THE GAZETTE OF1NDIA: EXTRAORDINARY

[PART III—-SEC. 41

SCHEDULE

Case No.TAMP/74/2001-CHPT

TrwChennal Port Trust (CHPT)

Applicant

ORDER

(Passed on this 5th day of November 2001)

This case relates to a proposal received from the Chennal Port Trust (CHFT) for

fixation of rates for recovery of wharfage charges on LCL status ICD containers.

In its proposal, the CHPT has made the following points:-

(l).

The present wharfage charges on the LCL containers booked from and to various

ICDs are recovered as per Clause 13. (0. (b)., Chapter II-B, Book I of the Scale of

Rates. According to this clause, wharfage for cargo containerised in LCL containers

ie being recovered as that of normal LCL cargo (!•••. a» per the wharfage schedule

applicable for general break-bulk cargo) even though the container* are directly taken

to the ICDs without any destufflng Inside the port premises. In this regard, it has also

received a representation from the SCI.

(li).

In this backdrop, it has proposed the following amendments to its Scale of Rates:

(a).

The wharfage rate for cargo containerised in LCL containers (Import/export)

is proposed to be recovered at par with the wharfage rate prevailing for cargo

containerised In FCL containers in case no destuffing/stuffing is done by the

Port.

(b).

Cases in which cargo containerised In LCL containers is destuffed/stuffed for

delivery/shipment it has proposed to levy a wharfage rate applicable to

general break-bulk cargo as per the wharfage schedule.

(lit).

Accordingly, it has proposed to substitute the existing Clause at 13.fi).(b). under

Scale A-General, Chapter U-B, Book I with the following:

Item Number

13.(0.(b).(0-

13.fi).(b).(li).

Classification

Wharfage

cargo

containerised in ONE LCL

CONTAINER

(Import or

Export) In cases when no

destuffing/stuffing is done

by the port

Wharfage

cargo

containerised in ONE LCL

CONTAINER

cases

when the cargo destuffed

and

stuffed

for

delivery/shipment

container/ as break bulk.

Rate per container

Upto20

fwtln

Length

500

Abov«20

fM4«nd

upto40

feet In

length

750

Afiov*

40 foot

length

1000

Wharfage as per classification

under Scale 'A' in Chapter II-A,

Book-I of the Scale of Rates.

A copy of the proposal was forwarded to concerned port users/ representative bodies

of port users for their comments. The comments received from them are summarised below:

fhf Tamil Chamber of Commerce (TCP

(0.

It Is not appropriate for the CHPT to seek changes in or revision of container rotated

tariff items'at this stage since a Licence Agreement between the Chennai Port Trust

and the Chennai Container Terminal Limited (CCT) has already been signed to

privatise the Container Terminal operations.

(II).

The CCT proposal for revision of tariffs for the Container Terminal operations at the

CHPT has been received by the Authority; and, the same has been circulated to

various representative bodies of port users.

The TAMP is, therefore, strongly

requested not to consider the revision proposed by the CHPT.

The Shipping corporation of India tscn

The proposal of the CHPT is in line with the SCI representation. It has, therefore, no

objection.

Tfrie Chennai steamer Agents Association tCSAA)

It is unable to send any comments since it has not received any response from its member

firms.

A copy each of the comments received from the above representative bodies of port

users has been forwarded to the CHPT, as feed back information.

A joint hearing in this case was held on 5 October 2001 at the CHPT.

At the joint

hearing, the following submissions wore made:

The Chennai Port Trust (CHFT1

It is a simple proposal for LCL (1CD) containers. We do nothing. The LCL containers go

straight through to the CFS or ICD yard. There is, therefore, no difference between the FCL

and the LCL (ICD) containers. They may be charged accordingly.

The Tamil Chamber of Commerce (TCC1

We endorse the views of the CHPT.

The Madras Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MCCI)

We agree wtth the CHPT proposal.

The Hindustan Chamber of Commerce (HCh

We accept the rates proposed by the CHPT.

Subsequent to the joint hearing in this case, the Chennai Container Terminals Limited

(CCT) has stated that It will be a party affected by any decision taken by the Authority in this case. It

has made the following points in this regard:

(I).

The CCT has signed a Concession Agreement (CA) wtth ttie CHPT for development,

operation and management of the Container Terminal at the Chennai port As per

the terms of the CA, the CCT shall collect all cargo related charges including

wharfage on FCL, LCL and ICD container*.

(ii).

It has requested the Authority to withhold disposing of the CHPT proposal, as the

CCT is the affected party that has not been heard. It has requested the Authority to

call another joint hearing to hear its views before disposing of this case.

THE GAZETTE 0F1NDIA: EXTRAORDINARY

[PARTIII—SEC. 41

With reference to the totality of information collected during the processing of this

case, and bearing in mind the arguments advanced at the joint hearing, the following position

emerges:

(i).

The proposal of the CHPT is not for revision of any of the existing rates or for

Introduction of a new tariff Item. The proposal only seeks rationalisation of the

existing tariff arrangement in order to align the rate with reference to the service

provided instead of resorting to charging box rates based on LCL and FCL

classification of laden containers. The TCC has, perhaps, wrongly understood this •

proposal as one seeking an upward revision of rates; the TCC had objected to the

proposed change In the context of a private container terminal to be established by

the P & 0 India. Nevertheless, the TCC had changed its mind by the time of the joint

hearing to say that they endorsed the views of the CHPT.

(ii).

(a).

The CCT*s objections are misplaced. The CCT has filed * separate tariff

application; and, when that is decided it will have Its own tariff structure, it Is

to be recognised that the present proposal is for an amendment to the Scale

of Rates of the CHPT; and, the Scale of Rates is valid only when the CHPT

provides services, unless it is extended by this Authority specifically to other

terminal operators functioning within the CHPT. Nevertheless, the principle

set forth by this Authority as a part of this case will in any case be borne in

mind while deciding similar cases relating to other Port Trusts / Private

Terminals.

(b).

It is also relevant here to mention that even after the Container Terminal is

taken over by the CCT, the CHPT can handle general cargo vessels carrying

less than 40 containers at its inner harbour. Apart from this stipulation, the

Licence Agreement also provides for the CHPT operating competing facilities

if the Licence* achieves 80% or more of the guaranteed throughput for three

consecutive years. This case, therefore, need not held up, as requested by

the CCT.

(iii).

Differential rates for FCL and LCL are prescribed recognising the different levels of

services provided by the Port In case of LCL, generally the cargo is delivered or

received in break-bulk, which calls for additional efforts when compared to FCL,

which moves in/out as unit load.

With the advent of ICDs and off-dock CFSs, the position in respect of LCL containers

explained above has changed. LCL containers can also move as unit load from/to

the Port to/from ICDs or off-dook CFSs. In such oases, the service provided by the

Port is not different from that provided to FCL containers. That being so, It is

reasonable to treat LCL containers, which enter or move out of port premises in unit

load, as FCL for the purpose of levying the box rate. It is also to be recognised that in

case of such LCLs, since stuffing/destuffing does not take place inside the port

premises, it may not be easily possible for the Port to assess the cargo content to

levy wharfage on a break-bulk basis.

(iv).

The CHPT has recognised this position partly insofar as (CD containers are

concerned and proposed rationalisation of tariff accordingly. This proposal has also

been endorsed by all user-organisations who participated in this proceeding. This

Authority Is, therefore, Inclined to approve the proposal of the CHPT.

(v).

As has been mentioned above, the proposal of the CHPT does not clearly include

those LCL containers moving in unit load from/to CFSs outside port premises. As far

as the port is concerned there is no difference between this situation and the LCL

containers moving to ICDs. That being so, the proposal of the CHPT Is to be

extended to cover all LCL containers moving as unit load without stuffing/destuffing of

cargo within the port premises. This requires amendment to Item no 10(i).(b). In

Scale A-General; ChapteMI B of the CHPT Scale of Rates in addition to amendment

to Item no. 13(i)-(b). proposed by the CHPT.

8.1.

In the result, and for the reasons given above, and based on a collective application

of mind, this Authority amends the Scale of Rates of the CHPT as follows:

(I).

The existing provision at item number 10. (i). (b). in Seal* 'A' General, Chapter n B,

Book - 1 may be deleted and substituted by the following:

Item

Numbers

10(i).(b). (i).

10(i).(b).(li).

Classification

Wharfage on cargo containerised

in ONE LCL CONTAINER (Import

or Export) In cases when no

destuffing/stuffing is done inside

the port premises.

Wharfage on cargo containerised

in ONE LCL CONTAINER in

cases

when

the

cargo

destuffed /stuffed for delivery/

shipment

inside

the

port

premises.

Rate per container (In Rs.)

Upto 20

feet

length

500

Above

feet

and

upto 40 fMt

in length

•

750

Above

40 feet

length

1000

Wharfage

per classification

under Scale 'A' in Chapter II-A,

Book-I of the Scale of Rates.

(ii).

The existing provision at Item number 13. (1). (b). In Scale 'A' General, Chapter n B,

Book - 1 may be deleted and substituted by the following:

Item

Numbers

13(i).(b).(i).

13(i).(b).(ii).

Classification

Wharfage on cargo containerised

In ONE LCL CONTAINER (Import

or Export) In cases when no

destuffing/stuffing is dona Inside

the port premises.

Wharfage on cargo containerised

in ONE LCL CONTAINER in

cases

when

the

cargo

destuffed /stuffed for delivery/

shipment

inside

the

port

premises.

Rate per container (In Rs.)

Upto 20

feet

length

500

Above

feet

and

upto 40 feet

in length

750

Above

40 feet

length

1000

Wharfage

per classification

under Scale 'A' In Chapter II-A,

Book-I of the Scale of Rates.

8.2.

This Order will come into effect after expiry of 15 days from the date of its notification

in the Gazette of India.

S. SATHYAM, Chainnan

[No. Advt/IMV/143/2001/Exty.]

Printed by the Manager, Govt of India Pre»s, Ring Road, Mayapuri. New Delhi-110064

and Published by the Controller of Publications, Dolhi-110054.