ltd. Development of Liquid Jetties at Gopalpur Port Pre- feasibility Study Final Report BMT Consultants

This document contains information that is proprietary to Gopalpur Ports Ltd. and BMT, which is to be held in

confidence. No disclosure or other use of this information is permitted without the express authorization of

Gopalpur Ports Ltd. or BMT.

Gopalpur Ports Limited

Pre- feasibility Study for

development of liquid jetties

at Gopalpur Port

Final Report

October 2018

BMT Consultants (India) Private Limited

310 Sarthik Square, S.G. Highway, Ahmedabad – 380 054

Tel: +91 (79) 40028708 Fax: +91 (79) 40028710

Pre- feasibility Study

Final Report

prepared for

Gopalpur Ports Ltd.

Prepared under the management of:

Name: Anvi Maniar

Position: Senior Manager

Reviewed and approved by:

Name: Tarun Kaw

Position: Director

Reference: BMT/1395/PFR/Final Report/Issue 1

Date: 26.10.2018

Gopalpur Ports Ltd. Development of Liquid Jetties at Gopalpur Port Pre- feasibility Study

Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page i

Executive Summary

Introduction

Gopalpur Port is located in Ganjam district of Odisha and is being developed by Gopalpur

Ports Limited (GPL) under Build Own Operate Transfer (BOOT) model. The phase- wise

development plan of the port includes setting up the infrastructure for imports of LNG and

LPG, alongwith a no. of other liquids. The liquid cargo mix includes Liquified Natural Gas

(LNG), Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG), Petroleum and other liquids (POL), edible/vegetable

oil and chemicals including ammonia.

GPL intends to establish the feasibility of setting up the required facilities for handling liquids

at Gopalpur Port. In this context, GPL have appointed BMT Consultants (India) Pvt. Ltd.

(BMT) to prepare a Pre- feasibility Report (PFR) for the development of liquid jetties at

Gopalpur Port. The assignment aims to undertake assessment of the feasibility of

developing and operating liquid terminal, which includes handling of LNG, LPG, POL,

edible oil, chemicals etc. along with identification of locations for developing the

infrastructure and preliminary level terminal configuration.

Existing infrastructure

At present, the port has an existing berth and two breakwaters. Construction of two

additional berths is ongoing at the port adjacent to the existing berth. These berths will be

used to handle dry bulk and general cargo. Currently partial operations are ongoing and

the area behind the existing berth is used as the back-up yard. Development of the back-

up yard, railway sidings, yard and road network are proposed on the landside area behind

the berths under the current phase of development. Generally, the land side area at

Gopalpur Port, is uneven and undulating with sparse vegetation. There is no other

habitation at site.

Traffic and terminal configuration

The liquid cargo mix to be handled at Gopalpur includes LNG, LPG, POL, edible/vegetable

oil and chemicals including ammonia are envisaged to be imported. The forecasted

throughput ranges from 0.1 Mtpa of other liquids in the first two years and reaching upto a

total volume of 13 Mtpa (10 Mtpa LNG and 3 Mtpa LPG, other liquids) in 2028.

For the development of the liquid terminals at Gopalpur Port, the terminal processes for (i)

LNG and (ii) LPG and other liquids were studied. Based on the analysis of the various LNG

terminal concepts and taking into cognizance the advantages offered by the Floating

Storage Regasification Unit (FSRU) as compared to the other options, it has been selected

as the preferred alternative for the current stage of the project. This option has relatively

low capital cost and provides significant commercial flexibility compared to the other

configurations described. As per the operational considerations, upto 3.5 Mtpa can be

handled using a single FSRU. Accordingly, it is proposed that the FSRU based facility will

be developed for the current phase and subsequently the terminal will be converted to a

conventional LNG terminal to handle higher volumes.

https://www.business-standard.com/search?type=news&q=lng


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page ii

Functional requirements

The vessel size analysis for LPG and other liquids suggests that the ships calling at

Goplapur Port will be relatively smaller tankers in the range of 30,000 DWT. For LNG

carriers, considering the global trends and current industry standards, in the initial phase,

design LNGC size is considered as 138,000 m3, with the maximum vessel size being

considered as 173,000 m3. In the future, the terminal can be planned to handle upto Q-Max

size vessels i.e. 267,000 m3. Based on the assessment of functional requirements, the

principal harbour dimensions are fixed as per the table below. These parameters will govern

the jetty design, storage capacity and harbour design.

Table 1: Functional requirements

Current phase (facility with FSRU) Future phase (conventional LNG facility)

Inner channel depth (m wrt CD) 13.0 13.2

Outer channel depth (m wrt CD) 15.3 15.6

Channel width (m) 230 270

Turning circle dia. (m) 560 610

Depth in harbour (m wrt CD) 13.0 13.2

The berth requirement is determined based on the number and size of vessels as well as

the type of cargo to be handled. Considering the safety aspects and need for cargo

segregation, it is proposed that separate jetties will be provided for (i) LNG (ii) LPG and

other liquids. Based on the jetty occupancy assessment, it is proposed that two liquid jetties

be developed; one dedicated jetty for LNG operations and the other liquid jetty for LPG and

the other liquids.

The land side requirements for the cargoes is assessed basis the land required for storage

at the port as well as associated evacuation facilities. The area requirement of LNG terminal

with FSRU is 5-10 ha, and upon developing the conventional onshore LNG facility, with

storage, process side facilities and other ancillary infrastructure alongwith evacuation

related facilities, around 40 ha area will be required. Given the total area requirement for

LPG and liquids, the land area needed for developing the liquid terminal is in a range of 15-

20 ha.

The NG will be evacuated primarily by means of pipeline. To make LNG available to

customers not linked to the gas pipeline network, it will be supplied by cryogenic trucks.

The other liquids like POL, edible oil, chemicals etc. will be evacuated mainly by means of

pipeline. The liquid cargo will be evacuated from the port and delivered to the destination

via road and railway modes as well.

Site selection

For selection of the most suitable locations for developing marine and landside facilities,

the key aspects under consideration are feasibility of developing multiple jetties in the

harbour, safety considerations, segregation requirements, cost economics and operational

requirements as well as constraints alongwith environmental considerations.


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page iii

The available waterfront for development of additional jetties includes the following:

(i) Stretch in continuation with dry/ general cargo berths already developed

(ii) Along the south breakwater

(iii) Along the intermediate breakwater

Since the site selection for LNG facility necessitates taking into cognizance the safety

aspects, the identification of location for LNG jetty is carried out first, followed by selection

of location for the other liquids jetty. Having studied each of the three alternative options

with regards to understanding their salient features towards assessing their suitability as

the preferred location for developing the LNG facility and also keeping in view the port

expansion plans, the location along the outer arm of the south breakwater emerges as the

most suitable alternative. It is also considered that the dry bulk berths will be developed as

planned by GPL, along the inner arm of south breakwater. Accordingly, as per the analysis

of the available sites, the location along the intermediate breakwater is found to be

favourable for developing the jetty for LPG and other liquids. The locations for the jetties

will require to be finalised following a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) study.

Figure 1: Locations of liquid terminals (marine and landside facilities)

The portion of the landside area behind the bulk and general cargo berths is earmarked as

the back up area for the current dry bulk terminal development. Hence, the land parcels

available for liquid terminal back up area development are those located to the east and

west of the dry bulk back up yard. Based on area availability, pipeline connectivity,

operational convenience and safety as well as expandability, the location, size and

arrangement of the back up yard for both the liquid jetties, based on the phase wise


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page iv

requirements are assessed. Considering the location of the LNG jetty, the most suitable

location for developing the back up area taking into account the area availability and

pipeline routing is the location to the west of the coal stockyards. Taking into cognizance

the location of the liquid handling jetty areas at two locations (i) area to the north of the

railway corridor (ii) area between the railway corridor and the warehouse will be utilised for

developing the landside facilities for liquids are proposed to be developed as the terminals

for liquids. The suitability of these locations will be reviewed and finalised following further

studies at a later stage.

Major utilities include power, water (potable water, service water, firewater) and diesel oil

for the proposed port expansion. The requirements are assessed, and the sources of

supply are also identified. To improve the overall environmental sustainability of the port by

means of resource optimization and recycling, it is proposed that the waste water will be

adequately treated for reuse for alternative purposes.

For the proposed expansion bulk raw materials will be required for the construction phase

but will not be needed during the operational phase. It is proposed to commence the

construction within 6-8 months after obtaining all approvals. The expansion project is

estimated to cost approx. INR 1,300 Crore. The expansion project will be financially and

economically beneficial since it is expected to promote employment opportunities during

the construction and operational phases of the expansion alongwith additional indirect

employment and improvement in infrastructure in the vicinity. There are no resettlement

issues envisaged resulting from this expansion project.


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page v

Contents

1 Introduction ....................................................................................... 16

1.1 Background .................................................................................................... 16

1.2 Project proponents ......................................................................................... 16

1.2.1 Shapoorji Pallonji Group ................................................................... 16

1.2.2 Orissa Stevedores Ltd. ..................................................................... 16

1.3 Scope of work ................................................................................................ 17

1.3.1 Exclusion ........................................................................................... 17

1.4 Purpose of report ........................................................................................... 17

1.5 Data consulted ............................................................................................... 18

1.6 Meetings and site visits .................................................................................. 18

1.7 Format of report ............................................................................................. 18

2 Project Description and Site Analysis ............................................ 20

2.1 Site location .................................................................................................... 20

2.2 Port boundary................................................................................................. 20

2.3 Port development and phasing ...................................................................... 21

2.4 Existing infrastructure .................................................................................... 22

2.4.1 Marine side........................................................................................ 22

2.4.2 Landside ............................................................................................ 23

2.5 Connectivity .................................................................................................... 23

2.5.1 Road .................................................................................................. 23

2.5.2 Rail .................................................................................................... 23

2.6 Landside characteristics ................................................................................ 23

2.6.1 Topography ....................................................................................... 23

2.6.2 Existing land use and ownership ...................................................... 23

2.7 Soil conditions ................................................................................................ 24

2.7.1 Land side ........................................................................................... 24

2.7.2 Marine side........................................................................................ 24

2.8 Climate ........................................................................................................... 24

2.9 Meteorological and oceanographic conditions ............................................... 25

2.9.1 Temperature...................................................................................... 25

2.9.2 Rainfall .............................................................................................. 25

2.9.3 Relative humidity ............................................................................... 25

2.9.4 Wind .................................................................................................. 25

2.9.5 Cyclones ........................................................................................... 26

2.9.6 Tides ................................................................................................. 26

2.9.7 Currents ............................................................................................ 27

2.9.8 Waves ............................................................................................... 27

2.10 Seismic conditions ......................................................................................... 28

2.11 Raw material requirements ............................................................................ 28

2.12 Resource optimization and recycling ............................................................. 28

2.13 Employment generation ................................................................................. 28

3 Traffic Forecast ................................................................................. 29


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page vi

4 Terminal Concepts ............................................................................ 30

4.1 LNG ................................................................................................................ 30

4.1.1 LNG process overview ...................................................................... 30

4.1.2 Regasification- terminal concepts ..................................................... 33

4.1.3 Terminal with Floating Storage and Regasification Unit

(FSRU)/Floating Storage Unit (FSU) ................................................ 34

4.1.4 Recommendation .............................................................................. 41

4.2 Other liquids ................................................................................................... 42

5 Operating Considerations and Functional requirements .............. 43

5.1 Traffic forecast summary ............................................................................... 43

5.2 Ship size analysis........................................................................................... 43

5.2.1 LNG ................................................................................................... 43

5.2.2 Other liquids ...................................................................................... 45

5.3 Principal harbour dimensions ......................................................................... 47

5.3.1 Approach channel ............................................................................. 47

5.3.2 Harbour and turning circle ................................................................. 47

5.3.3 Minimum stopping distance .............................................................. 48

5.4 Jetty requirements ......................................................................................... 48

5.4.1 LNG ................................................................................................... 49

5.4.2 Other liquids ...................................................................................... 52

5.5 Approach trestle ............................................................................................. 53

5.6 Land side requirements ................................................................................. 54

5.6.1 Storage .............................................................................................. 54

5.7 Evacuation ..................................................................................................... 55

6 Alternative Locations ....................................................................... 56

6.1 Feasibility of multiple jetties in the harbour .................................................... 56

6.1.1 Existing harbour layout and conditions ............................................. 56

6.1.2 Key planninng parameters ................................................................ 58

6.1.3 Principal guiding considerations for site selection ............................ 58

6.1.4 Assessment of potential jetty locations ............................................. 61

6.2 Landside development ................................................................................... 67

6.2.1 Key considerations for back up area selection ................................. 67

6.2.2 Assessment of back up area locations ............................................. 68

7 Proposed Infrastructure ................................................................... 74

7.1 Project site and surroundings ........................................................................ 74

7.2 Utilities ............................................................................................................ 75

7.2.1 Power requirement ............................................................................ 75

7.2.2 Water requirement ............................................................................ 75

7.3 Wastes and management .............................................................................. 75

7.3.1 Liquid wastes .................................................................................... 75

7.3.2 Solid wastes ...................................................................................... 76

7.3.3 Oily wastes ........................................................................................ 76

7.3.4 Wastes generated at FSRU .............................................................. 77


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page vii

7.4 Storm water drainage ..................................................................................... 77

7.5 Oil Spill Contingency Plan .............................................................................. 77

7.6 Disaster Management Plan ............................................................................ 78

7.6.1 Green belt ......................................................................................... 79

8 Rehabilitation and Resettlement ..................................................... 81

9 Project Schedule and Cost Estimates ............................................. 82

10 Financial and Social Benefits .......................................................... 83


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page viii

Tables

Table 3-1: Traffic forecast for Gopalpur Port (Mtpa) ................................................. 29

Table 4-1: Comparison of LNG terminal concepts ................................................... 39

Table 5-1: Design vessel size- FSRU ....................................................................... 45

Table 5-2: Design vessel size - LNGC...................................................................... 45

Table 5-3: Typical bulk liquid ship sizes ................................................................... 46

Table 5-4: Design vessel size for LPG and other liquids .......................................... 46

Table 5-5: Approach channel dimensions ................................................................ 47

Table 5-6: Turning circle dimensions ........................................................................ 48

Table 5-7: Jetty occupancy for FSRU based LNG facility ........................................ 51

Table 5-8: Jetty occupancy for conventional LNG facility (future) ............................ 52

Table 5-9: Jetty occupancy for LPG and other liquids .............................................. 53

Table 6-1: Downtime at locations within Gopalpur harbour ...................................... 59

Table 6-2: Land use area break up for LNG terminal ............................................... 69

Table 6-3: Land use area break up for LPG and other liquids’ terminal ................... 72

Figures

Figure 2-1: Location of Gopalpur Port........................................................................ 20

Figure 2-2: Project site layout .................................................................................... 21

Figure 2-3: Wind climate rose diargram ..................................................................... 26

Figure 2-4: Wave climate rose diagram ..................................................................... 27

Figure 4-1: LNG value chain ...................................................................................... 30

Figure 4-2: Typical LNG regasification process flow diagram ................................... 32

Figure 4-3: Conventional LNG terminal ..................................................................... 33

Figure 4-4: Typical LNG regasification process flow diagram on an FSRU .............. 35

Figure 4-5: Stand alone jetty ...................................................................................... 36


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page ix

Figure 4-6: Conventional jetty for side-by-side mooring ............................................ 37

Figure 4-7: Liquid cargo operations ........................................................................... 42

Figure 5-1: Liquid jetty- general arrangement (typ.) .................................................. 49

Figure 6-1: Existing harbour of Gopalpur Port ........................................................... 56

Figure 6-2: Proposed layout of ongoing development at Gopalpur Port ................... 57

Figure 6-3: Wave extraction points ............................................................................ 59

Figure 6-4: Alternative locations for LNG jetty ........................................................... 62

Figure 6-5: Jetty location for LPG and other liquids ................................................... 65

Figure 6-6: Proposed liquid jetty locations at Gopalpur Port ..................................... 66

Figure 6-7: LNG back up yard facility ......................................................................... 70

Figure 6-8: Area availability for development of LPG/other liquid terminal ................ 71

Figure 6-9: LPG and other liquids back up yard facility ............................................. 73

Figure 7-1: Seismic map of India ............................................................................... 78

Figure 7-2: Cyclone and wind zones in India ............................................................ 79

Annexure

Annexure A: Drawings .................................................................................................. 84


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page x

List of Drawings

Drawing no. Drawing title

BMT-1395-GPL-PFR-DWG-001 EXISTING LAYOUT- GOPALPUR PORT

BMT-1395-GPL-PFR-DWG-002 ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS FOR LNG JETTY IN GOPALPUR PORT HARBOUR

BMT-1395-GPL-PFR-DWG-003 JETTY LOCATIONS FOR LNG AND OTHER LIQUIDS AT GOPALPUR PORT

BMT-1395-GPL-PFR-DWG-004 LNG TERMINAL (JETTY AND BACK UP YARD) LOCATION AT GOPALPUR PORT

BMT-1395-GPL-PFR-DWG-005 LNG AND LPG/ OTHER LIQUIDS TERMINALS LOCATIONS AT GOPALPUR PORT


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page xi

SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Symbols and abbreviations used are generally in accordance with the following list.

1 Proper names and organisations – India

BMT CI ............. BMT Consultants India

DAE ................. Department of Atomic Energy

GoI ................... Government of India

GoO ................. Government of Odisha

GPL .................. Gopalpur Ports Limited

IMD .................. Indian Meteorological Department

IREL ................. Indian Rare Earths Limited

MoEFCC .......... Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

OSCOM ........... Orissa Sands Complex

OSPCB ............ Odisha State Pollution control Board

SOUTHCO ....... Southern Electricity Supply Company of Odisha Ltd.

TSSEZ ............. Tata Steel Special Economic Zone Limited

2 Proper names and organisations – Other

BA .................... British Admiralty

ECMWF ........... European Centre for Medium- Range Weather Forecasts

NCEP ............... National Centres for Environmental Prediction

NIO .................. National Institute of Oceanogaphy

PIANC .............. Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses

UKMO .............. United Kingdom Meteorological Office

3 Other abbreviations

approx .............. approximately

BOOT ............... Build Own Operate Transfer


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page xii

dia .................... diameter

max .................. maximum

min ................... minimum

No .................... number

avg ................... average

BOG ................. Boil-off Gas

CA .................... Concession Agreement

CD .................... Chart Datum

CNG ................. compressed natural gas

DPR ................. Detailed Project Report

ENE ................. east northeast

ESE .................. east southeast

FEED ............... Front- End Engineering Design

FSRU ............... Floating Storage and Regasification Unit

FSU .................. Floating Storage Unit

HAT ..................Highest Astronomical Tide

HAZID .............. Hazard Identification study

HAZOP ............ Hazard and Operability study

Hs .................... Significant Wave Height

HP .................... High Pressure

LoA .................. Length overall (of a ship)

LAT .................. Lowest Astronomical Tide

LNG ................. Liquefied Natural Gas

LNGC ............... Liquefied Natural Gas Carrier

LPG .................. Liquefied Petroleum Gas

M ...................... “mega” or one million (106)

MHWS ............. Mean High Water Spring tides

MSL ................. Mean Sea Level


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page xiii

MLWS .............. Mean Low Water Spring tides

NE .................... northeast

NG ................... Natural Gas

NNE ................. north northeast

NNW ................ north northwest

NW ................... northwest

OSD ................. oil spill dispersants

PFR .................. Pre- feasibility Report

PNG ................. Piped Natural Gas

POL .................. Petroleum and other liquids

PRF .................. port reception facility

QRA ................. Quantitative Risk Assessment

SSE .................. south southeast

SSW ................. south southwest

STP .................. Sewage Treatment Plant

ToR .................. Terms of Reference

UKC ................. Under Keel Clearance

wrt .................... with respect to

WE ................... wave extraction

WNW ............... west northwest

WSW ................ west southwest

4 Units of measurement

Length, area and volume

ha ..................... hectare(s)

kL ..................... kilo litre

km.................... kilometre(s)

km2 ................... square kilometre(s)


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page xiv

m...................... metre(s)

mm................... millimetre(s)

mm2 .................. square millimetre(s)

m2 ..................... square metre(s)

m3 ..................... cubic metre(s)

n. mile.............. nautical mile(s)

Time and time derived units

hr ...................... hour(s)

min ................... minute(s)

sec ................... second(s)

knot .................. nautical mile per hour

m/s ................... metre per second

tpd .................... tonnes per day

tph .................... tonnes per hour

yr ...................... year

Mass, force and derived units

displacement .... the total mass of the vessel and its contents. (This is equal to the volume

of water displaced by the vessel multiplied by the density of the water.)

DWT ................. dead weight tonne, the total mass of cargo, stores, fuels, crew and

reserves with which a vessel is laden when submerged to the summer

loading line. (Although this represents the load carrying capacity of the

vessel it is not an exact measure of the cargo load).

g ....................... gram = kg x 10-3

kg ..................... kilogram(s)

kPa ................... kilo pascal

Mt ..................... million tonnes = t x 106

t ........................ tonne = kg x 103

Other units

°C ..................... degrees Celsius (temperature)


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page xv

MLD ................. Millions Litres per day

MMSCFD ......... Million Metric Standard Cubic Feet per Day

MMSCMD ........ Million Metric Standard Cubic Meters per Day

Mtpa ................. million tonnes per annum


Final Report

BMT Consultants India Page 16

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

Gopalpur Port is located at latitude 19°18’8” N, longitude 84°5’56” E in the Bay of Bengal,

approx. 15 km South of the Rushikulya River estuary in Ganjam district of Odisha. Gopalpur

Port is being developed by Gopalpur Ports Limited (GPL). Gopalpur Ports Ltd. (GPL) is a

consortium between Shapoorji Pallonji Group (SP Group) and Orissa Stevedores Ltd

(OSL). The project is being executed under Build Own Operate Transfer (BOOT) model.

The phase- wise development plan of the port includes handling of containers and also

setting up the infrastructure for imports of LNG and LPG, alongwith a no. of other liquids,

since ports on the eastern coast have a very good potential to handle liquid cargo, including

LNG. The liquid cargo mix includes Liquified Natural Gas (LNG), Liquified Petroleum Gas

(LPG), Petroleum and other liquids (POL), edible/vegetable oil and chemicals including

ammonia.

GPL intends to establish the feasibility of setting up the required facilities for handling liquids

at Gopalpur Port. In this context, GPL have appointed BMT Consultants (India) Pvt. Ltd.

(BMT) to prepare a Pre- feasibility Report (PFR) for the development of liquid jetties at

Gopalpur Port.

1.2 Project proponents

1.2.1 Shapoorji Pallonji Group

Shapoorji Pallonji Group (SP Group) has a majority stake in the GPL consortium. SP Group,

from a general contracting company is now a diversified business conglomerate. SP Group

offers complete solutions in various businesses i.e., Engineering and Construction,

Infrastructure, Real Estate, Energy, Water & Financial Services. With a turnover of more

than ~USD 4 billion, SP Group serves clients in more than 50 countries. The Group has a

60,000 strong workforce, comprising of about 40 nationalities.

1.2.2 Orissa Stevedores Ltd.

Orissa Stevedores Ltd. (OSL) has been offering services in stevedoring and cargo handling

over the last 35 years and handles more than 35 Mtpa of cargo with a workforce of 7000

employees. Its core competencies include project cargo handling, custom house agency,

steamer agency, mining, exports, ship owning & management. OSL has prominent

presence at almost all the major ports on the east coast of India. They offer services like

stevedoring, project cargo handling, C & F activities, container handling and freight

forwarding etc. The group is also involved in various other businesses like aviation,

automobile dealerships, education, hospitality, real estate, and healthcare.

(Source: Gopalpur port website)

https://www.business-standard.com/search?type=news&q=lng


Final Report


1.3 Scope of work

The assignment aims to undertake assessment of the feasibility of developing and

operating liquid terminal, which includes handling of LNG, LPG, POL, edible oil, chemicals

etc. along with identification of locations for developing the infrastructure and preliminary

level terminal configuration.

The scope of services for this assignment include the following:

• Assessment of marine requirements for the given cargoes and traffic; which includes:

- Assessment of number of jetties required

- Establishing the location of the jetties within the existing harbour

- Assessment of feasibility of having multiple jetties inside the harbour

- Establishing the design vessel size

- Establishing dredging requirements, if any

• Assessment of the terminal configuration

• Assessment of landside requirements; covering broad assessment of area required for

storage/regasification/handling of liquid cargoes and its location

• Broad assessment of the pipeline route from jetty to the storage area/boundary of the

port for transfer to third-party agencies having their tankage outside the port limits

• Broad-based cost estimation for development of the facility

1.3.1 Exclusion

The following is excluded from BMT’s scope:

• Traffic study

• Any risk assessment such as Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)

• Numerical model studies

• Specifications of Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU)/ Floating Storage

Unit (FSU)/on-land terminal equipment

• Layout for landside facilities/tankages

• Any other studies

1.4 Purpose of report

This document constitutes the Final Report for establishing the feasibility of setting up

infrastructure for handling liquids at Goplapur Port. It includes the study and evaluation of

possible suitable locations for developing the liquid jetty/ies and the supporting back up

infrastructure, and on its basis, proposing a feasible development scheme.


Final Report


The developer of the port wishes to avail the statutory clearance for handling of liquid

cargoes at Gopalpur Port. The purpose of this report is to support this process. The report

once approved by GPL, will be submitted for approval from statutory authorities.

As stipulated in the ToR, the Final Report is the second deliverable.

1.5 Data consulted

The data reviewed and consulted for preparation of this report includes the data made

available to us by GPL and other studies carried out previously by BMT.

1.6 Meetings and site visits

A telephonic call was held between BMT personnel Mr. Darpan Jethi and Mr. Selvaraj

Narayanan and Mr. Kartik Deuskar from GPL on June 11, 2018 to kickstart the project. The

discussion mainly included scope of work, exclusions alongwith definition of the way

forward to get an overall clarity on the requirements of the project.

An interim presentation was made by the BMT team at the client office in Mumbai on August

2, 2018 to discuss the progress on the project and avail necessary clarifications from GPL

required for preparation for the Draft report.

A meeting was held between the teams of BMT and GPL at the client office in Mumbai to

discuss the findings of the Draft Report and to resolve queries towards finalisation of the

report.

BMT personnel met Mr. Selvaraj Narayanan from GPL on August 28, 2018 to discuss the

Final Report and for necessary clarifications towards conclusion of the assignment.

1.7 Format of report

The format of report is arranged as follows:

Chapter 1: Introduction

The introduction chapter sets the background for the project and the current report.

Chapter 2: Project Description and Site Analysis

This chapter discusses about the location and other general physical and meteorological

characteristics of the port site. It also includes the existing and proposed development at

the port.

Chapter 3: Traffic Forecast

The type and volume of cargoes expected at the terminal is summarized in this chapter,

including the forecasted volumes for a horizon period of 10 years.

Chapter 4: Terminal Concepts

This chapter discusses the components and processes of an LNG terminal and explores

the various available alternatives for the regasification process. It also compares the


Final Report


alternatives, followed by selection of the most suitable scheme for Gopalpur LNG terminal.

The chapter also describes the terminal processes for the other liquids.

Chapter 5: Operating Considerations and Functional Requirements

Operational and functional requirements of the proposed terminal are assessed in this

chapter. It includes the derivation of key dimensions and requirements of various

components such as the jetty, storage and other marine and landside infrastructure.

Chapter 6: Alternative Locations

Different alternatives locations are identified, examined and compared in terms of their

characteristics to arrive at the most suitable location for the liquid jetty/ies.

Recommendation on preferred location/s for the marine and landside components is given

basis the comparative analysis.

Chapter 7: Proposed Infrastructure

This chapter discusses the requirement and sources of utilities and waste management

pertaining to development of the liquid handling infrastructure as well as a brief overview

of the disaster management plan for the port.

Chapter 8: Rehabilitation and Resettlement

This chapter addresses the aspect of rehabilitation and resettlement considering the

proposed development.

Chapter 9: Project Schedule and Cost Estimates

The timeline for commencement of construction and project costing are included in this

chapter.

Chapter 10: Financial and Social Benefits

This chapter discusses the potential financial and social benefits envisaged as a result of

the development of this liquid handling facility at Gopalpur.


Final Report


2 Project Description and Site Analysis

2.1 Site location

Gopalpur Port is located on the East coast of India, at latitude 19°18’8” N, longitude

84°57’56” E in the Bay of Bengal, approx. 15 km South of the Rushikulya River estuary in

Ganjam district of Odisha.

Figure 2-1: Location of Gopalpur Port

2.2 Port boundary

The port boundary stretches along 4 km stretch along the coastline. The area within the

port boundary and around the port are devoid of any heritage site, vegetation and natural

habitation like forests, mangrove and/or any endangered plant/animal species. A portion of

the project land is situated on demined land which was mined by Indian Rare Earths Ltd.

(IREL) previously and handed back to the Government of Odisha (GoO). GoO then leased

the demined land to GPL. Figure 2-2 indicates the project boundary layout. It is further

discussed in detail in Chapter 6.


Final Report


Figure 2-2: Project site layout

The port is located in a non-urbanized area adjoining villages, agricultural tracks, grazing

sites and non-productive lands. Hence, the economy of the region is mainly agro-based

with majority of people engaged in agriculture which is supported by irrigation canals, with

fishing being the other important occupation in the region.

2.3 Port development and phasing

According to the Detailed Project Report (DPR) by RITES, the project has been divided

into 4 phases; based on the projected traffic. Phase 1 and Phase 2 are maintained as

stipulated in the Concession Agreement (CA) signed in 2003; which are as follows:

Phase 1: development of the port to such an extent that the port is able to operate as a fair

weather lighterage port. Phase 1 (fair weather lighterage port) commenced operations in

January 2007.

Phase 2: expansion and development of the port to such an extent that the port is able to

operate as an all-weather deep-water direct berthing port. Phase 2 included the following

facilities:

• 1,730 m long south breakwater

• 360 m long intermediate breakwater

• 11 nos. of groynes

• 1,900 m long channel, dredged to -11 m CD to -12.5 m CD


Final Report


• 150 m long multipurpose berth with berth pockets dredged to -10 m CD

• Motorable road along the berth, south breakwater and stockyards

• 1,200 m railway siding renovated

• Development of 10 acres of stockyard behind the berth, including site grading

• Construction of buildings

These facilities were damaged in the Phailin cyclone in October 2013; while the DPR was

being prepared by RITES. RITES then defined Phase 3 and Phase 4 as follows:

Phase 3 includes construction of:

• 2,070 m of south breakwater

• 380 m of intermediate breakwater

• 11 nos. of groynes

• 1,900 m x 200 m approach channel dredged to -13.50 m CD

• 550 m dia turning circle dredged to a depth of -13.50 m CD

• 2 nos. of dry bulk berths and 1 no. of multipurpose berth having a total quay length of

535 m; with berth pockets dredged to -13.50 m CD

• Development of stockyard

• Development of roads, railways and utilities

Phase 4 includes:

• Total 2,170 m south breakwater

• Total 380 m of intermediate breakwater

• Total 300 m of multipurpose berth and 500 m of bulk cargo berth; with berth pockets

dredged upto -15 m CD

• Development of stockyard

• Development of roads, railways, buildings and other utilities

2.4 Existing infrastructure

2.4.1 Marine side

The marine facilities at the port include an existing berth and two breakwaters. The berth is

aligned to the shoreline; and it is a 300 m long and 30 m wide berth, which is currently

undergoing refurbishment. Partial operations are ongoing on the available portion of the

berth. Construction of two additional berths of lengths 300 m and 200 m and of width 28 m

each, is ongoing at the port adjacent to the existing berth. These three berths will be used

to handle dry bulk and general cargo.


Final Report


The existing south breakwater starts from a little south of the existing berth. An intermediate

breakwater is constructed perpendicular to the shoreline at about 850 m NE from the

existing berth. Works for extension of breakwaters is currently ongoing.

2.4.2 Landside

Currently partial operations are ongoing and the area behind the existing berth is used as

the back-up yard. A road runs parallel to the berth which gives access to the berth and the

storage area. A port office and signal centre are present on the landside, alongwith

temporary site offices for various agencies involved in the current phase development and

labour sheds.

Development of the back-up yard, railway sidings and yard and road network are proposed

on the landside area behind the berths under the current phase of development. The works

are in the ground filling and levelling stage at present.

2.5 Connectivity

2.5.1 Road

The Gopalpur Port is located 7 km from the National Highway 5 (NH 5), which runs till

Chatrapur. NH 217, which originates from the road connecting Gopalpur Port to Raipur in

Chhattisgarh, runs adjacent to the port entry. The road has been widened to 7.5 m. In

addition, there is also a road with wide right of way connecting the port via IREL gate and

their colony.

2.5.2 Rail

The railway trunk line from Chennai to Howrah runs upto a distance of 6 km from the port.

An existing siding from Chatrapur railway station to IREL plant abuts the port area. Rail

linkage to the port can be provided through this siding with a provision for doubling up as

and when required.

2.6 Landside characteristics

2.6.1 Topography

The topography of the area along the shore is highly undulated, with a no. of sand heaps

and indentations. The land is generally sloping towards the sea. Topography survey results

show that the terrain of the port site has contours mainly ranging from 2 m to 15 m. The

area towards the land side boundary of the survey area have ground elevation as high as

24 m. Low lying patches filled of water as well as green areas having vegetation are

observed over the area, as well.

2.6.2 Existing land use and ownership

Along the shoreline, there is an existing berth built by GPL on which cargo is handled. The

land immediately behind the berth is used as a storage area for the cargo. The port

boundary is adjacent to the plant of IREL on the land side. Filling and levelling operations


Final Report


are ongoing in the back up area. There is an existing Penna cement plot towards south of

the back up yard near the base of the south breakwater.

Small green patches consisting of bushes are scattered in the surrounding area. Most of

the remaining land near the port area is barren. There is no other habitation at the port site.

It is understood that the majority of the land being considered for development of the liquid

handling facilities is under GPL ownership. Some land parcels are at present owned by

other parties (such as IREL), but the acquisition process for this land is underway and

expected to be completed soon.

2.7 Soil conditions

2.7.1 Land side

The subsoil stratification and the field test results conducted in the boreholes on the land

side indicate that the soils at site, predominantly, consist of sands, sometimes interspersed

with clay binding at lower depths.

The general sequence of geological strata along the surveyed area is as follows:

• Loose to medium dense sand

• Dense to very dense sand, with silty sand at places

• Again a layer of medium dense sand

• Weak Khondalite and moderately strong Khondalite

The bedrock generally dips gently as we move from land side towards the sea.

2.7.2 Marine side

The borehole information in general shows the following geological sequence over the

entire area:

• The top layer primarily comprises of loose to medium dense sand interspersed with

dense sand

• This is followed by dense clayey sand and silty sand

• A layer of weak Khondalite is observed under it, followed by moderately strong to strong

Khondalite

• Presence of hard clay is observed towards the eastern side

(Source: Geotechnical investigation survey report by Ideal Geoservices Pvt. Ltd., 2017)

2.8 Climate

The climate of the region is characterised by two seasonal monsoons viz. northeast (NE)

and southwest (SW). NE monsoon occurs between December and March and is

characterised by predominant north-easterly winds. During this period, the risk of a tropical


Final Report


storm or cyclone is higher than in most months. SW monsoon extends from June upto

September and is characterised by occurrence of rain, with predominantly south-westerly

winds.

2.9 Meteorological and oceanographic conditions

2.9.1 Temperature

Maximum temperature varies from 29°C and 35°C with the highest temperature occurring

in June. Minimum temperature varies between 15°C and 24°C, with the lowest occurring in

December/January.

2.9.2 Rainfall

The average annual rainfall is 1,439 mm. The average number of rainy days is 67 per year.

June to October are the wettest months of the year with an average rainfall in excess of

185 mm per month, with a maximum of 296 mm in July. December to April are dry months

with average rainfall below 20 mm per month.

2.9.3 Relative humidity

Relative humidity is fairly high and uniform round the year. The mean relative humidity

varies between 74% and 84%.

2.9.4 Wind

The most prominent offshore wind direction is parallel to the coast in the south to SW

direction during southwest monsoon period; with the highest occurrence from SW. Winds

from NE direction are also present in northeast monsoon period. The magnitudes of wind

are mostly lower than 9 m/s.

Following figure gives the wind rose diagram for the port location:


Final Report


Figure 2-3: Wind climate rose diargram

(Source: ECMWF, 1995-2014)

2.9.5 Cyclones

East coast is prone to cyclonic storms around the year but mostly these occur prior to SW

monsoon i.e. in May and after southwest monsoon i.e. in October and November. Around

18 depressions are formed annually in the Bay of Bengal out of which 6 turn out to be

cyclonic storms on an average.

(Data source: DPR prepared by RITES, 2014)

2.9.6 Tides

The tidal levels at Gopalpur are given in the following table:

Tide Level (wrt CD)

High Astronomical Tide (HAT) + 2.20 m

Mean High Water Spring (MHWS) +1.70 m

Mean High Water Neap (MHWN) + 1.30 m

Mean Sea Level (MSL) + 1.10 m

Mean Low Water Neap (MLWN) + 0.90 m

Mean Low Water Spring (MLWS) + 0.70 m

Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT) + 0.00 m

(Data source: Mathematical modelling report by BMT, 2018)


Final Report


2.9.7 Currents

The current at project site flows parallel to the coast, unidirectional towards NE except

during the neap tidal days, during which they reverse towards SW. The current

measurements show that the currents are less influenced by tidal phases.

The data on currents was collected in 1994 by NIO Goa. The long shore current speed

observed was relatively high about 1.2 m/s during June to August and it was about 0.5 m/s

during rest of the year.

(Data source: RITES Report 2014)

2.9.8 Waves

The offshore waves near the port location are primarily form the SSE, south and SSW

directions. The predominant wave periods vary from 6 to 10 sec, and the maximum

significant wave height occurring offshore is below 5 m.

Results of near shore wave transformation study show that the ambient maximum

significant wave height is 4.8 m at 20 m CD water depth. 70.1% waves at the location are

encountered form SSE direction. 97.5% of the times wave height are below 1.5 m; and 65%

of the time the wave periods vary between 6 to 12 sec. Highest waves are corresponding

to a wave period of 8 to 10 sec.

Following figure shows the rose plot of wave height for the wave climate at the port:

Figure 2-4: Wave climate rose diagram

(Source: Wave climate and tranquillity study report by BMT, 2017)


Final Report


2.10 Seismic conditions

The proposed project falls under Zone II as per the seismic map of India shown in IS: 1893

(Part 1) – 2002.

2.11 Raw material requirements

The proposed expansion of the Port envisages handling of liquid cargo in addition to

ongoing bulk and break bulk cargo operations. Hence, the proposed expansion will not

need any bulk raw materials during the operational phase. However, raw materials such as

cement, steel, sand gravel etc. will be required for the construction of marine structures and

land-based facilities, during the construction phase. These materials will be sourced from

the local suppliers.

2.12 Resource optimization and recycling

To improve the overall environmental sustainability of the port by means of resource

optimization and recycling, it is proposed that the waste water will be adequately treated

for reuse for alternative purposes and not be discharged into the sea. The sewage from the

liquid handling infrastructure will be collected by a drainage network in a sewage collection

sump near the sewage treatment plant (STP) to be developed at the facility. The treated

water will be collected in treated water sump near the STP after tertiary treatment for

reusing the STP recycled water for purposes such as gardening, dust suppression etc. The

run off during dust suppression by water sprinkling into sea is prohibited by passing it

through an oil-water separator, primary treatment (settling) and subsequently treated at

STP.

2.13 Employment generation

The potential level of employment generation resulting from the proposed liquid terminal

development at Gopalpur Port is envisaged to be for manpower of approx. 1000 persons

during the construction phase and 200 persons during the operational phase. Local

manpower will be preferred during construction phase.


Final Report


3 Traffic Forecast

The liquid cargo mix constituting the potential throughput to be handled at Gopalpur

includes LNG, LPG, POL, edible/vegetable oil and chemicals including ammonia. At this

stage, it is envisaged that all the liquid cargo will constitute import volumes. The cargo-

wise traffic forecast for liquid cargo is summarized below:

Table 3-1: Traffic forecast for Gopalpur Port (Mtpa)

Cargo 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028

LNG - - 2.5 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.5 8.5 10.0

LPG - - 0.15 0.2 0.3 0.45 0.5 0.65 0.75 1.0

Liquids 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.0

Total 0.05 0.1 2.85 3.5 4.8 6.15 7.7 9.65 11.05 13.0

FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28


Final Report


4 Terminal Concepts

4.1 LNG

4.1.1 LNG process overview

4.1.1.1 Value chain

The LNG value chain consists of different independent segments. Each of the segments

has specific industrial processes and requirements. Following figure gives a graphical

representation of the LNG value chain:

Figure 4-1: LNG value chain

The segments of the value chain are explained below in brief:

• Exploration and extraction

Under the first process, geological structures are analysed, and tests are carried out to

identify areas where there is a high possibility of discovering gas. If the gas is available,

it goes into extraction wherein raw gas is sourced from gas fields or underground

reservoirs or coal bed methane.

• Production and liquefaction

Production involves treatment of gas where various solid, liquid and gaseous

contaminants are removed. It is then converted from gaseous to liquid form by cooling

it to -162º C at which the gas is reduced to 1/600th of its volume and gets converted to

liquid state; thus making it economical for transportation and storage.


Final Report


• Shipping

This includes transport of the LNG from place of origin to place of consumption. LNG

is shipped at -163º C in LNG Carriers (LNGC) having specially designed cryogenic

tankers at maximum transport pressure of 25 kPa. The size of the LNGCs range from

15,000 m3 to 267,000 m3.

• Regasification

At the receiving terminal, the LNG is offloaded and is transferred from ships to

cryogenic storage tanks. LNG is then vaporized by gradually warming it, to retrieve

natural gas (NG) for send-out.

• Distribution

The NG is distributed to various range of end users via either pipelines under required

pressure and send-out capacity (piped natural gas or PNG) or by trucks /tankers

(compressed natural gas or CNG) for domestic, commercial and industrial use.

4.1.1.2 Import terminal components

The LNG receiving terminal is near the end of LNG supply/ value chain. An LNG import

terminal receives, stores and vaporizes LNG into NG for further distribution to the

consumption point. The LNG is unloaded from LNGCs using unloading system, stored in

either onshore or floating storage tanks, vaporized in either onshore or floating

regasification plant with process equipment and then delivered through distribution

pipelines or trucks/ tankers. The LNG terminal is to be designed to deliver gas at specified

rate and pressure into the distribution pipeline.

An LNG import terminal broadly comprises the following components:

• LNG unloading system including jetty and unloading arms

• LNG storage tanks

• LNG vaporisers

• In-tank and external LNG pumps

• Vapour handling system

• Supporting utilities, piping, valves, control systems, and safety systems required for the

terminal’s safe operation

• Infrastructure (roads, fencing and buildings)

• Flare stack

• Facilities for truck loading and power generation (optional/additional)

4.1.1.3 Process

The LNG process comprises of three major, relatively independent, processes:

• Unloading LNG from ship to storage


Final Report


• LNG regasification and despatch

• Boil-off gas (BOG) management

Following figure shows the schematic flow diagram of LNG process:

Figure 4-2: Typical LNG regasification process flow diagram

Subsequent to berthing of the LNGC, the hard LNG transfer lines as well as vapour return

line are connected to the LNGC and the unloading process is initiated. The unloading arms

or flexible hoses mounted on the unloading platform are attached to the manifold of the

LNGC and LNG is transferred to onshore storage tanks or to an FSU using ship pumps.

LNGC pumps usually have an unloading rate of 5,000 m3 to 12,000 m3/ hr depending on

the vessel size; such that they can unload the vessel within 15-18 hours from the time of

connection. Some of the vapour generated in the storage tank during unloading operations

is returned to the ship, in order to maintain positive pressure.

LNG is stored in cryogenic state at low pressure in storage tanks. Due to leakage of

surrounding heat into the storage tanks, some amount of LNG boils off and increases the

pressure of the tank; thus causing undue stress to the tank walls leading to breach of

containment. The BOG is therefore evacuated from the storage tanks and passed through

BOG compressor (used to increase the pressure of boil-off gas) and recondenser where

LNG is injected to re-liquefy the boil-off gas. The amount of vapour that can be

recondensed depends on the amount of send-out required. If there is not enough LNG

send-out to absorb the boil-off vapour, then the vapour must be compressed to pipeline

pressure, or flared or vented.

From the storage tanks, the submerged pumps provided in the tank pump out the LNG to

the recondenser from where high pressure (HP) LNG pump boosts the pressure and send

it to the vaporizer. The regasification process comprises of multiple vaporizers which

operate in parallel to gradually increase the temperature and covert LNG (liquid form) into

NG (gaseous form). This NG is then metered and despatched to the onshore NG pipeline

via HP pipelines and the pressure is achieved through multi- staged high send- out pumps.


Final Report


The above process can be carried out on an onshore terminal or floating terminal i.e. FSRU

or its variants. The different terminal concepts are explained in the subsequent sections.

4.1.2 Regasification- terminal concepts

4.1.2.1 Conventional LNG terminal

Most LNG import terminals operating all over the world are conventional onshore

regasification LNG import terminals. The conventional terminal consists of a marine facility

for offloading LNG from a standard LNGC to an onshore regasification unit. However,

conventional onshore terminals are relatively expensive to build and also a typical

regasification plant with two storage tanks would require about 4-5 years of construction

time.

The time for construction of the onshore regasification and especially the storage tanks is

considerably longer than the marine works. The marine facility for a typical conventional

LNG terminal consists of a loading platform and breasting and mooring dolphins. The ship-

to-shore transfer of LNG is carried out through loading arms on the loading platform

connected to the manifold of the standard LNGC.

The key features of a conventional LNG terminal are:

• The jetty is generally constructed in water depths less than 25.0 m and with operating

wave heights less than 2.0 m

• Reduced costs compared to FSRU/FSU berthing since loads are reduced

• Common jetty type, built extensively throughout the world

• Higher cargo handling possible as compared to FSRU/FSU type terminals

Figure 4-3: Conventional LNG terminal

Onshore

regasification

and storage

LNG

Carrier


Final Report


(Image source: Kochi LNG terminal, Shapoorji Pallonji database)

From the carrier, the fluid will be transported through offshore and onshore pipeline

arrangement to conventional LNG tank terminal. The offshore part of pipeline is typically

laid along a trestle and the onshore part either buried and/or above ground with structural

support arrangement.

To achieve an earlier start of operations, the deployment of a temporary FSRU or FSU may

be a viable option.

4.1.3 Terminal with Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU)/Floating

Storage Unit (FSU)

Floating storage and regasification units (FSRUs) were developed driven by the need for a

fast delivery LNG storage and regasification solution. FSRU projects have a short delivery

time in comparison with land-based terminals, which is the main advantage, whereas, the

land-based terminals are built for long-term operations.

The concept of FSRU is becoming very popular amongst potential LNG import terminals

being planned and built. FSRU consists of a modified/new build LNG vessel with a

regasification unit retrofitted on to it. Existing LNG ships can be converted to FSRUs by

making necessary changes to accommodate unloading arms, regasification system and

utilizing the storage tank on the ship as the storage medium.

Subsequently, the concept of FSU has also been developed in which the regasification unit

is located onshore and LNGC can be used as a storage facility to save time and cost on

the construction of onshore LNG storage tanks. However, in the case of FSU the onshore

regasification equipment is required to be installed and completed for operations.

The regasification process on an FSRU is similar to onshore regasification and only differs

in terms of size and capacities. The process equipment is arranged in a more compact

manner on-board an FSRU. The standard LNG vessel carrying LNG can be moored parallel

or adjacent to a permanently moored FSRU or an FSU. The mooring arrangement can be


Final Report


a standalone mooring facility or side by side mooring for transfer of LNG from carrier to the

FSRU/FSU. The liquefied gas is regasified on the on-board regasification unit (or onshore

regasification unit in case of an FSU) and transferred via high pressure pipelines to the end

users.

Figure 4-4: Typical LNG regasification process flow diagram on an FSRU

An FSRU/FSU can be moored on a permanent basis at the terminal until the onshore

facilities are complete for operations. This may be assumed to be around 3-4 years

depending on the commissioning of the onshore facilities and the throughput to be handled

at the facility.

A barge mounted regasification unit is similar to an FSU option with the regasification

carried out on a custom built non-propelled regasification barge instead of onshore.

4.1.3.1 FSRU/FSU mooring options

FSRU vessels can be classified either as ships or offshore installations depending upon

the design they incorporate. FSRU is typically positioned in near-shore water depth of 15

to 30 m. The FSRU can be connected to the onshore transfer point via a high pressure

sub-sea gas pipeline. The various mooring options of an FSRU/FSU can be classified as

follows:

1. FSRU/FSU and LNGC moored standalone/twin jetty

2. Single jetty side-by-side mooring: FSRU/FSU and LNGC moored side-by-side

3. Two separate jetties for LNGC and FSRU/FSU each

For FSRU, the regasified LNG is to be transported so the connection to the shore is by high

pressure gas pipeline. In case of an FSU based option, the regasification is based onshore

and the connection will require a cryogenic pipeline.

Cryogenic BOG

Compressor

M

BOG Recondenser

LP LNG Pumps

HP LNG Pumps

LNG Surge Drum

LNG Separator

FAV Option

S&T Option

WG System

WG System

WG System

LNGC / FSU / Jetty

Sampling & Metering Station

Natural Gas

Sendout

HP BOG Compressor

Option

Truck Loading Station Option

LNG

Recondenser Option

BOG Compressor Suction Drum


Final Report


This therefore rules out the offshore mooring options as, in general, subsea LNG pipelines

are not yet developed and/or are very expensive and the practical maximum distance of

transporting LNG by pipeline is 5 km without intermediate pumping and vapour recovery

system.

1. FSRU/FSU and LNGC moored – standalone/twin jetty

The conventional FSRU and LNGC are moored on a twin berthing facility independently on

either side of the loading platform. The LNG is transferred from LNGC to FSRU through

unloading and loading arms respectively. The gas from the FSRU is sent out onshore via

high pressure gas pipelines. For an FSU option this would mean a cryogenic connection to

the shore.

• The jetty is generally constructed in water depths less than 25.0 m and with operating

wave heights less than 2.0 m

• Cost of standalone jetty is higher compared to side-by-side mooring

• Facilitates smooth operating conditions and has minimum downtime

Figure 4-5: Stand alone jetty

2. Single jetty side-by-side mooring

The facility is a typical berthing facility consisting of a loading platform, berthing dolphins

and mooring dolphins. The FSRU is moored to the jetty similar to an LNGC at a

conventional LNG terminal. The LNGC moored directly to the FSRU, is protected by

fenders between the hulls. The LNGC transfers LNG to the FSRU through loading arms on

the FSRU, which is regasified on the FSRU and gas send-out is through pipelines either

subsea or over a trestle. For an FSU option this would mean storage of LNG and a

cryogenic pipeline connection to the shore.


Final Report


• It is generally constructed in water depths less than 25.0 m and are designed to operate

with wave heights less than 2.0 m

• Considered to be of acceptable cost

• Smooth operation with minimum downtime provided in sheltered environment

An alternative arrangement for the jetty is a set of mono-pile/ multi-pile dolphins (mooring

and berthing) to provide stability to the FSRU. A flexible gas transfer pipeline connects to

a smaller gas transfer platform which in turn connects to the send-out pipeline. This option

is generally not suitable for FSU based terminals as subsea cryogenic pipelines are

considered non-viable until date.

• This arrangement is generally constructed in water depths less than 25.0 m and are

designed to operate with wave heights less than 2.0 m

• Considered to be cost efficient

• Smooth operation with minimum downtime

The jetty can be placed on the lee side of the breakwater which facilitates smooth unloading

operations without downtime due to sheltered environment. The facility is possible for both

side-by-side and stand-alone/ twin jetty mooring.

Figure 4-6: Conventional jetty for side-by-side mooring

3. Two separate jetties for LNGC and FSRU each

The concept consists of mooring an FSRU and an LNGC to two separate jetties. The LNG

from the carrier is transferred via unloading arms on one jetty, through the cryogenic

pipelines and loaded onto the FSRU moored on another jetty via loading arms. The gas

send-out from the FSRU is via high pressure gas pipeline. For an FSU option this would

mean storage of LNG and a cryogenic pipeline connection to the shore.


Final Report


• It is generally constructed in water depths less than 25.0 m and are designed to operate

with wave heights less than 2.0 m.

• No ship-to-ship offloading limitations as compared to side-by-side mooring hence

facilitating smooth operations. However, cost is higher due to construction of two

separate jetties and installation of cryogenic pipelines.

4.1.3.2 Comparative analysis of terminal concepts

The following table shows the comprehensive analysis carried out by studying and

comparing each concept as per the list of parameters for the selection of a suitable terminal

type for the development of an LNG terminal within the port.


Final Report


Table 4-1: Comparison of LNG terminal concepts

Terminal concept Conventional jetty with

onshore regasification

FSU with onshore

regasification FSRU

Comparative parameters

Land requirement - Large area required. - Land required is lesser as compared to

conventional terminal.

- Lowest requirement along all alternatives.

Time for commissioning - Longest construction time, hence longer

duration for commissioning.

- Shorter time to commission as compared to


- Regasification process can be modularized

and built simultaneously in a separate

location.

- Dependent on FSRU existing fleet or lead-

time for repurposed/new build.

- Lowest construction time along all

alternatives.

- Shorter time to commission as compared to


- Extensive planning not required for FSRU

as compared to a conventional onshore

regasification terminal.

Regasification

process and capacity

- Suitable for high throughput.

- Long term flexibility.

- Variety of regasification/ vaporization

options available.

- Continuous gas send-out.

- Less capacity as compared to onshore

terminal.

- Variety of regasification/vaporization

options available.

- Possibility to combine with small LNG tanks

onshore to increase send-out reliability

during cyclones.

- Less capacity as compared to onshore

terminal.

- Limited vaporization options.

LNGC mooring and fluid

transfer

- Conventional LNG terminal, no issues

foreseen.

- Ship-to-ship offloading is required, which is

widely acceptable and practised in the LNG

industry now.

- Ship-to-ship offloading requires additional

procedures, could limit supply options.


Final Report


Capital expenditure - Expensive - Savings on construction of storage tanks,

therefore lower capex than a


- FSU can be moved from one point of

demand to serve another.

- Higher capex compared to FSU +

onshore regasification as it is not easily

scalable.

- FSRU can be moved from one point of

demand to serve another.

Feasibility within the port - It is possible to develop this option,

provided that land is available.

- This option is highly preferable as it is

easily scalable.

- Regasification process can be

modularized leading to faster turnaround

time.

- Feasible.


Final Report


4.1.4 Recommendation

Based on the analysis of the various LNG terminal concepts and taking into cognizance the

advantages offered by the FSRU as compared to the other options, it has been selected

as the preferred alternative for the current stage of the project. This option has relatively

low capital cost and provides significant commercial flexibility compared to the other

configurations described. The key advantages of this alternative are as follows:

• Lowest land and time requirement

Conversion of a vessel to FSRU requires significantly lesser time than the construction

of onshore tanks for storage. In addition, there is no requirement of land for this

alternative. Hence, the project gestation period is lowered significantly, and revenue

generation can commence earlier than that possible if a conventional type of LNG

terminal is being developed. These factors help make FSRU an attractive alternative

since this results in time and cost reduction as well.

• Lowest capital cost

The alternative of retrofitting of older vessels coming off long-term charter for utilisation

as FSRU is a favourable option, considering that this works out to be the most

economical storage solution. Construction of onshore storage (tanks) is considerably

costlier than an FSRU. This alternative also helps save the costs associated with land

requirement. Since the market is highly cost sensitive, it is necessary to ensure lower

capital expenditure in development of the terminal. Hence, the option of FSRU is the

most attractive considering that this will incur the lowest capex amongst all the options.

• Scalability

This alternative offers scalability in operations, thus allowing GPL to enhance the

capacity of the facility in the future with increased demand, with a view to meeting the

rising market demands. It also helps justify the initial investment to customers.

• Modularization

Modularization is an additional advantage offered by choosing the FSRU configuration,

which ensures lower turnaround time, also resulting in reduced time and costs. To keep

the gas price attractive and not burden the customers with initial high capex, the option

of expanding the terminal in sync with the demand growth in phases is deemed a

favourable alternative.

It is to be noted that between FSRU based and onshore LNG terminals, these are more a

complement to each other, since the terminal concepts are very different, and the choice

of terminal is to be made on basis of the project requirements and constraints. The value

that FSRUs bring to the LNG value chain are different from that of the land-based terminals.

As per the current trends, operational considerations and trade practices, upto 3.5 Mtpa

can be handled using a single FSRU. For throughput exceeding 3.5 Mt, it can be handled

using either 2 nos. FSRU or by converting the facility to a conventional LNG terminal with

onshore regasification and storage.


Final Report


Accordingly, it is proposed that the FSRU based facility will be developed for the current

phase i.e. to handle upto 3.5 Mtpa, following which, the terminal will be converted to a

conventional LNG terminal to handle the increased volumes.

4.2 Other liquids

The other liquids to be handled at Gopalpur consist of LPG, edible oil, POL, chemicals like

ammonia etc. Since there are no stringent requirements with regards to the safety aspects

in handling and operations (unlike LNG), all these liquid cargoes can be handled on the

same berth and terminal.

The movement of LPG and other liquid bulk cargo, from the vessel will be undertaken by

means of pipelines connected to the shore- based storage tanks. Pumping equipment is

available on the smaller size vessels.

For liquid cargo, the discharge from the ship’s tanks will be via the cargo piping system to

the ship’s manifold usually situated amid ships, on either starboard or port side. From there,

by means of shore- based unloading arms, liquid cargo will be transferred to the shore

manifold and then distributed to shore-based tanks. The loading arm hose must be flanged

oil tight to the ship’s manifold so that oils spills can be avoided.

According to the type of cargo and the envisaged parcel sizes, tanks of different sizes as

per the cargo storage requirement will be constructed. The terminal will also house the

evacuation related facilities i.e. truck loading, rail loading and pipeline connectivity.

Figure 4-7: Liquid cargo operations

Liquid cargo shipment in tanker

Unloaded at berth using unloading arms

Transferred to tank farm via pipeline

Stored in liquid tank farm

Evacuation to deliver to customers

Loaded into tankers

for evacuation via

road

Loaded into tank

cars for

evacuation via rail

Loaded into tank

cars for

evacuation via rail


Final Report


5 Operating Considerations and Functional

requirements

This chapter examines in detail the major operating considerations to be taken into

cognizance while planning the liquid terminal. The functional requirements are also

assessed on the basis of the requirements of the facility to develop the marine and landside

infrastructure layout and to formulate the scheme of operation for this facility.

5.1 Traffic forecast summary

The cargo mix and the forecasted traffic throughput are as discussed in Chapter 3. The

pre- feasibility study takes into consideration throughput starting from 0.1 Mtpa of other

liquids in the first two years and reaching upto a total volume of 13 Mtpa (10 Mtpa LNG and

3 Mtpa LPG, other liquids) in 2028.

5.2 Ship size analysis

Design vessel sizes are governed mainly by the availability of vessels worldwide and

considering the global fleet, throughput, water depth and marine facilities and the aspect of

ensuring scalability in case of future expansions. Liquid cargoes are handled in tankers.

The market demands high service levels in terms of timely and safe movement of high-

value, sensitive and sometimes hazardous and aggressive liquid cargoes. This section

arrives at the design vessel size for the FSRU, LNGC as well as the other liquids.

It is envisaged that the LNG terminal at Gopalpur will commence operations with an FSRU

permanently moored at the jetty to which the vessels will be moored on the side, followed

by conversion of the facility to a conventional onshore type LNG facility in the future, upon

increase in the throughput. In such a scenario, the jetty has to be designed considering the

size of FSRU vessel as well as the LNGC which may call at the port in the future.

For LPG and the other liquids, the design vessel size is assessed on the basis of the

historical ship sizes, prevalent global shipping practices based on the value/type of cargo

as well as the typical parcel size requirements of the buyers.

5.2.1 LNG

5.2.1.1 Global LNGC and FSRU fleet

Considering the size of LNG on order or under construction across various global

shipyards, the current “standard” size for LNGC is approximately 160,000 m3, up from

135,000 m3 during 1990s. To understand the changing dynamic of the “standard” LNG ship

size with respect to time, we have differentiated the ships with respect to their vintage and

storage capacities as below:

Vintage categories

• Older vintage (hull delivery up to year 2007)

• Newer vintage (hull delivery from 2008 onwards)


Final Report


• Under construction (hull delivery from 2013 onwards)

Storage capacity categories

• Very small (< 50,000 m3)

• Small (between 50,000 m3 and 120,000 m3)

• Medium (between 120,000 m3 and 160,000 m3)

• Large (between 160,000 m3 and 180,000 m3)

• Very large (> 180,000 m3)

5.2.1.2 Sizing

• Repurposed FSRU

Based on the above section, we conclude that for a retrofitted FSRU, the candidate ship

coming from the LNG fleet would be of older vintage and therefore typically would be of

medium capacity. Accordingly, the ships of capacity ranging from 125,000 m3 – 145,000 m3

are within the optimal range of vessels for the retrofitted FSRU.

• New-built FSRU

We understand that all the new-built FSRU vessels and under-construction FSRU vessels

are large ships. Given the significant number of 170,000 m3 ships under construction, a

standard capacity of up to 175,000 m3 is to be considered for the new-built FSRU storage

capacity.

• LNG carrier (LNGC)

The choice of LNGC is constrained by the storage capacity of FSRU as they must have

smaller or similar storage capacities than the FSRU. Accordingly, the design vessel size is

finalised.

5.2.1.3 Selection of FSRU

The type of vessel to be selected for the purpose of utilisation as FSRU depends on a no.

of factors. In addition to the consideration of the global fleet availability, forecasted

throughput and storage requirements while selecting the FSRU vessel, a major factor

determining the final choice is also capital cost of the FSRU and its economics.

FSRU conversion for older tonnage that is coming off long-term charter is a favourable

option. Ships that are 25 years or older, typically about 138,000 m3 capacity, are the

approximate size of vessels that are repurposed to FSRUs. Moss or membrane

containment vessels can be retrofitted into FSRU. Typically, moss containment is favoured

because moss tanks are better than membrane tanks at withstanding sloshing loads as

well as considering the availability of space in moss containment for locating the

regasification equipment. FSRUs having tank capacities of 125,000 to 150,000 m3 are

mostly in use.


Final Report


It is, therefore, proposed that a previously used (20-25 years old) vessel of 138,000 m3

capacity be deployed by GPL for the LNG facility at Gopalpur. The decision of deploying a

previously used vessel of 138,000 m3 in place of choosing a larger vessel of recent make

for the purpose of FSRU is primarily based on the strategy of storage cost optimization.

As explained above, the FSRU proposed to be deployed at the terminal will be of size

138,000 m3 considering the criteria of selection as discussed.

Table 5-1: Design vessel size- FSRU

FSRU dimensions

Size range (m3) 125,000 – 150,000

Capacity (m3) Up to 150,000

LoA (m) 290

Beam (m) 43.4- 48.9

Draught (m) 11.0-11.5

The average capacity of the FSRU for planning the facility is considered as 138,000 m3.

5.2.1.4 LNG carrier (LNGC)

The nature of the commodity i.e. cargo characteristics and its parcel size determine the

ship size to be used on a particular service. In addition, the global shipping trend is also a

major determinant of the design LNGC size.

With respect to economies of scale, the bigger the size of the LNGC is, the higher is the

convenience in operations and the profitability. Also, with the increasing throughput over

the years, the design vessel size of LNGC calling at the port will also get larger. Accordingly,

in the initial phase, design LNGC size is considered as 138,000 m3, but the infrastructure

is to be designed to serve requirements in the future as well. Accordingly, vessel of size

173,000 m3 is considered as the maximum vessel size to be served at the terminal at

present. In the future, the terminal can be planned to handle upto Q-Max size vessels.

Table 5-2: Design vessel size - LNGC

LNGC dimensions Current phase Future phase

Size (m3) Upto 173,000 Upto Q-Max i.e. 267,000

Capacity (m3) 138,000 220,000

LoA (m) 290 345

Beam (m) 45.8 54

Draught (m) 11.8 12.0

5.2.2 Other liquids

Ocean-going POL, oil and chemical tankers generally range from 5,000 DWT to 40,000

DWT in size and are considerably smaller than the tankers used for moving voluminous


Final Report


cargo like crude oils. This is partly due to their specialized nature and stringent conditions

for storage and shipping and also because economies of scale are less important than in

the trades dealing with large volumes. It is also applicable to LPG tankers to be taken into

consideration for the study.

Product tankers normally have a series of separate cargo tanks that are either coated with

specialized coatings such as phenolic epoxy or zinc paint or made from stainless steel.

Many carriers can transport multiple cargoes as they have several separate cargo tanks.

The carrier design and tank material are determined by the chemical composition of the

cargo that needs to be transported.

Typical bulk liquid carriers have dimensions as summarised in the table below:

Table 5-3: Typical bulk liquid ship sizes

Carrying capacity (DWT) LoA (m) Beam (m) Min. draught (m)

10,000 127 20.8 7.9

20,000 158 25.8 9.6

30,000 180 29.2 10.9

40,000 211 32.3 12.6

The design vessel size for LPG and other liquids is assessed as below:

Table 5-4: Design vessel size for LPG and other liquids

Design vessel size parameters LPG Other liquids

Capacity (DWT) 30,000 20,000

LoA (m) 180 158

Beam (m) 29.2 25.8

Draught (m) 10.9 9.6

The above vessel details will govern the jetty design, storage capacity, harbour design

including channel and turning circle dimensions as well as harbour traffic control. In the

case of LNG, depending on the throughput, it is possible that in the future the operations

may be carried out without the FSRU i.e., by direct berthing of vessels and larger sized

vessels will be calling at the facility at this stage. Hence taking into consideration the trend

of increase in average and maximum ship sizes, the layout will be optimised to berth ships

of sizes discussed in this section.

In the case of other liquids, given the shipping trends and the parcel sizes, major variations

in the design vessel size is not envisaged.


Final Report


5.3 Principal harbour dimensions

5.3.1 Approach channel

“Approach Channels – A Guide for Design”, PIANC, Report no. 121-2014 provides

guidance for the determination of the underkeel clearance (UKC) requirements for safe

navigation.

As per standard requirements, the UKC shall be considered at 30% of the draught for the

channel subjected to the wave action and 10% of the vessel draught for the calm protected

water. The channel width is assessed by considering 5 times the beam of the vessel for a

two-lane navigation.

Considering the dimensions of the different design vessels as per cargoes (refer Table 5-2

and Table 5-4), the navigational requirements will be governed by the LNGC size as it is

the largest. Accordingly, the required navigation channel dimensions are assessed as

follows:

Table 5-5: Approach channel dimensions

Approach channel dimensions Current phase (facility with FSRU) Future phase (conventional LNG facility)

Channel depth

LNGC size (m3) 173,000 267,000

Vessel draught (m) 11.8 12

Inner channel depth (m wrt CD) 13.0 13.2

Outer channel depth (m wrt

CD)

15.3 15.6

Channel width

Vessel beam (m) 45.8 54

Channel width (m) 230 270

Hence, the depth of -15.5 m proposed in the current phase and -18.5 m in the future phase

in the navigation channel will be sufficient for navigation of design vessel size.

The existing channel width of 200 m is sufficient for single way navigation. Considering that

the vessel movement in the inner channel and harbour will be assisted by tugs, it is not

deemed necessary to increase the channel width for navigation of the liquid tankers.

However, in the future, depending on traffic to be handled at the port and should there be

requirement of two-way navigation, widening of the channel will have to be examined at

that stage.

5.3.2 Harbour and turning circle

PIANC and IS: 4651 (Part V) recommend that where vessels turn by free interplay of the

propeller and assisted by tugs, the minimum diameter of the turning circle should be 1.7 to

2.0 times (1.70 for protected locations and 2.0 for exposed locations) the length of the


Final Report


largest vessel to be turned. These ships would be assisted with tugs in manoeuvring in the

approach channel, in the harbour basin and to and from the jetty.

The water depth in the harbour basin and in the front of and alongside the jetty should

generally be sufficient for safe manoeuvring. The water depth should be based on the

maximum loaded draught of the largest design vessel. For sheltered areas the estimated

minimum UKC required would be 10% of the ship’s draught.

Table 5-6: Turning circle dimensions

For 173,000 m3 LNGC For Q-Max LNGC

Vessel LoA (m) 290 345

Turning circle dia. (m) 560 610

Vessel draught (m) 11.8 12

Depth in harbour (m wrt CD) 13.0 13.2

Accordingly, the turning circle of 600 m at present will suffice considering the navigation

requirements. The available depth in the harbour is adequate as per the requirements

assessed.

5.3.3 Minimum stopping distance

As per standard industry norms, a minimum stopping distance requirement is in the range

of 3 to 5 ship lengths between the main breakwater roundhead and the start of the turning

basin. This implies a requirement of 1000 m for the design ships, which is in line with the

available distance in the existing harbour. Accordingly, the distance available to steady the

ship and fasten the tugs to vessel before entering the port is in the range of 3 to 3.5 for the

design vessel sizes.

5.4 Jetty requirements

The main components of the liquid jetty are:

• unloading platform

• approach trestle

• breasting dolphins

• mooring dolphins

• catwalks

A jetty with dolphin type berthing facility supported by piles is the most common and suitable

structural system for liquid handling facilities. A central unloading platform with breasting

dolphins provides safety and the mooring dolphins provide adequate anchorage and

stability for achieving operational conditions. The trestle structure will support the liquid

carrying pipeline, utilities including fire-fighting water supply and a roadway. Typical liquid

jetty is as shown in Figure 5-1.


Final Report


Figure 5-1: Liquid jetty- general arrangement (typ.)

Jetty requirements are calculated on the basis of operational considerations, cargo

volumes and the no. of ship calls. The arrival of vessels at jetty is usually a stochastic

process. The number of jetties required will depend on the jetty occupancy. Jetty

occupancy is expressed as a percentage of the number of hours a jetty is occupied by

vessel(s) to the total no. of berth hours available in a year. Therefore, in order to calculate

the number of jetties required, it is essential to know if the ships arrive randomly or if there

are significant peaks in the arrival pattern. High jetty occupancy factors can seem attractive

because this yields the highest jetty utilisation, but it also has a significant impact on waiting

time and congestion issues.

The assessment of jetty occupancy takes into consideration the following:

• Effective working duration

While calculating the required no. of jetties, it is considered that cargo handling and ship

servicing will be carried out 24 hrs a day in multiple shifts.

Annually, 350 days are considered for the calculation of jetty occupancy, taking into

consideration incremental weather downtime, equipment breakdown etc.

• Additional service requirements

The turn-around time at the port includes the time required for actual unloading/loading

operations and time for peripheral activities. Apart from the actual time for

loading/unloading cargo, additional time is required for berthing and de-berthing of ships,

obtaining customs clearance, surveys, positioning and hook up of equipment, waiting for

pilots and clearance for navigation. An average duration of 6 hours per vessel is allowed

for these activities.

• Cargo handling rate

The unloading time is determined by the effective cargo handling rates. The details of

handling rates are explained in the subsequent sections.

5.4.1 LNG

The jetty occupancy assessment for LNG is carried out for the current phase i.e. for the

FSRU based facility as well as the future phase i.e. the conventional onshore type of LNG

facility.

Approach

trestle

Unloading

platform

Breasting

dolphins

Mooring

dolphins


Final Report


5.4.1.1 FSRU based LNG facility

Effectively, the jetty occupancy is being assessed on the basis of the total time taken by

the cargo to be transferred (i) from the LNGC to the FSRU (ii) FSRU to onshore

regasification unit (iii) regasification and send-out. Since there is no onshore storage to be

provided, it is considered that that after offloading the LNG from LNGC to FSRU, the

regasification and cargo transfer from FSRU to onshore unit and send-out will be

undertaken as a continuous process. Effectively, the LNG facility is under utilization and

hence occupied for the whole duration until the entire process of (i) LNGC to FSRU transfer

of LNG (ii) regasification at FSRU and send-out is complete.

In essence, the governing factors for determining duration of occupancy of the facility are

(i) rate of unloading from LNGC to FSRU (ii) send-out rate. Since there is no onshore

storage to be provided, it is considered that that after offloading the LNG from LNGC to

FSRU, the cargo transfer from FSRU to onshore regasification unit and further

regasification and send-out will be undertaken as a continuous process. Considering that

the rate of transfer of cargo from FSRU to onshore unit is greater than the send-out rate,

the calculation is carried out using the gas send-out rate.

As per prevailing industry trends and operational practices, the unloading time is

determined by the effective cargo handling rates. As per standard FSRU configurations

available in the industry for the proposed size of vessel, handling rate of 7,500 m3/hr from

the LNGC to FSRU is proposed. For the send-out of regasified cargo, 4 send-out units with

a total regasification capacity of 600 MMSCFD are considered.

The assessment of jetty utilisation to examine the feasibility of handling the target LNG

throughput using an FSRU is as shown below. It is undertaken for combinations with

different sizes of LNGCs vis a-vis the FSRU of proposed capacity to understand the most

optimal scenario.


Final Report


Table 5-7: Jetty occupancy for FSRU based LNG facility

LNG jetty occupancy assessment

Vessel particulars

Annual Throughput (t) 35,00,000 35,00,000

Annual Throughput (m3) 77,00,000 77,77,000

LNGC Vessel size (m3) 1,38,000 1,95,000

FSRU size (m3) 1,38,000 1,38,000

Number of LNGC calls per annum 56 40

Unloading and regasification

Unloading arm working hr 24 24

Capacity of unloading arms (m3/hr) 7,500 7,500

Handling rate per day (m3/day/jetty) 1,80,000 1,80,000

Avg. send-out rate of NG (MMSCFD) from regas 600 600

Avg. send-out rate of LNG (m3/day) from regas 31,980 31,980

Total handling duration

Additional berthing/ unberthing/ waiting time (day) 0.33 0.42

LNG unloading from LNGC to FSRU/vessel (day) 0.77 1.08

Balance FSRU capacity (m3) (difference of capacities of LNGC and FSRU) - 57,000

Regas, send-out duration of LNG from FSRU/vessel (day) 4.32 6.10

Total duration of LNG transfer from LNGGC to FSRU to send-out/vessel (day) 5.42 7.60

Jetty occupancy percentage

Assumed available berth days per annum 350 350

No. of jetties 1 1

Total vessel days 302 303

Jetty occupancy 86% 87%

As seen from the above table, the jetty occupancy is slightly higher than the standard

operating limit of 85% for LNG terminals. However, there is a possibility of optimising the

process or increasing the regasification/send-out rate to ensure more efficient operations.

The alternative of deploying a larger FSRU with higher capacities can also be explored, but

the cost economics would have to be evaluated.

Thus, it is inferred from the above assessment that as explained in §4.1.3, upto 3.5 Mtpa

can be handled using a single FSRU (i.e. a single jetty).

5.4.1.2 Conventional onshore based LNG facility

As explained in §4.1.3, at a stage when the throughput exceeds 3.5 Mt, the facility will be

converted to a conventional LNG terminal with onshore regasification and storage for

handling the cargo. In this phase, vessels of size upto Q-Max are envisaged to be handled

at the port. The unloading rate at the LNG jetty is considered as 12,500 m3/hr.


Final Report


Table 5-8: Jetty occupancy for conventional LNG facility (future)

Assessment of jetty occupancy

Annual Throughput (t) 10,000,000

Annual Throughput (m3) 22,000,000

Average Vessel Size (m3) 225,000

Average Parcel Size (m3) 180,000

Number of ships per annum 122

Operational hr/ day 24

Handling Rate per day (m3/hr) 12,500

Handling time per shipment (hrs) 14.40

Berthing/ unberthing/ waiting time (hrs) 8.00

Total days per ship (hrs) 22.40

Total days per ship (days) 0.93

Berth days per annum 114

No. of berths provided 1

Available working days at port (annual) 350

Berth occupancy rate 33%

The assessment of jetty occupancy indicates that 1 no. jetty will also be sufficient for 10

Mtpa, considering a conventional onshore LNG terminal. In this scenario, it will also be

possible to handle greater volumes efficiently at the LNG terminal with the available marine

infrastructure.

5.4.2 Other liquids

As explained previously, LPG and other liquids like POL, edible oil, chemicals etc. can be

handled on the same jetty. For the projected annual throughput of LPG and other liquids,

the jetty occupancy is calculated to establish the jetty requirements, as shown in Table 5-9.


Final Report


Table 5-9: Jetty occupancy for LPG and other liquids

Description LPG Other liquids

Annual throughput (t) 10,00,000 20,00,000

Average parcel size (t) 26,000 15,000

Number of ships per annum 38 133

Working time per day (hr) 24 24

Handling rate (tpd) 24,000 15,000

Handling time per shipment (days) 1.1 1.0

Other time (days) 0.25 0.25

Total time per ship (days) 1.33 1.25

No. of days of operation for handling one vessel 51 167

Number of berths 1

Number of days in a year 350

Berth occupancy (%) 62%

As per the assessment shown above, the operating capacity of a single berth works out to

3 Mtpa. This scenario considers utilisation of unloading pumps installed at the berth.

At the time of commencement of liquid bulk operations at Gopalpur, smaller vessels with

lower parcel sizes are envisaged to call at the port. At this stage, the cargo can be handled

at the general cargo berth (currently under construction) using ship gears. It is assessed

that upto 1.7 Mtpa can be effectively handled, considering an output of 10,000 t/day.

Thus, based on the above assessment, it is proposed that two liquid jetties be developed;

one dedicated jetty for LNG operations and the other liquid jetty for LPG and the other

liquids.

5.5 Approach trestle

The jetties will be connected to the landfall point by means of an approach trestle. The

approach trestle is to be designed to accommodate:

• Access road for movement of fire trucks and ambulances (in case of emergency and

mobile crane (in travelling mode only).

• Walkway for movement of personnel, primarily for service and maintenance of the pipes

and utilities.

• Pipe rack and utility corridor

• Lighting

• Safety equipment


Final Report


5.6 Land side requirements

The land side requirements for the cargoes is assessed basis the land required for storage

at the port as well as associated evacuation facilities.

5.6.1 Storage

The assessment of total storage requirement is undertaken by analysing the commodity

wise area requirements in relation to the forecasted volumes. Storage area requirements

are sensitive to a wide array of parameters, principally:

• Projected annual throughput volumes

• Average dwell time

• Cargo types and segregation/safety requirements

• Area for internal circulation and access

5.6.1.1 LNG

At present, it is proposed to deploy an FSRU for the LNG operation and it will be utilised

for storage of the cargo. The construction of an onshore storage facility is not envisaged to

be required given the forecasted throughput at present and the existing project

requirements. A small buffer storage provision is proposed at the truck loading terminal to

support the truck loading operations. Accordingly, the area requirement in this phase is

approx. 5-10 ha.

Following ramp up of LNG volumes at the terminal (>3.5 Mt), the terminal will be converted

to a conventional onshore LNG facility, with storage, process side facilities and other

ancillary infrastructure alongwith evacuation related facilities will be provided onshore. At

this stage, an area of approx. 40 ha will be required for the LNG facility.

5.6.1.2 Other liquids

• LPG

Considering an annual throughput of 1 Mtpa, it is assumed that storage for one parcel

load i.e. 30,000 t is to be provided. Accordingly, it is proposed that 3 clusters of tanks

with total 10,000 kL capacity of each cluster will be constructed.

• Other liquids

The total annual throughput of other liquids is 2 Mtpa.

Accordingly, it is proposed that tanks of sizes ranging from 500 kL to 5,000 kL

depending on the type of cargo and the parcel size of each type of commodity to be

stored at the liquid terminal. Larger tanks upto 15,000 kL may be considered in the

future depending on parcel sizes and storage requirements.

Given the total area requirement for LPG and liquids, the land area needed for developing

the liquid terminal is in a range of 15-20 ha.


Final Report


It is also important to ensure that the safety aspects for the cargoes to be handled also be

taken into cognizance while locating and planning the back up area.

5.7 Evacuation

5.7.1.1 LNG

The NG will be evacuated primarily by means of pipeline. The LNG facility will be connected

to the gas grid by means of tie- in pipeline, via which, the gas will be evacuated and

transported to the customers.

To make LNG available to customers who are not linked to the gas pipeline network, LNG

will be supplied by cryogenic trucks (upto 25 t capacity). Though the demand for LNG from

industrial zones is substantial, they are scattered and still not connected. Hence, for such

customers, road transportation will fulfil the requirement. Low fixed costs and short

distances make road tankers more preferable. Moreover, road tankers offer high flexibility

and durability. With road tanker deliveries, LNG is not regasified at the terminal but at the

end user locations. Approx. 20 truck loading bays are proposed to be provided for

evacuation of LNG. These will be built in phases as per the throughput requirements.

5.7.1.2 Other liquids

The other liquids like POL, edible oil, chemicals etc. will be evacuated mainly by means of

pipeline. The pipeline will be connected from the liquid storage at Goplapur upto the users’

facilities. For customers who cannot be served by means of the pipeline, the liquid cargo

will be evacuated from the port and delivered to the destination via both road and railway

modes as well. Tankers will be used for evacuation by road and tank cars for evacuation

through rail.


Final Report


6 Alternative Locations

6.1 Feasibility of multiple jetties in the harbour

6.1.1 Existing harbour layout and conditions

The assignment calls for exploring various locations in the harbour of Gopalpur Port to

develop liquid jetties for handling the estimated liquid cargo throughput. The port

infrastructure being developed at Gopalpur is meant for handling of dry bulk and general

cargo. The operational safety, convenience and control aspects as well as the cost of

investment and operations assume paramount importance when evaluating the options.

The existing harbour layout of Gopalpur Port is as shown in Figure 6-1.

Figure 6-1: Existing harbour of Gopalpur Port

The existing landside and marine infrastructure at the port as well as the infrastructure

under development currently is described in §2.3. Following completion of the current

phase of development, the infrastructure in the Gopalpur Port harbour and on the landside

will be as shown below in Figure 6-2 (refer corresponding drawing no. BMT-1395-GPL-

PFR-DWG-001).


Final Report


Figure 6-2: Proposed layout of ongoing development at Gopalpur Port


Final Report


As seen from the above figure, the available waterfront for development of additional jetties

includes the following:

(i) Stretch in continuation with dry/general cargo berths already developed

(ii) Along the south breakwater

(iii) Along the intermediate breakwater

It is to be noted that as part of the future developments at the port, it is proposed that

development of 2 nos. bulk berths may be considered, along the inner arm of the southern

breakwater. Hence, this needs to be taken into consideration while studying the possible

locations for the liquid jetties, with regards to waterfront availability and operational safety.

Thus, it is inferred from the above discussion that it will be feasible to develop multiple

jetties in the harbour, considering the availability of waterfront.

Based on our understanding of the requirements of liquid terminal, we propose to identify

and examine alternative site locations based on the parameters explained in §6.1.2.

6.1.2 Key planninng parameters

For the alternative locations as stated above, the facility planning philosophy is based on

the following parameters:

• Separate berths for handling LNG and LPG/other liquids

• Commencement of LNG facility as FSRU based terminal and conversion to a

conventional LNG terminal in future

• Handling of liquids on existing general cargo berth using ship gears in initial stages and

gradually shifting operations to the dedicated liquid berth fitted with unloading arms

• Conveyance of cargo between jetty and back up area through pipelines

• Storage provision in the back up area considering parcel size required to be stored and

necessary cargo segregation

• Cost economics and safety in handling

• Berths are considered to be operational 7 days a week over 330 working days per year

(considering the cyclone prone location of Gopalpur Port), allowing 35 non- operational

days for maintenance and unforeseen reasons. Further, the berths will operate round-

the-clock i.e. 3 shifts of 8 hours each resulting in 24 hr/day working.

6.1.3 Principal guiding considerations for site selection

Key considerations guiding the process of studying the available options towards

identification of suitable sites for locating the jetties are as follows:

6.1.3.1 Tranquillity in the harbour

Given the nature of liquid cargo proposed to be handled at the port, it is of utmost necessity

to ensure that the location of the berth is at a tranquil location for safe operations. The

maximum allowable wave height being considered for assessment of tranquillity in the

various locations in the Gopalpur harbour is 1.0 m.


Final Report


The tranquillity at various locations in the Gopalpur Port harbour has been examined on

the basis of results of numerical model study1 carried out. An excerpt of the study i.e. results

of the downtime analysis at various locations are as shown below.

Figure 6-3: Wave extraction points

Results of the downtime analysis for the wave extraction (WE) points shown above is given

in the table below.

Table 6-1: Downtime at locations within Gopalpur harbour

Location Downtime (%) Downtime (hr/yr)

WE2 0.3 25.0

WE3 0.08 7.0

WE4 0.04 3.5

WE5 0.01 1.0

WE7 0 0.0

WE8 0 0.0

WE9 0 0.0

WE10 0.08 7.0

1 Wave climate and tranquillity study at Gopalpur Port by BMT Consultants (India) Pvt. Ltd., November 2017


Final Report


WE11 0 0.0

WE12 0.04 3.5

WE13 0.01 1.0

WE14 0 0.0

WE15 0 0.0

WE16 0 0.0

WE18 0.02 2.0

The results of the study indicate that all the potential locations in the harbour that are to be

examined for selection of location have negligible downtime and are thus, adequately

tranquil as required for the liquid handling operations.

6.1.3.2 Availability of depth/dredging requirements

Based on the assessment of functional requirements in §5.3, the proposed depth of -15.6

m CD in the harbour and channel in the current phase of development will be sufficient for

the vessels envisaged to be handled at the liquid terminal. GPL already has an Environment

and CRZ Clearance to handle bulk cargo with an approved depth of -15 m CD. However,

it is proposed that Capesize vessels will be handled for bulk cargo for which a depth of -18

m CD will be required at the berths, the channel and the turning basin, hence needing

additional dredging. This issue will be further examined and included in the EIA in detail.

It is important to note that a 25-30 m distance will be required to be maintained between

the dredge line and breakwater toe to ensure that the stability of the breakwater is not

affected. However, detailed studies will be required at a later stage to determine the exact

distance to be maintained from the dredge line for safety of the breakwater.

6.1.3.3 Safety zone

This parameter is specific to the LNG jetty, but it also affects location of other facilities in

its vicinity. An exclusive safety zone with at least 250 m radius at the time an LNG ship is

berthed at the jetty is to be maintained and the LNG jetty needs to be located accordingly.

The accurate safety distance to be maintained will have to be ascertained by carrying out

a QRA study. This radius where no other structure/operation allowed is measured from

centre of the manifold. Considering that the FSRU will be permanently moored at the LNG

jetty, it will be necessary to maintain this zone of safety all the time i.e. 24 x 7 without any

structure/operations in this area.

It is also necessary to check the proximity of the LNG jetty to existing approach channel

and turning basins to ensure there are no navigation risks.

6.1.3.4 Separation distance

The separation distance is also a particular requirement of the LNG jetty and is to be

considered for selecting the location of the jetty. A clear 500 m separation distance from

the centre of the manifold of LNG jetty to the centre of any other jetty structure is required

to be maintained to ensure safe operations.


Final Report


6.1.3.5 Accessibility to land and connectivity to back up areas

It is necessary to ensure that the jetty location is in proximity to its back up area, considering

that the cargo conveyance from jetty to storage will be through pipeline and this will have

implications on costs and operational convenience. It is also necessary that the location to

be developed be accessible from land, with road connectivity for movement of vehicles,

personnel and also to ensure availability of construction material as well as the utilities like

power, water, waste water etc.

6.1.3.6 Environmental considerations

Since all the locations under consideration are situated in the same harbour, all the sites

are similar with respect to environmental considerations. None of the sites are envisaged

to have any varying or additional environmental impacts that need to be taken into

cognizance at the site selection stage.

6.1.4 Assessment of potential jetty locations

In line with the above considerations, the following options are being examined for selecting

the most suitable locations for the jetties. Since the site selection for LNG facility

necessitates taking into cognizance the safety aspects, the identification of location for LNG

jetty is carried out first, followed by selection of location for the other liquids jetty.

6.1.4.1 LNG

The alternative locations for developing the LNG jetty are as shown in Figure 6-4.

Considering the requirement of a safety zone of 250 m radius from the manifold, the

alternative locations are-

• Location A: Outer arm of south breakwater

• Location B: Intermediate breakwater

• Location C: Inner arm of south breakwater


Final Report


Figure 6-4: Alternative locations for LNG jetty


Final Report


A broad based examination of the characteristics of each site location is undertaken and

discussed below.

Location A

Location A refers to the option along the outer arm of south breakwater. This location is

being studied, considering the future development of bulk berths along inner arm of south

breakwater. The annual downtime at locations along this length is in the range of 0.04-

0.08%, hence, is negligible. This location is also accessible by land, as the road/ utilities

can run from the landfall point along the breakwater length, upto the jetty.

With reference to Figure 6-4, it is important to note that the approach channel or turning

circle may possibly coincide with the 250 m radius safety zone required to be maintained

for the LNG jetty. In this case, there would be restrictions to movement/ manoeuvring of the

other incoming/ outgoing vessels when passing through this overlapping area. Hence, it is

necessary to ensure that the location of the jetty is selected such that it fulfils the

requirements of the safety zone as well as the separation distance from other infrastructure,

especially the proposed berths on the inner arm of the breakwater.

Since this location is farthest from the existing landside development and berth line at the

port (>1000 m), there are no potential issues such as operational conflicts or safety

concerns with respect to the existing infrastructure. Also, it will be possible to undertake

dredging at this location to match the proposed harbour depth of -15.5 m, hence, availability

of depth will also be fulfilled.

This location appears to be a favourable location for constructing the LNG jetty, and will be

compared with respect to the other options to finalise the most suitable location.

Location B

This option is proposed along the intermediate breakwater. This location is not expected to

be exposed to any wave disturbance, given the negligible downtime envisaged along this

zone. Since it is situated very close to the landfall point, accessibility by land and

construction of road/ utilities upto the jetty will be very convenient, as well as of least length

and cost, of all the options. Dredging at the location will ensure availability of required

depths for vessel handling.

With respect to the safety zone and separation distance, there may be possible conflicts if

the LNG jetty is proposed at this location. The waterfront along which the existing berths

are located, as well as the landside infrastructure, are in close vicinity (~500 m) to this

location. While the portion of the berth line coinciding with the safety zone for this location

is not developed till date, it is proposed that the existing berths will be extended in the near

future, upon ramp up in the cargo volumes. If the LNG jetty is constructed along the

intermediate breakwater, the extension of the general cargo berth will not be feasible,

considering the safety aspects. Also, the turning circle coincides with the safety zone if the

LNG jetty is along the intermediate breakwater, and this would result in restrictions to vessel

movement in the harbour.


Final Report


Also, since the landside area of the terminal and gate complex and terminal landside is in

close proximity to this location, there may be safety related issues considering the frequent

personnel and vehicular movements as well as the landside operational activities.

Based on the above discussions, the concept of developing the LNG jetty at this location

seems to have significant safety related issues. It is, therefore, not considered as a

favourable alternative for the LNG jetty.

Location C

The third alternative location under study for the LNG jetty in the Gopalpur harbour is along

the inner arm of the south breakwater. This alternative is being assessed for suitability

considering that this facility be developed at the given location instead of the dry bulk berths

proposed by GPL in the future.

The annual downtime at locations along this length is 0, hence this location is highly

advantageous in terms of availability of tranquillity. This location is also accessible by land,

as the road/ utilities can run from the landfall point along the breakwater length, upto the

jetty.

It is possible to locate the LNG jetty along this length such that the approach channel or

turning circle do not coincide with the 250 m radius safety zone required for the LNG jetty.

Locating the jetty at this site would also fulfil the requirement of the separation distance

from other infrastructure. However, if this location is chosen for development of the LNG

jetty, it would lead to restrictions to the future expansion of the marine infrastructure within

the harbour. While this alternative is mostly promising as a potential location for the LNG

jetty, it is not the most optimal solution, especially taking into account future plans and

scope of expansion in this harbour.

Having studied each of the three alternative options with regards to understanding their

salient features towards assessing their suitability as the preferred location for developing

the LNG facility, and also keeping in view the long term expansion plans of Gopalpur Port,

the location along the outer arm of the south breakwater emerges as the most suitable

alternative. QRA is required to be undertaken in the detailed feasibility stage to further

assess the suitability and finalise this location for development of the LNG jetty.

6.1.4.2 LPG and other liquids

The LNG jetty location is proposed along the outer arm of south breakwater (refer §6.1.4.1).

It is as shown in Figure 6-5.


Final Report


Figure 6-5: Jetty location for LPG and other liquids


Final Report


While there are general guidelines with respect to operational safety in handling of LPG

and certain hazardous/ explosive liquid chemicals, there are no specific requirements

(unlike LNG) to be considered while selecting a location for the jetty.

As explained in the previous section, the annual downtime at his location is negligible, thus

offering tranquillity for operations. The location is also accessible by land, and development

of road and utilities upto this location will be of short length and low cost. Since there are

no particular safety and separation related parameters to be followed for choosing a

location for this jetty, the proximity of terminal land side area and gate complex as well as

the turning circle on the marine side do not cause any safety related conflicts or operational/

navigational restrictions. Also, it will be possible to undertake dredging at this location to

match the proposed harbour depth of -15.5 m, hence, availability of depth will also be

fulfilled.

As per the above analysis, this location appears to be a favourable for constructing the jetty

for LPG and other liquids. It will be finalised following the QRA study.

6.1.4.3 Recommendation

Following an analysis of the site characteristics of potential locations within the harbour at

Gopalpur Port for the liquid jetties and their suitability with respect to the requirements of

the proposed infrastructure, it is proposed that the LNG jetty will be developed along the

outer arm of the south breakwater and the LPG and other liquid’s jetty will be developed

along the intermediate breakwater (refer Figure 6-6) and drawing no. BMT-1395-GPL-PFR-

DWG-003).

Figure 6-6: Proposed liquid jetty locations at Gopalpur Port


Final Report


6.2 Landside development

As per the current phase of development at Gopalpur Port, marine and landside

infrastructure are proposed as part of this phase and are under construction at present.

Accordingly, the land parcels available and suitable for back up area development are to

be identified and planned as per the requirements of the liquid handling facility.

As seen in Figure 6-7, the portion of the landside area behind the bulk and general cargo

berths, extending upto the railway corridor is earmarked as part of the back up area for the

current dry bulk terminal development. Hence, the land parcels available for liquid terminal

back up area development are those located to the east and west of the dry bulk back up

yard. This section identifies and defines the location, size and arrangement of the back up

yard for both the liquid jetties, based on the phase wise requirements. The facilities required

for cargo evacuation (including pipeline route) are also discussed.

6.2.1 Key considerations for back up area selection

• Area availability

On the basis of the requirements of the back up facility for each cargo, the area required

has been assessed as per the phases. While selecting a suitable land parcel to be

earmarked for development of the back up yard for a particular cargo, it will be necessary

to check the availability of adequate area (as per current and future development plans).

It is also important to check that the type of facility being set up at the location is not

conflicting with any existing land use/activities in the immediate vicinity.

• Pipeline connectivity- length, terrain, interfaces

An important criterion to be examined is the pipeline connectivity between the (i) jetty and

the storage facility in the back up yard and (ii) storage facility towards evacuation. It is also

essential to identify the pipeline route running between the jetty and landside facility, to

ensure it is an optimal alternative

The corridor availability for development of pipeline along the favoured route is to be

checked. In addition, it is preferred to develop a pipeline that has an alignment with lesser

bends, lower length, running along similar terrain throughout the corridor distance and

fewer interfaces which may interfere with the pipeline alignment owing to the land use at

the location.

• Operational convenience and safety

Given that the types of cargoes to be handled at the terminal will be hazardous, prone to

explosion etc., it is of utmost necessity that the aspects of operational convenience, control

and safety be taken into cognizance while planning the landside as well as the marine

infrastructure for this terminal.

• Expandability

Considering the cargo forecast and having identified the way forward for development of

the terminal in the coming years, it will be important to ensure that the scope of


Final Report


Considering the cargo forecast and having identified the way forward for development of

the terminal in the coming years, it will be important to ensure that the scope of

expandability be checked when selecting the back up locations and planning for the

development of the facility.

6.2.2 Assessment of back up area locations

6.2.2.1 LNG

The landside requirements for the LNG back up yard have been assessed in §5.6.1.1. No

storage or process facilities are to be provided in this phase. The area will have to be

developed to house offices, supporting buildings for the facility and evacuation related

infrastructure. Accordingly, in the current phase of FSRU based LNG terminal, an area of

5-10 ha will be required.

In the future phase when the LNG terminal is converted from FSRU based facility to a

conventional type of LNG terminal with onshore facilities, the back up area will house the

process side facilities, storage tanks and the evacuation facilities i.e. truck loading bays,

pipelines infrastructure etc. The area requirement in this phase is in the range of 40 ha.

Considering the location of the LNG jetty, the most suitable location for developing the back

up area taking into account the area availability and pipeline routing is the location to the

west of the coal stockyards and the Penna Cements facility (refer Figure 6-7). Also, given

the location of this area, it will be possible to ensure the safety aspects with respect to

surrounding land use and activities are also taken care of. Considering the distance of this

area from the other facilities at the port, it will be possible to locate the tank farms such that

the safety related criteria of the blast radius, heat radiation effects and other necessary

parameters are adequately fulfilled.

40 ha area, as per the functional requirements for development of an onshore conventional

type of LNG terminal, is available at this location. It is to be noted that the ground level will

have to be raised to +8.5 m CD. Considering that a portion of the back up yard will be

developed on the area formed by the beach build up, wave runoff will be suitably managed.

The pipeline from the jetty will run along the breakwater and reach the back up yard, with

almost no interfaces. The approx. length of this pipeline will be ~3 km.

Also, it will be possible to plan and align the back up area such that the arrangement of

various facilities within the yard alongwith routing of pipeline for evacuation can be planned

as required. Appropriate area will also be allocated for green belt development. In the

future, tanks will be provided for storage of cargo. The LNG cargo is proposed to be

evacuated through pipeline as well as trucks, as explained in §5.6.1.1. Truck loading zone

with loading bays and waiting/parking will be provided. The pipeline routing will be planned

so as to transport the cargo upto the end users’ facilities. The alignment of pipeline for

users outside the GPL boundary/to offload to the grid from the storage area will be along

the port road (refer Figure 6-7).

It is also envisaged that in the future, the users based in Tata Steel Special Economic Zone

Ltd. (TSSEZ) will be potential LNG customers. At this stage, it is proposed that a direct

pipeline will be provided from the back up yard to the customers. The alignment is as shown

in Figure 6-7 (reference drawing no. BMT-1395-GPL-PFR-DWG-005).


Final Report


The location is recommended based on the findings of the pre- feasibility study. The exact

location will have to be finalised after the QRA study in the Front-End Engineering Design

(FEED) stage. Further detailing regarding the suitability of arrangement of facilities within

the back up yard will be confirmed after the Hazard Identification (HAZID) and Hazard and

Operability (HAZOP) studies have been carried out, at a later stage.

The area wise break up of the various zones in the LNG terminal to be developed on the

landside is as follows:

Table 6-2: Land use area break up for LNG terminal

Sr. No. Land use Area in ha

1 Storage and allied facilities 16

2 Truck loading facilities, pump house 7.0

3 Green belt 5

4 Other facilities 12.5

Total 40.5


Final Report


Figure 6-7: LNG back up yard facility


Final Report


6.2.2.2 LPG and other liquids

As discussed previously, at the stage of commencement of operations, small volumes of

other liquids are envisaged which can be handled through ship gears at the general cargo

berth. Further on, the liquid jetty along the intermediate breakwater will be developed to

handle increased volumes.

Accordingly, considering the location of the liquid handling jetty (on the eastern side of the

facility), the land parcel available such that it is accessible from the jetty, is the area situated

in the northeastern portion of the terminal. Taking into account the land availability to the

north of the railway corridor, this area is also considered suitable as the back up area for

liquid handling. Accordingly, areas at two locations (i) area to the north of the railway

corridor (ii) area between the railway corridor and the warehouse will be utilised for

developing the landside facilities for liquids (refer Figure 6-8).

Figure 6-8: Area availability for development of LPG/other liquid terminal


Final Report


The back up areas will house the storage tanks and the evacuation facilities i.e. the truck

loading zone, pipeline connecting to the end users/ grid as well pipeline running upto the

railway for evacuation through tank cars. As per the assessment of area requirement

discussed in §5.6.1.2, an area of 15-20 ha will be required for the back up facility for LPG

and other liquids. The back up yard to the north of the railway corridor i.e. area 1 has an

area of 11 ha and the back up area 2 (to the north of the warehouse) has an area of 9.5

ha. As per the requirements, the back up yards are being proposed so as to develop

separate facilities for LPG and the other liquids, considering the different cargo

characteristics and safety aspects. The land parcel on the northern side of the back up area

2 is available for expansion of the liquid terminal in the future. Appropriate area will also be

allocated for green belt development in both the terminal areas.

In the initial phase, when the liquid tankers are being handled at the existing general cargo

berth, a pipeline will be developed from that berth upto the back up area for cargo

conveyance. Thereafter, upon development of the dedicated liquid berth, the pipeline will

be augmented so that it connects from the jetty at the intermediate breakwater upto the

storage tanks in both, back up areas 1 and 2 (refer Figure 6-9). The length of the pipeline

from the jetty to the back up area 1 will be approx. 1.5 km and upto back up area 2 will be

in the range of 0.7 km. Pipeline connectivity to end users’ properties will be provided as per

the requirements from these storage yards. Suitable design and provision will be made for

underground pipe corridor at the junctions where the pipeline crosses the railway line and/

or railway loading areas.

The area wise break up of the various zones in the liquid terminal to be developed on the

landside is as follows:

Table 6-3: Land use area break up for LPG and other liquids’ terminal

Sr. No. Land use Area in ha

1 Storage and allied facilities 8

2 Truck loading facilities, pump house 2.5

3 Green belt 2

4 Other facilities 7.5

Total 20


Final Report


Figure 6-9: LPG and other liquids back up yard facility


Final Report


7 Proposed Infrastructure

The proposed project is the expansion phase of GPL aimed at diversifying the cargo spread

by creating facilities to handle liquids including LNG, LPG, POL, edible oil, chemicals etc.

The details of proposed facilities are described in Chapter 5.

7.1 Project site and surroundings

Gopalpur Port is located near the village Arjeepalli in the Ganjam District of Odisha midway

between the Gopalpur town and Rushikulya estuary (Figure 2-1). The land area of 393

acres (160 ha) is in possession of GPL and and have been assured of an additional 353.7

Ha for port expansion by the Govt. of Odisha as per the terms of GPL’s Concession

Agreement with the Govt of Odisha. This includes an additional area of 119 acres (48 ha),

which is in the process of being transferred to GPL from the GoO. This land area in

possession of GPL is a narrow coastal strip along the Bay of Bengal with a maximum width

of 800 m. Further 615 acres (250 ha) is earmarked for GPL and will be transferred as per

the conditions of the CA. Additional accreted area of 140 acres (56.5 ha) will also be

available with GPL. Accordingly, GPL will have under possession a total area of about

1,267 acres i.e. 512.75 ha. The Orissa Sands Complex (OSCOM), a unit of IREL, which is

under the administrative control of Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), Government of

India (GoI), adjoins the south-western boundary of GPL. TSSEZ is located about 2 km to

the north-west of the Port.

The OSCOM is involved in beach sand mining and mineral separation activity producing

ilmenite and other associated minerals. The sand after extraction of the heavy minerals is

used for re-filling the mined voids. Hence, the area at Gopalpur Port, where once sand was

mined, is uneven and undulating with sparse vegetation except for salt tolerant shrubs and

creepers. Trees like casurina, cashew nut, palm, coconut etc. grow towards the landward

periphery and inland.

The port is located in a non-urbanized area adjoining villages, agricultural tracks, grazing

sites and non-productive lands. Hence, the economy of the region is mainly agro-based

with majority of people engaged in agriculture which is supported by irrigation canals.

Rotation of crops is a common practice in the District. The important crops grown in the

area are rice, ragi, jower, bajra, maize, arhar, mung, biri, groundnut, jute, cotton, sugarcane

etc. Fishing is also an important occupation after agriculture in the region with freshwater

fishing mainly concentrated in the in the Rushikulya River and nearby dams while marine

catches are generally from nearshore coastal zone using small fishing vessels.

As per Census data, there are 60 villages within 10 km of the GPL with a total population

of about 74,000 and literacy rate of 46%. Most villages have access to primary schools and

primary medical facilities. Dug wells and hand pumps are major sources of potable water

though some villages are provided water through tankers.

The port is connected to the NH 5 via a 7 km road and to Howrah Chennai railway line

through a siding of OSCOM. Nearest airport is at Bhubaneshwar which is 150 km from

GPL.


Final Report


7.2 Utilities

Major utilities include power, water (potable water, service water, firewater) and diesel oil

for the proposed port expansion.

7.2.1 Power requirement

The present average power consumption of the Port is about 11 KV/1000 KVA which is

mainly met from 132 KV main at Chhatrapur grid substation of the Southern Electricity

Supply Company of Odisha (SOUTHCO) Ltd. The port has its own substation with two

33/11 KV transformers.

The power for proposed expansion is estimated at 33 KV and will also be met through the

SOUTHCO grid. It is also proposed to install diesel generator of adequate capacity to meet

emergency power requirements after the expansion.

7.2.2 Water requirement

The water requirement is envisaged to increase incrementally as the proposed expansion

is underway, with the ultimate requirement at the end of the expansion estimated at 1.4

million lit/day (MLD). Initially this requirement will be met through local supplies as is done

at present. Also, there are some industries in the vicinity that are examining the alternative

of a desalination plant, and GPL is under discussion with these industries for sourcing water

from their plant to serve the augmented water requirement of the port in the future.

7.3 Wastes and management

The major wastes at ports during day to day operations include those generated at the

land-based facilities and those produced by ships at berths. These wastes can be liquid,

solid and hazardous.

7.3.1 Liquid wastes

7.3.1.1 Domestic wastewater

Domestic wastewater is the major contributor to liquid wastes at ports. At present, domestic

wastewater at the port is treated in septic tank – soak pit arrangement. Due to low traffic of

ships at the port this arrangement of sewage disposal is quite adequate. With the proposed

expansion the traffic of ships would increase, however, the workers which constitute the

major component, are unlikely to increase substantially since liquids will be unloaded

through pipelines and transferred to storage tanks. However, as more land is made

available to GPL by the GoO and port operations increase, provision will be made for a

sewage treatment plant (STP) and treated wastewater will be used for gardening and other

secondary uses such as dust suppression, floor washing etc.

The amount of sewage generated on a ship depends on the number of persons on board

and the type of system used. This volume is estimated to be in 0.04-0.45 m3/day per person

out of which 0.01-0.06 m3 is probably black water and the balance grey or galley water. As

per Annex-IV of MARPOL 73/78 which came into force from September 2008, it is

mandatory for ships to treat and disinfect sewage, store it in the holding tanks and release


Final Report


it at a distance of more than 3 nm from the nearest land, while, sewage if untreated can be

released only beyond 12 nautical miles. In view of this it will be ensured that the ocean

going ships visiting the port have sewage storing tanks on board and that sewage is not

released in the port waters.

7.3.1.2 Floor washing and other miscellaneous wastes

Small volume of wastewater will be generated from floor washings and other miscellaneous

uses. This wastewater after allowing settling will be mixed with water used for dust

suppression etc.

7.3.2 Solid wastes

The solid waste generated at ports includes food waste from canteen, paper, plastic

discards, cardboard boxes, empty drums, construction debris etc. This waste is segregated

into biodegradable and non-biodegradable wastes and stored in separate containers. The

stored waste is handed over to vendors approved by the Odisha State Pollution control

Board (OSPCB) for disposal/recycling as per pre-decided schedule following the Solid

Waste Management Rules, 2016.

The same system of solid waste collection, segregation and disposal will be adopted for

shore-based solid waste generation for the Port expansion.

Solid waste generated by ships includes food waste, domestic waste, plastics, incinerator

ash, paper, card board etc. The food waste which generally varies between 0.001 and

0.002 m3/person/day for cargo ships is permitted to be disposed at sea (but not in port

waters) after being comminuted, shredded or passed through grinder or collected in bins

and delivered to Port Reception Facility (PRF) as per Annexure-V of MARPOL 73/78.

Annexure-V of MARPOL 73/78 prohibits disposal of other solid wastes such as plastics,

incineration ash, paper etc to sea and is to be stored on board and delivered to PRF.

7.3.3 Oily wastes

Shore-based facilities at the port generate small volume (940 lit/yr) of oily waste such as

spent oil, oily sludge, tank bottoms, oily rags etc. This waste is stored in covered containers

and given to OSPCB approved recyclers as per the Hazardous and Other Wastes

(Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016. The same system will continue

in future as well.

Ships on the contrary generate large volume of oily wastes such as the following:

• Bilge, a mixture of liquids such as water oil, sludge and chemicals collected in the bilge

of a ship. The bilge volume varies depending on the type and size of the ship but is

roughly 0.3 m3/day.

• Oily residual waste resulting from fuel consumption generated at a rate of 0.0-0.03 m3/t

of fuel (marine gas oil; heavy fuel oil).

• Oil tank washings popularly termed as slops, are generated when oil cargo tanks are

cleaned with water and hence contain oil, water and dispersants. They are generally

stored in settling tanks. Annexure-I of MARPOL 73/78 allows release of water


Final Report


separated from oil to sea provided oil content of water is less than 15 ppm and some

other conditions are met. However, this effluent cannot be released in the port area.

Thus, the oily waste generated on board the ships cannot be released to the sea and hence

is to be stored on board and evacuated to PRF. GPL does not have PRF at present. Hence,

ships will have to discharge wastes such as oil, plastics, incineration ash, paper etc to next

port of call where such facilities are available. However, there is arrangement at the port to

receive such wastes in an emergency situation.

7.3.4 Wastes generated at FSRU

FSRU will be at berth on long-term basis and will generate wastes like any normal ship.

The sewage generated on board will be treated in on-board sewage treatment facility and

the effluent meeting the OSPCB will be released to the sea. Food waste and other solid

waste will be segregated and there will be arrangement to evacuate this waste on daily

basis or as required. Similarly, the oily waste also will be unloaded in closed containers and

given to authorized vendors.

In addition, FSRU will be using seawater for onboard gasification of LNG. The return

seawater with temperature lower than that of ambient seawater will be released back to the

sea. This effluent will meet the General Standards for Discharge of Environmental

Pollutants Part – A: Effluents (Marine Coastal Areas) as per the Environment Protection

Act, 1986.

Accordingly, considering that the system on the FSRU is of open loop type, the volume of

seawater required to vaporize LNG will be approx. 15,000 m3/hr and equivalent volume will

be released to the sea at a temperature that is about 7°C below that of the ambient

seawater (cold water effluent). Seawater intake and effluent release are integral to the

design and construction of FSRU and is directly withdrawn/released from the ship’s hull.

7.4 Storm water drainage

Storm water drainage will be planned along roads with suitable catch drains. Surface runoff

will be discharged into the proposed roadside drains (on both sides of the road) and

subsequently channelled to retention ponds for each sub-catchment prior discharging into

the existing natural drain connecting the sea. Closed concrete rectangular drain system will

be considered for the roadside drain for ease of maintenance and more effective use of

land as it serves as a pedestrian footpath.

7.5 Oil Spill Contingency Plan

The port has an Oil Spill Contingency Plan as required under the National Oil Spill Disaster

Contingency Plan and is in the process of augmenting oil spill combating equipment to

meet Tier-I response. The present inventory includes fence boom, oil skimmer, Oil Spill

Dispersants (OSD), absorbent sheets, absorbent booms, portable OSD applicator, shovels,

scrapers, buckets, rakes, rope, line, whistles, first aid material, chemical suit, chemical

resistant nitrile gloves, gumboots, helmet with eye cover etc.

The port has tugs, mooring launches and storage barge to assist in oil spill combating

should an oil spill occur.


Final Report


The present Oil Spill Contingency Plan will be suitably amended to include the port

expansion to handle liquids and additional equipment will be procured as recommended in

the revised Plan.

7.6 Disaster Management Plan

Based on the seismic map of India illustrated in Figure 7-1 the Ganjam District falls in the

Low Risk Zone and hence the probability of occurrence of earthquake is very low.

Figure 7-1: Seismic map of India

However, the region is highly prone to cyclones. The wind and cyclone map of India (Figure

7-2) categorizes the coastal belt of Odisha under Very High Damage Risk Zone.

Cyclonic storms from Bay of Bengal hitting the Odisha coast is common and some of them

have crossed the coast between Gopalpur and Puri causing widespread devastation. A

very severe cyclone – Phailin crossed the Gopalpur coast on October 12, 2013 resulting in

catastrophic destruction including the infrastructure of the Gopalpur Port. The south

breakwater was considerably damaged and the large armour stones were displaced into

the channel and the manoeuvring area. The support infrastructure like electricity, water

supply, roads, shore line and banks suffered unprecedented devastation.


Final Report


Figure 7-2: Cyclone and wind zones in India

Coastal strip of the Ganjam District was also influenced by the Tsunami of December 2004

through the Gopalpur Port is not vulnerable to flooding. To respond to such natural

calamities and man-made accidents, GPL has a well-structured Disaster Management

Plan. The Plan is divided in 3 main parts and relevant sub-sections as follows:

• Part-I: General- it includes introduction; vulnerability assessment and risk analysis;

preventive measures, mainstreaming DM concerns into development plans/

programmes/projects; preparedness measures; response; partnership with other stake

holders; financial arrangements.

• Part-II: Disaster specific action plan deals with cyclone; tsunami; oil spill disaster;

berths, breakwater collapse etc; collision between vessels resulting in fire/ explosion/

sinking of vessel; explosion on board vessel at berth.

• Part-III: Cross-cutting issues cover review and updation of plans; coordination and

implementation.

In view of the change in the cargo mix, particularly due to the proposal to handle LNG, LPG,

POL and hazardous chemicals, these Plans will be modified as required.

7.6.1 Green belt

An area of about 7 ha out of 60.5 ha (for development of liquid terminal back up areas)

available with GPL will be developed as green belt. The plan for green belt development

will be made and included in the EIA. Trees will be planted lining the connecting road and

around vehicle parking areas, terminal building and in other available sites. Selection of the

plant species will be based on their adaptability to the existing geographical conditions and

the vegetation composition of the region. As far as possible native plant species will be


Final Report


selected, which have good ornamental value and are fast growing with excellent canopy

cover.


Final Report


8 Rehabilitation and Resettlement

The land in possession of GPL under the CA with the GoO is a narrow coastal strip free

from human settlements. The land is unproductive waste land unfit for agriculture. Hence,

there are no rehabilitation and resettlement issues.


Final Report


9 Project Schedule and Cost Estimates

The proposed project envisages expansion of the port to handle liquid cargo. It is proposed

to commence the construction within 6-8 months after obtaining all approvals,

environmental and statutory clearances, whichever is later. The expansion project

consisting of development of the LNG based FSRU terminal and the facility for LPG and

other liquids is estimated to cost about INR 1,300 Crore. Details of project schedule will be

included in the EIA.


Final Report


10 Financial and Social Benefits

The coastal strip of the Ganjam District is economically underdeveloped with agriculture

and fishing as the major occupation in coastal villages. The proposed port expansion is

expected to promote employment opportunities during the construction and operational

phases of the expansion. During construction the labour will be sourced from nearby

villages and during operation there will be requirement of engaging contractual services for

a variety of unskilled jobs such as solid waste segregation and lifting, sanitation, gardening

and other ancillary services.

Many industries from TSSEZ located about 2 km from the port and other industries in the

region will use the port facilities for their import and export cargo. This will also generate

considerable additional indirect employment and improvement in infrastructure such as

roads, shops and medical facilities.


Final Report


Annexure A: Drawings

Documents

Gopalpur Ports Limited Pre- feasibility Study for ...€¦ · Gopalpur Ports Ltd. Development of Liquid Jetties at Gopalpur Port Pre- feasibility Study Final Report BMT Consultants