Needed- A Regulator for the Polymer Industryfor Stability & Availability
It is a paradoxical situation that is currently prevailing in the polymer market. Whereas the current availability of polymer is supposed to exceed the demand in the country yet there are ‘shortages’ of some grades, which often result in market prices being higher than list prices of polymer majors.In the current liberalized economic scenario the polymer majors are ruling the roost. Neither the availability of polymers nor-stability in their prices is assured or their equitable distribution of certain grades of polymers which often are available in lesser quantities than the demand. Moreover, polymer majors continue to act as an informal cartel when they are keeping polymer prices fluctuating without their prices being linked to their cost of production or international prices. Apparently it is a deliberate policy of the polymer majors to keep volatility of prices and also of availability.
The uncertainty on the price front and artificial ‘shortage’ of few grades hurt the small and tiny units most who with their limited financial capability are unable to hold stocks. The polymer majors also enjoy variety of incentives for export of polymers which is often done at variable cost. Such exports also help them to create artificial ‘shortage’ from time to time with complete dis regard to the adverse impact on the small and tiny sector.
The cure for all the ills of uncertain, availability and price volatility calls for Govt. of India appointing a Regulator for the polymer industry so that wanton ways of the polymer majors could be reined in.This Association has in the past also pleaded for Govt. appointing a Regulator who could be assigned the following tasks in order to discipline the major polymer manufacturers.
(i) Regulator could keep an eagle’s eye on the demand & availability scenario so that exports are allowed only after the domestic demand was fully met.
(ii) Clear prices of polymer for different grades based on a norm i.e. with reference to respective cost of production or linked to international prices.
(iii) Keep an eye on the production planning of different polymer majors so as to ensure that no artificial ‘shortage’ gets created.
(iv) To ensure that polymer prices were kept stable by the polymer majors for at least 30 days, so that the downstream industry could plan their business activity in a proper manner allowing it to grow steadily.
(v) No anti-dumping duty is imposed on any specific polymer just because of the pressure/influence of a particular major producer’s.
To conclude, appointment of a Regulator for the polymer industry would ensure stability in prices, fair prices, no artificial ‘shortages’ and a more disciplined working of the major polymer producers which would help the downstream industry to thrive, in turn, helping the polymer majors to fully utilize their available capacity.
AIPIA revives Suggestion for Appointment of a Regulator for the Polymer Industry
Vide Letter No AIPIA/5/09 dated 29th October 2009 addressed to the Secretary Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals, AIPIA has again repeated its suggestion for Govt. Appointing a Regulator for the Polymer Industry.
(Contents of the letter are reproducing below)
Sub: Suggestion for Appointment of a Regulator for the Polymer Industry.
As of now there are three major producers of polymers namely Gail (India) Ltd. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. and Reliance Industries Ltd. besides few small players. In our observation these major producers are working in cohesion as an informal cartel when they keep polymer prices more or less at equal levels and change the same with small intervals. They are also fully exploiting the ‘freedom’ available to them in this era of economic liberalization. This results in their fixing ‘opportunistic’ prices which are also changed by them at short intervals of even 7 days.
Price volatility hits SSI and Medium Scale Processors.
It is to be appreciated that units in SSI / Medium scale sector cannot plan their business activity in a price volatile scenario. They are unable to get acceptance from their buyers of finish products at frequently revised prices which results in their bleeding continuously.
Due to financial constraints they are also not in a position to keep material in stock.
Processing industry prefer stability in polymer prices for at least 30 days.
This is understandable. However, despite repeated pleadings to the major polymer producers to keep prices stable for 30 days or announce a pre-known date of price change (which could be 1st of every month). The response of the major producers is insensitive. Stability in prices is a must for the health of SSI / Medium scale units.
We indicate here under a chart showing price movement of select grade of polymer for the period 19-1-2008 to 29-10-2009.
Price Movement of a Popular Grade of Polymer B52A003A OF GAIL INDIA LTD. FOR THE PERIOD 19/1/2008 - 22/10/2009
Price per Tone Differential Periodicity of Change Date: Ex-Gail India Plant
19/1/2008 79610 540 16
4/2/2008 80150 -200 26
1/3/2008 79950 1110 33
3/4/2008 81060 1720 29
2/5/2008 82780 2280 14
16/5/2008 85060 4550 14
30/5/2008 89610 110 2
1/6/2008 89720 3430 5
5/6/2008 93150 4640 27
2/7/2008 97790 -2210 30
1/8/2008 95580 -2290 7
8/8/2008 93290 -3430 6
14/8/2008 89860 -1140 18
1/9/2008 88720 -3440 17
18/9/2008 85280 -3430 13
1/10/2008 81850 -3430 9
10/10/2008 78420 -6870 6
16/10/2008 71550 -5720 7
23/10/2008 65830 -9150 9
1/11/2008 56680 -9730 12
13/11/2008 46950 2290 14
27/11/2008 49240 2290 4
1/12/2008 51530 1140 3
4/12/2008 52670 -1890 14
18/12/2008 50780 2200 7
25/12/2008 52980 2880 7
1/1/2009 55860 5510 14
15/1/2009 61370 3300 17
1/2/2009 64670 -1210 24
25/2/2009 63460 -2010 35
1/4/2009 61450 5000 8
9/4/2009 66450 1990 22
1/5/2009 68440 -5000 27
28/5/2009 63440 2000 21
18/6/2009 65440 2010 13
1/7/2009 67450 1140 31
1/8/2009 68590 1060 31
1/9/2009 69650 -3000 16
17/9/2009 66650 -4000 14
1/10/2009 62650 -3010 7
8/10/2009 59640 2000 14
22/10/2009 61640 3000 7
29/10/2009 64640
Observation:-
The following can be observed from the detail recorded above-
1. Prices have been changed frequently. Minimum period of changed is even less than 7 days e.g. Prices were changed on 1/12/2008 and again on 4/12/2008.
2. Prices have been dropped by Rs. 50840/- per ton between the periods 2-7-2008 to 13-11-2008 i.e. a drop of 52 % in a short span of 4 month when the price was changed 12 times.
3. Between 1/10/2008 to 1/11/2008 i.e. in a months time the price was change 5 times.
4. Between 1/9/2009 to 29/10/2009 prices were reduced by 10000/- PMT on 17/09/2009, 1/10/2009 & 8/10/2009 and then increased by 5000/-PMT on 22/10/2009 & 29/10/2009.
It is obvious that the changes in prices are not linked to their cost of production as such a sharp drop normally, can not be given by a producer. This is a mystery which can only be explained by the major producers. Apparently there is no basis / justification for such sharp price changes.
Basis of polymer price fixation remain vague.
Despite repeated request by the processing industry to disclose basis of their price fixation major producers prefer to remain silent.
Normally it is expected that prices can be fixed on the basis of cost of production with a reasonable return on capital invested or the same could have a linkage to the international polymer prices reflected in platt. It may be mentioned that prices fixed by major producers today do not seem to be related either to their cost of production or to international prices. By fixing opportunistic prices major producers aim at maximizing their profits. Most of the major producers are earning hefty profit year after year which enables them to play with the prices.
Need of appointing a Regulator for the polymer industry.
It is the considered opinion of this Association that there is a dire need of Govt. appointing a Regulator for the polymer industry on the pattern of TRAI or IRDA as was done the case of Cement and Steel Industry. The Regulator could oversee following aspects continuously.
(i) Clear fixation of polymer prices on normative basis by the major producers.
(ii) Discourage price volatility by directing major producers to keep the same firm for 30 days.
(iii)Periodically monitor raw-material demand Vs availability scenario so as to ensure meeting domestic demand on priority over exports.
(iv)Keep a watch on the general production planning of different producers so that no artificial shortages are created by major producers for any particular grade.
In the past also this Association has pleaded for appointment of a Regulator considering that today polymer production exceeds four million tons and prices of polymers impacts domestic inflation. Needless to say variety of plastic products / packaging materials are popular in every nook and corner of the country as plastic have today improved the quality of modern living.
We shall be glad if you could kindly take a note of our suggestion for early implementation. Should you require any further information / elaboration this Association would be glad to respond suitably?
Regional Manger Reliance Industry Ltd. Interacts
with AIPIA Executive Committee:-
Shri Arun Rawal Regional Manager RIL and Shri Rajesh Jha RIL interacted with the Executive Committee of AIPIA during the monthly meeting held on 10 November 09. GIST of discussion held was conveyed vide Association letter no AIPIA/31/09 dated18 November-09,
Text of which is printed below.
Sub: Interaction with AIPIA Executive Committee in the monthly meeting held on 10-11-09.
Kindly find enclosed a note recording GIST of discussion held for your perusal and further necessary action. Kindly acknowledge receipt.
Interaction with Regional Manager RIL:-
Shri Arun Rawal Regional Manager and Rajesh Jha Sr. Executive RIL joined the meeting at around 4.30 PM.
Opening the discussion President AIPIA mentioned that:-
(i) RIL had again resorted to price revision at short intervals of even 7 days. Whereas the industry had been suggesting that the prices could be kept-stable at-least for 30 days. Alternatively RIL could announce a pre-known date of price change so that there was stability in the market.
(ii) RIL should make its price fixation policy transparent by disclosing whether the same is based on cost of production with a reasonable return or was linked to international price changes reflected by Platt.
(iii) Specific attention of RIL was drawn to RIL not honoring customer orders booked with advance payments which were canceled unilaterally at the time of hike in prices. This was much against the trade custom where commitments made were invariably honored irrespective of market price changes etc; Industry expects RIL to execute such orders with advance payment at the prices at which they were booked.
(iv) Specific mentioned was made about continuing difficulties in obtaining delivery of small quantity of polymers from RIL godown located at Northern end of the city.
Some of the members present gave specific example of their recent negative experiences.
Responding to AIPIA points RIL officials stated that.
(i) RIL could not but help adjust their price suitably, if the international prices showed a variation of Plus (+) Minus (-) $50 per ton.
(ii) RILs prices were fixed considering various variables like international prices, inventory levels, demand supply position, import arrivals etc. Regional Officials also gave their feedback to the headquarters, who were the ultimate Authority for RIL price fixation.
(iii) As regards difficulties in obtaining deliveries from RIL godowns it was stated that RIL always try to execute orders even by keeping their godowns open till late hours. However there could be exceptions.
At this point AIPIA suggested that Regional Manager RIL should convey the sentiments of the industry regarding stability in prices, making the basis of their price fixation transparent, execution of orders booked with advance payments at booked prices.RIL could follow the practice of erstwhile IPCL of locating their godwon in the central part of the city as also offering deliveries through the godown of their CA’s/Distributers.
In order to keep prices stable for 30 days, RIL could always keep a cushion in their prices so that they did not loose in the interim period when prices were kept firm but international prices showed downtrend.
It was also suggested by AIPIA that delivery against the orders could be taken within 24-48 hours. As regards issue of delivery orders RIL officials explained that copies of the same can be downloaded through internet. Members could also take advantage of the CGST schemes linked with the bankers.
RIL officials assured that they would convey Association’s specific suggestions to their headquarters for an appropriate decision.
Draft Notification of MoEF increasing minimum thickness and size of plastic bag etc. AIPIA forwards its objections and suggestions to Secretary MoEF, Govt. of India, In response to the Draft Notification issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest Govt. of India AIPIA has forwarded its objections and suggestions to Secretary MoEF GOI, under cover its letter no. AIPIA/5/09 dated 11 November-09(Contents of which are printed below)
Sub: Objections / Suggestions with regard to Draft Notification issued on 17-09-2009 by the MoEF (Being Draft Rules – “Plastics (Manufacture, Usage and Waste Management) Rules, 2009”).
Established in 1982, this Association is an all India body of SSI and Medium scale plastic processing industry and related interests. As on date Association has 562 life members with a total registration of 1663 members spread all over the country.
We refer to the above draft notification and wish to file our objections and suggestions with particular reference to the notification’s clauses no 5(d) (e), 7(b) (c), 3 (k), 9(iii) etc.
1. We note that the draft notification inter-alia stipulates minimum thickness of plastic carry bags to be 40 microns with a minimum size of 12”x 18” and also requires the manufacturers to print their name, address, thickness etc, on each plastic carry bag. No justification / basis / reason for the proposed changes has been given.
It may be recalled that after detailed deliberations the “Ranganatha Committee” on solid waste management and the national task force had stipulated minimum thickness of plastic carry bags at 20 microns with a minimum size of 8”x12” which were circulated under the notification of MoEF / CPCB during the period 1999-2002. The above minimum thickness and size stipulation were arrived at after detailed interaction and consultation with the plastic processing industry and State Pollution Control Boards etc. The restrictions being reasonable were accepted by the industry in the overall interest.
We see no reason for causing the proposed revision of minimum thickness of plastic carry bags at 40 microns with a minimum size of 12”x18”. We suggest that the earlier stipulation in this regard could be continued. It is to further point out that there is no scientific basis and rationale for stipulating higher thickness etc. and the same are, at best, ad hoc. Apparently Govt. of India has lost sight of the responsibilities cast on the Municipal Agencies for proper collection, segregation and disposal of solid waste including plastic waste and for civic agencies promoting two bin cultures.
In our opinion the Central as well as State Govts. must improve working of civic agencies by involving private sector for efficient collection and disposal of solid waste including plastic waste. Revising the minimum thickness and size of plastic carry bag is a soft option that should be shunned. Further when states have concurrent powers in Environment matters they are not bound by the central guidelines. As such in the interest of uniformity and good order any notification in the matter issued by Central Govt. should mandate the state Govts. to implement the central guidelines and not enact laws in contravention of the same.
2. Composting facilities in cities.
As on date use of biodegradable bags & containers is a self defeating proposition for scientific reasons and also for lack of infrastructure. As per our information very few cities in the country including mega cities of Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, and Chennai have established such composting facilities in adequate numbers. It is essential that such facilities are made available first and with strong scientific reason then only the processing industry be forced to manufacture biodegradable plastic carry bags / containers. In other words, the notification in this regard should be issued only after suitable composting facilities are put in place in cities all over the country, otherwise the desired objective of introducing Biodegradable / Compositable products will be defeated.
It needs to be repeated that compostable plastics would not biodegrade /compost on its own. Proper composting procedure and facilities are required to decompose this type of plastic. In the absence of proper mechanical / industrial composting system in place, biodegradable plastic’s will remain in the waste stream without undergoing degradation like the non-biodegradable plastics. Introduction of Biodegradable (Compostable) Plastics for mass application products may create more waste problem. Moreover use of Biodegradable (compostable) plastics would create more carbon dioxide and methane, both Green house Gases, apart from increasing the requirement of more overall energy for making new set of products. Recycling is a better option.
It is also clear that Waste of compostable plastics may create additional problem of mixing up with recyclable plastics waste, making both the varieties non-recyclable. In our country we have not been able to segregate the Dry and Wet waste till date despite introduction of Solid Waste Management (Handling) Rules way back in the year 2000. If the Biodegradable (Compostable) Plastics are introduced in such mass application product like “carry bags”, this will complicate matter further. These will require to be separated from the normal (non-biodegradable) plastics carry bags and other products, so that the two varieties do not get mixed together and jeopardize the entire recycling activity.
In the present setup segregation of biodegradable waste and non-degradable waste appears to be an impossibility. Further the notification stipulates carry bags/containers made of virgin plastics to be produced in natural shade .We suggest that the same could be permitted to be manufactured in white colour as well which will facilitate printing of required information wherever feasible. I.e. bags and containers in natural shade and white colour could be used only for carriage /packaging of edible items / food products. There is no reason why bags & containers used for products such as soap, shampoo. Oils etc, should be of natural shade .Edible oil should be packed in yellow containers to protect it from UV rays.
3. Impact of introduction of biodegradable bags on the recycling chain should be adequately studied.
The recycling industry in the country (mostly in unorganized sectors) is helping conserve resources / energy while generating employment revenues. Any mix-up of non biodegradable / biodegradable materials would jeopardize their fortunes. As such this subject needs to be studied in depth. by CPCB / MoEF.
4. Requirement of printing variety of information on plastic carry bags / container.
In our opinion it is not practically possible for small manufacturers of plastic carry bags etc. to print individual bags with the required information. Instead we suggest that the required information could be allowed to be printed on the outer covering of the packing, containing the bunch of plastics bag therein. If this is not agreed we are afraid implementing an impractical proposition will end-up in confusion and un-implementation.
5. Both Central Govt. / State Govt.s should encourage utilization of all kinds of plastic wastes for direct applications like:-
(i) In Road surfacing.
(ii)Burning in cement kilns and blast furnaces of steel plant for utilizing the high calorific value of plastics. MoEF could advise state Govt.s for their involving private sector agencies in collection of all kinds of plastic waste for supply to Cement / Steel plant. Feasibility of such application stands certified by Experts / CPCB
(iii) Incineration of any non-recyclable plastic waste should be encouraged too, to extract its calorific value for eg. -for generating power, as is being done wo rld over.
Exercising this option is an ideal proposition whereby all types of plastic waste including multilayered, pouches etc, can be utilized with much lesser effort (compared to efficient collection, segregation of different type of plastic waste) .This would also help in such waste not finding its way to landfills.
6. Clause 4:- Prescribed Authority
In this clause there is no provision for any Appeal against the decision of the enforcement bodies like State Pollution Control Boards, Municipal Authorities etc. We suggest that MoEF may incorporate a provision for constituting an Appellate Panel to hear the grievances of the trade against the decision of the enforcement bodies. We also suggest that the constitution of such Appellate panel should be such that 2/3 rd of the members are from non-government. Trade should be given due representation so as to ensure justice. The trade could be represented by the Presidents of the concerned trade Associations as well as eminent persons not connected with the government. These Appellate Panels should be based statewise so as to ensure reasonable access to the aggrieved members of the trade.
7. Multilayered plastic packaging/pouches (5f) etc The Clause 5(f) envisages a ban on manufacture etc of multilayered packaging /pouches etc
It is well known Multilayer plastics packaging, with or without a very thin micro-coating of metal, usually Aluminum, replaces 100% glass or tin containers. Glass and Tin containers are much more energy consuming and generate more emissions to air and water during their manufacture and these are much heavier than multilayered plastics packaging necessitating more fuels during their transportation to the market place. Through Life Cycle Analysis it has been conclusively established that Multilayered Plastics Packaging system is much more environment friendly compared to the alternatives like Glass, Tin or other metal packaging systems.
It is obvious that if manufacture of laminated plastics is to be stopped, then there will be chaos around. All the ‘table / furniture tops’ commonly known as Formica products have to be withdrawn from the market! All Credit Cards have to go out of circulation. All tooth paste tubes and various cosmetic / toilet products have to switch to either 100% aluminum or 100% glass or tin packaging, which would create a much larger burden on the environment and would upset the country’s energy balance. A very thin coating of metal, usually of aluminum, is used as a barrier material for the construction of some types of multilayer packages. Mechanical recycling by way of compression moulding is possible for the waste of such packaging. Energy recovery is also possible. Therefore the general impression that this waste is non-recyclable/non-useable is not correct.However we suggest that MoEF may initiate a dialogue with the concerned industry and form a well informed committee to debate the issue further.
Conclusion
To conclude, plastic waste is not for the landfill; it should be either recycled to make other products or alternatively should be directly used by various methods or incinerated for recovery of energy as above mentioned. Increasing the thickness/size serves no such purpose except putting an additional cost burden on the consumer. It serves no environmental purpose at all. Banning pouches, multilayered packaging also serves no environmental objective and also may create a bigger problem than they erroneously claim to solve. Proper management of solid waste by Municipal bodies as per the Solid Waste Management Rules 2000 is the need of the hour, where municipal agencies could actively involve private sector to improve their efficiency.
For Information of members
Automation of Central Excise and Service Tax (ACES),
CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT LAUNCHING CONVEINANCE @ ACES
Central Excise Department is launching the above Automation System is effect from 25/11/09. Salient features of the scheme are printed below.
"Welcome to the world of convenience @ ACES. Automation of Central Excise & Service Tax (ACES), the new centralized and web-based software application of CBEC is now available to you. It is designed to provide you an electronic interface with the department and aims at reducing paper work, visits to the departmental offices and improving transparency, accountability and efficiency in indirect tax administration in India.
Modules@ACES
It comprises the following modules:
» Access Control of Users (ACL)
» Registration (REG): Registration of Central Excise & Service Tax Assesses
» Returns (RET): Electronic filing of Central Excise & Service Tax Returns and their scrutiny
» Refund (REF): Electronic filing and processing of Refund Claims
» CLI: Electronic filing and processing of claims, intimations and permissions including Special Procedures
» Provisional Assessment (PRA): Electronic filing and processing of request for provisional assessment
» Assessee running Account: information on credits and debits under the Current Account and CENVAT Credit Account, liabilities (confirmed and unconfirmed demands) and status of Bonds.
» Dispute Resolution (DSR): Creation of case portfolios, Show Cause Notices, Personal Hearing Memos, Adjudication Orders, On-line filing of Appeals with Commissioner (Appeals), Appellate Orders, Review and related processes
» Automated Report Generation
» Audit Module: Selection of units based on risk parameters
» Export Module: Processing of export-related Documents
Benefits@ACES
» Online registration and amendment of registration of registration details
» Electronic filing of documents such as Returns, Claims, Intimations and Permissions.
» Online tracking of the status of application, claims, and permissions
» Online facility to view documents like Registration Certificate, Returns, SCN, Order-in-Original etc.
» Internal messaging system for faster communication
» Application accessible from anywhere through the Internet
» Online authentication of PAN with the Income Tax databases
Registration@ACES
(a) New Assessee
» If you are a new assessee, login to ACES at http://www.aces.gov.in and choose the Central Excise of Service Tax link as the case may be
» Submit the form “Registration with ACES”, by furnishing a self-chosen user ID and e-mail ID. System checks for availability of the chosen User ID and generates a password. It will be sent to your e-mail
» Again login and proceed with the statutory registration with Central Excise or Service Tax as the case may be, by filling-in Forms a 1, a 2 or ST 1. For security reasons, change password immediately
» ACES also provides assistance of ‘Know your location code’ for choosing correct jurisdictional office
(b) Existing Assessee
» If you are an existing assessee, you need not take fresh registration with the department. You have to only register with ACES
» ACES application automatically sends mails to your e-mail ID, as available in the existing registration date base, indicating a TPIN and password. The main will contain a hyperlink to the website. By clicking it, you can proceed to register with ACES.
» After introduction of ACES in your Commissionerate, if you do not receive the e-mail, you should contact the jurisdictional Range Officer to confirm/ modify your e-mail ID, after which the system will send you a new e-mail communicating the TPIN and password.
(c) Non-Assessee
This category of registration is given in ACES to any individual, firm or company, who are not, assesses but who require transacting with the Central Excise or Service. Tax Department, such as
» Merchant Exporter
» Co-noticee
» Refund Applicant other than registered taxpayers
» Persons who have failed to obtain CE/ST registration as required under the law and against whom the Department has initiated proceedings and
» Persons who are required to tender any payment under CE/ST laws, rules & regulations
» Where such persons desire to seek non-assessee registration they have to follow the same steps as in the case of a new assessee
» In case the user wants to take such a registration for claiming any rebate it is mandatory to provide a valid PAN.
» A Non-assessee registration can also be given by the designated officer of the commissionerate The Non-assessees are not required to file any tax returns
(d) Large Tax Payer Unit (LTU) Client
» If you want to opt for LTU scheme, submit the consent form to your jurisdictional LTU officer. It will be processed off-line and uploaded to ACES
» All pending items of work will be transferred to the concerned LUT automatically and intimation will be sent
» If you are approved as an LTU client, and want to register a new unit, submit the registration application in ACES. The systems will automatically attach the new unit with the concerned LTU on the basis of PAN details in the registration form
» If you are an existing LTU client, the process of registration is same as explained for existing assesses.
(e) Important
» Ensure that the Registration database in the existing SACER/SAPS systems is updated to include your valid and current e-mail ids.
» Upon introduction of ACES in your commissionerate, if you do not receive e-mail containing the TPIN, contact your jurisdictional Range Superintendent to correct the e-mail id and to resend TPIN and Password at your email id
» While choosing Username remembers that username that username once selected is permanent and can not be changed
» Change Passwords at regular intervals
e-filing@ACES
» All returns such as ER-1, ER-2 etc. in Central Excise and ST-3 in Service Tax can be prepared and filed online through ACES
» Offing return preparation utilities are also available at ACES website for download which can be used for preparing and uploading the returns at your convenience
» Always use the latest version of offline utility
Service Desk@ACES
In case of any difficulty in accessing or using the ACES Application, assesses can seek help of the ACES Service Desk by sending e-mail to aces.servicedesk@icegate.gov.in or calling up national toll-free number 1800 425 4215 on any working day from Monday to Friday between 9 AM and 6 PM.
Tech-Speces@ACES
To use ACES following minimum systems requirement are prescribed:
» Processor: Intel Pentium III and higher
» RAM: 256 MB and higher
» HDD: 80 GB and more
» Web Browser: IE 6.0 and above, Netscape 6.2 and above
» MS Excel 2003 and above for using offline utilities
» Sound Card, Speakers/Headphones, Colour Monitor for using Learning Management System (LMS)
» TCP/IP Ports 12520 and 12520 under firewall setting to be kept open if accessing ACES through proxy server
POINT DISCUSSED DURING THE THIRD MONTHLY MEETING OF AIPIA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (2009-2011) HELD ON TUESDAY 10TH NOVEMBER-2009.
1. Report on PGC Meeting held on 21-10-09.
Members were briefed about the proceedings of the meeting.
2. Report on the hearing by MRTPC scheduled to be held on 29/10/09 regarding GAIL India matter (RTPE No 6-2008).
Mahajan & Associates Lawyers Appointed by the Association had informed that the MRTPC had since been wounded-up and the Competition Commission would now indicate the next date of hearing by mid November-09.
3. Appraising members about status of admittance of SLPs in the Supreme Court of India.
It was informed that three SLPs and one writ petition were being examined and the decision to accept or reject the same was likely to be available by 16-November-09.
4. Review of raw-material availability position including pricing aspects :-
Members noted that major producers were adjusting prices at short intervals. The plant of Haldia Petrochemicals was under shutdown for maintenance which fact may impact availability position for a temporary period. |
