‘Oversight’ prompts questions about FPT’s status

FTW was landed with a right
puzzler last week.
An anonymous e-mail
arrived in our system,
hinting at a big story
involving the Cape Townbased
Fresh Produce
Terminal (FPT), but with
no background information
on this intriguing affair –
which seemed to involve
some sort of alleged
illegal activity(ies),
possible contraventions
of a government act, and
potential major fines.
The e-mail read: “It
is understood that two
major shipping lines have
suspended their calls to FPT
in Cape Town.
“The questions you might
consider asking are:
* Is FPT an SA Revenue
Service (Sars) designated
place of entry for ships in
terms of (section) s.6 of the
Customs & Excise Act?
* If not, what potential
fines will every ship that
has called there since 2004?
incur?
* Is FPT a “transit shed,
container terminal, container
depot or state warehouse”
for purposes of s.11?
* If not, what potential
fine will there be for
shipowners in respect of
every container ever landed
there (and how many
containers have been landed
there)?
* Does it have a container
depot licence issued by Sars
ito (in terms of) s.64A and
s.60(1) of the Customs Act?
* If so, what is its depot
code, and why does code
04 (Cape Town Container
Terminal) appear on
all Customs documents
irrespective of goods landed
at FPT?
* If it is not licensed, what
is the potential fine for FPT
per container ever landed/
stored there?”
Bearing this in hand, FTW
contacted Capespan, the
owners of the FPT chain.
It is a “sensitive issue”,
said Dr Dawie Ferreira,
CEO of Capespan Logistics
Division, and one he couldn’t
discuss in any detail.
But, he added, “the
summarised version”
was that, when Sars went
from the old manifest
acquittal system (MAS) to
the new automated cargo
management (ACM) system,
it had to re-register all
the old entities in the new
system – some going back
50 years. “In this,” he added,
“FPT was not on the dropdown
list as a container
terminal – and was redflagged.”
The problem, he stressed,
was not due to “bad intent”,
but rather an “oversight
along the way”.
What had happened
was that the perishable
market had moved from
the traditional bulk reefer
(refrigerated) ships almost
exclusively to reefer
container transport. “For
example,” he told FTW, “all
deciduous fruit ex Cape
Town is now in containers.”
To meet this market need,
FPT – with the approval of
Transnet – became a multipurpose
terminal. “We
handle bulk agri-products,
like timber,” said Ferreira.
“We also have a reefer yard
where we cool fruit and stuff
reefer containers. Most of
this goes round the bay to
the CTCT.”
With fruit terminals in the
ports of Cape Town, Port
Elizabeth and Durban, FPT
has offered fruit exporters “a
customised service for many,
many years”, Ferreira added.
FPT is currently working
with Sars to identify the
areas of the business that
require registration on the
ACM system or additional
requirements, according to
Ferreira.
“We do not foresee
any penalties to ships
landing containers at FPT
premises,” he added. “Any
potential penalties levied
by Sars associated with our
operations would be of an
administrative nature and
borne by FPT. We are in
discussion with Sars to have
the status quo remain until
all administrative issues
have been clarified and
updated.”
Ferreira also insisted that
it was too soon for him to
provide a detailed response
to all the questions posed in
the anonymous e-mail.
“We will, however,
endeavour to provide you
with a detailed response
following finalisation of
our discussions with Sars,”
he said.