Minutes of the 24th SEEPZ-SEZ Authority Meeting held on 16.02.2015

—

|

~ ii ! . : ae MINUTES Or THE 24th MEETING OF THE SREPZ SEZ AUTHORITY HELD | ; ON 16th FEBRUARY, 2015 AT 11.30 AM UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF | | . DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, SREPZ SEZ AND CHAIRPERSON, SEBPZ | SEZ AUTHORITY. - _ | the following were present: , bo | | l) Shri P.S. Ramana Member | : | | : Joint Development Commissioner | | . — | 2) Shri. |Abhay Doshi, (MD)-. Member Representating Trade | | M/s. Fineline Circuit Ltd. . | . ae ; | | 3) Shri. Prem kumar L. Kothari, (CMD)Member Representating Trade | “M/s. ‘Fine Jewellary Manufacturing Ltd. ; . a In Attendance: ot “ | | 1) Smt. MJ, Kulkarni | - ; | 7 i | Astt, | Development Commissioner a 4 : | Minutes of the meeting held on 16th february, 2015 were confirmed. SO | : G[juidelines|][for][ MIDC:] | | : ; | At the outset, the trade members. stated that there has been delay in execution ofmaintenance works. Apart from this, the quality of work also an: Issue. In-spite of carrying out water proofing, still issue of leakage /seepage! . during monsoon continues. They felt that works like AMC and maintenance’ works of routine nature can perhaps be attended to by the Authority in the. “following manner:. | a : -{1)A Committee, comprising Officers from the Authority and Deputy | | | Engineer, MIDC, SEEPZ sub clivision can be constititted to consider and | 7. recommend, the maintenance works to be undertaken. Wherever services | | of an, Architect or specific consultant is also required, the same can be: | . |. | : outsourced at the samme rate as MIDC incurs. The specific ‘worl to be: | I executed and the drawings can be examined anc recommended by the | ): Committee. After approval of the Chairperson or the Authority, as the : |: case may be, the MIDC can be asked to execute the work. This will a facilitate the process of finalization of the work required to be done and | | | the related drawings before MIDC is asked to execute the work. his . ! Comittee can also monitor the progress of the work. — , | | In order to have effective tnonitoring of the implementation’ of‘the various; | | | cons truction ancl maintenance work, the Authority directed the following :- |

.

| | 1) Work order should be give to contract alter obtaining concern of Estate | . | - | Manager so that work order is in accordance with requirement of SEEPZpo | i SEZ Authority. _ - : _ | | 2) Progress of work should be intimated on monthly basis. | mo! | | | 3) tntimption of completion of project should be send to Estate Manager. Pe | 7 . iil 4) Payment should be released only on after obtaining Satisfactory. | Te | Certificate from the Estate Manager. , . | 7s ot i . | i S) It was! furtheradvised that the whenever possible, earlier works M&R | . | work | /development worl assign to MIDC should be reviewed in’ | | i accordance with above guidelines . : | | ' 6) Payment of earlier/ project/worl: should be. release only after ensuring. ; | that the work was completed satisfactorily. 7 - | | _ Agends No, i: Re airin to ‘External, internal walls with paintin and. | Do: i The Committee noted that the proposal is for repairs of external and | . || Itemal wails with painting and other allied works of SDF — VI. It was aléo | . 7 “noted that]. the MIDC has submitted an estimated expenditure of Rs. _ 7 3,91,900/: for the same. : | : . | . Decision: The proposal was approved, . | | , ail Agenda No, 2: Remolding and refurbishing of Conference Hall at SEEPZ Services Centre Building. ; 7 | | | | | 7 | F It was noted that the proposal is for remolding and refurbishing of | Conference EHall in the SEEPZ Service Centre Building. It was pointed out that, | he condition of the Conference ‘Hall requires urgent repairs. The Commiitee | oo noted that the MIDC has submitted an expenditure of Rs. 98,38,600/- for the: : : ‘sin aud refurbishing of Conference Hall. : | - | vey Decision: | After detailed discussion the proposal was approved, _

| 7

|

| / Agenda No! 3: Construction of security cabin and canopy for Gate NO. I at ! | The Committee was informed that the Gate No. If requires widening and | /{econstruction. in order to take care of the movement of the vehicles anc for | Installation of Access Control System. The MIDC was'asked to submit detailed ! | (stimmate for the work. The Scope of the work covers providing new gate with . | ontry and. exit, providing new securily cabin and canopy, electrical and allied . | works i.e, ‘entire electrical internal and external electrification work, providing | 2 baggage .scanners, providing flap barriers of 18 numbers, providing 4 | ; jumbers of door frame metal detector with access control system etc. The | | MIDC has estimated an expenditure of Rs. 8,83,88,650/- for the above work. Co . Dectaton: | \After detailed discussion the proposal was approved. se sconce No. 4: M&R to SEEPZ.._ Repairs to SDF-} building in: SEEPZ-SEZ | The Committee was informed that the SDI _ lis the oldest building in SEBPZ | Sez and the condition of the building is not good. Many of the units have | been complaining about the leakages, falling of the ceiling and internal plaster | ne The MIDC was asked to inspect the building and submit an estimate for . repairs, The MIDC has © submitted an estimated — expenditure of | Rs.1,40,36;100/- for repair of the building. The Scope of the work covers the _ following:| _ _ | : | | | 1. Strengthening of external and internal walls at cracked portion by using ee | polymer mortar treatment. ot | | a | 12.| Strengthening of structural members by using micro polymer concrete by ; | | applying rust resisting chernicals to reinforcements, | i . | | | 3. Proving luster Painting to internal common portion and external Acrylic : i painting to external side of SDF-I building. oo 7 _ ! 4. Provision of concrete work for drainage gutters and plinth protection: : | tilling work and drainage pipe work as per requirement. , 2 | The trade members pointed out that for such major works, defect liability | | period of longer duration is given by major contractors and MIDC should be dslved to explore this possibility without any additional cost, | OO

• }

==> picture [2 x 1] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----<br> ,<br>----- End of picture text -----<br>

|

| _ Decision: | After detailed discussion the Authority approved the proposal. | | . | The MIDC shall endeavor to have long defeot liability period. — a Agenda No. 5: Annual Maintenance Contract for operation Maintenance §__ | hha allied 5ervices for STP in SERPZ-SEZ | : The Axithority was informed that ‘the MIDC has submitted the Annual Maintenange Contract for operation , maintenance and allied: services of . Sewerage Treatment Plant in SEEPZ SIEZ for the period from 3-3-2015. to 2-3+ | re for a pam of Rs. 54,79,120 /-. It was noted that the AMC arrangement. = for the STPlis essential. |

po Decision: The proposal was approved.

:

i, Agenda No! 6: Construction of 15t and 2n¢ floor of Créche Wellness, Clinic Wen anc Wholesale Price Shop near SDPF-IT Building in SEEPZ-SEZ premises, The Committee noted that-the proposal is for construction of 1st and 274 floor | of | | . the building’ . under construction for.Creche, Wellness Clinic and Wholesale | Price Shop mear-SDF — J] Building. The MIDC has submitted an estimate of | Rs. 3,84,60,500:00 for the Proposed construction. The scope of the work is as | lollows:if . - : Sr. Patticulars / Estimated CostRs. LL, Civil works . 99,87,935.00 oo a 2. opening works | . 7,90,478.00 . 7 | 3. |Dobrs 4,69,625.00 qo | EA, Glazing works 51,94,745.00 WS. False Ceiling works 9,50,440.00 . V6: ‘Catpentry and misc. works ~~~ 708,438.75 | Le | litt works , |[29,38,800.00] | | 8. Electricity works i 30,93 362.00 — TS,Ii Landscaping 644860.00 |[10.][|][Modular][ kitchen][ works’] ; 40,00,000.00 |[(|] : | | }11. | Fireworks 14,79,030.00

OO Total Estimated Cost Re. 2,98,57,713.00. 7 7 : Po Lh ADD 5.00% Contingencies on Estimated Cost 14,92,886.00 ; | ADD 9.00% Escalation Estimated Cost Rs, 14,92,886.00 | | Architectural Consultancy @ 4.50% | 13,43,598.00 hyo | | oy | TotalRs. 3,41,87,083.75 | at SAY Rs. 3,41,87,100.00 (N) _ il | ADD 12.5% ETP Charges 42,73 ,387.50 : - | | : Total Rs. 3,84,60,487.50 ae ee re se eee " ; So | | Say|: RS. | 3,84,60,500.00 (@) . Po. Decision: | After detailed discussion the proposal was approved. : | ' Agenda No: 7: Extension of it is contract of BVG for further eriod of one | year w.e.f, 04.02.2015 . | ; The proposal was extension of M/s. BVG’s contract period for a further period of-one year. 7 o ‘Decision: The Authority observed that the proposal may be deferred for fie considerion. after receipt of feedback from the Caretaker regarding | - | Aatisfactory services in respect ofthe Service Provider and also to‘bring in :| dine with, ‘Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. The Authority approved the | Fontinuation of the existing arrangement upto 30-04-2015. , !| Agendarr No.i 8: Extension for renew of the MOU till further orders, | | . ne . : i It was nioted that the proposal is for renewal of the MOU between M/s. Vastunchard through M/s. Stree Multi Sanghatan and SEEPZ-SEz Authority | for a further period of two years w.e.f. 06.01.20 15 for collection of dry/wet | waste from Larious SDFs. The M/S. Vasundhara will collect dry and wet waste from the units. Vasundhara will send the dry and wet waste to Biogas plant fot bo generation of Biogas and dispose the dry and wet waste collected in the kachara andi, It was also ‘noted that M/s. Vasundera Ghankachra — | Vvavesthaphin Sahakari Sanstha has given a total estimated cost of Rs. 402,600 /- | per month including 10% Administrative ch rges for the above .

. ,

ute

_ .

|| ; work. U was also noted that the Vasundhara has charges on manpower and. Vehi cle on tua basis and charging 10% asa Administrative Cost. : | Decision: The Authority approved the continuation of MOU till further mo - orders. The Authority also approved the arrangement of charging - ) | manpower | and’ Vehicle on Actual basis and charging 10% as a Administrative[Cost.] . | . ; lo Agenda No! 9: Revised license fees rate for allotment of tesidential Qtrs.. tol outsource of staff and Service Provider, G It| was noted that the proposal is for revising the lease. rent as was charged prior to downward revision in 26th November, 2014 is as follows:, | . Sr. No. “Type of Otrs License fees — Total Amount : ota nV ees Rs. 245/- (15 times‘Rs. 3675 + Water Chargest | te | of license fees) _ Electricity Charges | | | r | | oflicense fees) Electricity Charges 7 | | The revised calculation as follows:- ~ ) _ 7 _ Sr. . 7 No. Tyre of Qtrs | License fees Total Amount (PM) : | . yA Rs. 245/- (16 times! Rent Rs.4,000/- + Water| | | | | | . of license fees) Charge + Electricity Charges” | | po | ane | | Total =Rs 4,000/- pa ms, rs 5: Rs. 310/- (2 times Rent Rs. 10,000/- + Watey }, - | | 7 | | of license fees) Charges+ Electricity Charges aan | | | : | | | — Total = Rs. 10,000/- PM Decision: _ The Authority approved the proposal with a direction to charge , | | ! | water charges and electricity charges as per actual use in addition to the | . | lease rent mentioned above. - |

| : Agenda No. | 1G: Promotional Activity at SEEPZ cafeteria area 4 Canteen. , ._ie. ICH ; in The Authority was informed . that the various Service . Providers | approached the Authority for permitting promotional Campaign inside the Zone | . : for few days, The Authority has been permitting such requests if the activity : . — has relevance for the workers/employees of the Zone units and allowing a ) | , canopy to be installed near the ICH/Kaydees for a lirnitect number of days i evouring that there is no disturbance or inconvenience to the units,

. | a movement of vehicles Or persons. The proposal is to charge & sum of Rs. . | 2,000/- per day for such permissions. The trade members: suggested that the | charges may be fixed Minimum at Rs. 4,000/- per day for such activity and u p fo Rs. 101000/- per day depending on the nature of the activity Proposed. || . Decision: The Authority decided that such requests may be permitted | | and a minimum of Rs. 4,006/- per day may be charged for ‘the same. | However, appropriate charges may he levied for such commercial 3 | Activities upto Rs. 10000/.. ; : | | a 2 Agenda No./11: Repairs to SDF-IN building : oe | , - dt was noted that the proposal is to carry out Strengthéning of walls, , _ chajjas, cohimns and beam and painting to all over external wall portion and. , 9 thternal common passages portion of SDF —qy building. The MIDC wasasked ee to inspect and submit detailed estimate for the work, The MIDC has submitted : | an estimate for Rs. 2,05, 10,665/- for the above work. The scope of work covers! | | 1. Strengthening of external and internal walls at cracked portion by using. ! | : polymer mortar treatment, | | | | | 2. Strengthening of structural members by using micro polymer concrete by | | applying rust resisting chemicals-to reinforcements. | : | : iS. Proving luster painting to internal common portion and external Acrylic 3 . : | painting to exterhal side of SDP-Ii building. : - iB | : 4, Provision of concrete work for drainage gutters and plinth protection, - | | tiling prorie and drainage pipe work as per requirement, a, . | . Decision: The proposal was approved. a , || Agpr e mises.nda No.To12: Resurfacing of existingasphalt| road: in. SEEPZ-SEZ a . - | ; | It was noted that the proposal is for resurfacing of the existing asphalt — - | | road, the total length of road in SEEPZ premises is 7.182 KM. It is observed : | that, 2.495 iM internal asphalt road surface and potholes are formed, also the | , 3 side shoulders of some road need strengthening ile. from Gate No. Il to the , Authority wae informed that the condition of the said portion of the iniernal road is very bad and the same requires resurfacing at the earliest. MIDC has | | . | | submitted estimate of Rs. 2,03,14,000 / ~ for “M&R to Resurfacing of existing | Desision: ithe Authority approved the proposal. | . :| asphalt road in SEEPZ-SEZ premises. lpr : | |

| | Agenda Item No.13: Modified Exit Policy | , . The Authority noted that the existing Policy Guidelines in respect of premises | in Spr VU.| Tower I & II, Multi-storied building and Self-built factories on plots | was approved: by the Authority in its meeting held On 03.06.2013. Based on | the difficulties expressed by the Association /units, the draft of the modified a , Guideline was hosted on the website on 6-2-20 14, inviting comments of the . | Units, However, no comments were received. , 7| ‘Decision: ‘The Authority approved the following modified exit guidelines : | onfor SDFplots. Vu,! Tower. I & I, Multi-storied building and Self-built factories , . || ‘The revised guidelines are ag under: , oe . . i | . | Li | 8 Any units in above mentioned premises may apply for exit’ along . , | -_ , with the required documents. . oo . | , oy Weaitlistea of applicants will be olfered premises as per moditied 7 . . :| |a, priteria, Names suggested by existing units wil] be considered if : - there 18 no applicant on the waitlisted, oo | | . 7 o The Authority will regularly call application to maintain wait list. . | | ) However, the waitlist will expire after 90 days. Again, Authority wilt 7 | _— call the fresh list of desirous units, | . _— | ° Agreement,‘The unitholder must have a valid LOA and valid Sub-Lease | | oe . seat | 6 Phe unitholder should have no pending litigation swith the SEEPZ, a a | 7 Authority or Office of the Development Conumissioner, SEEPZ SQ@z, | , _ -| | | e Phe unit intending to assign sub-lease for the remaining period, - | . | Be, will make an application to the SEEPZ sprz Authority and shall | | | submit document indicating the price at the time ofallotment. | ; | | ® In ‘case any unit requires only part of existing space for its | | . : r approved activity, in such cases, exit can be made in respect of the 7 . |. | remaining part of the area subject to feasibility. : . - | | ” e On scrutiny of application, Authority may give “in principle” : | | ! : | Dproval for exit. However, if charges are created by. other | | | ! terseauthorities, “jn principle” approval shall be given after: 7 | = POnsulting such agencies : : liability of the applicant. | / authorities and ascertaining total” | , oY | , e bn. receipt of “In-principle approval” from the Development | | | | Commissioner, the applicant shall proceed to obtain no. dues: : certificate from the Custorns and thereafter applyper . |

| : | : 6 | In case de-bonding is not possible because of the pending liability , a | 7 _ | of the Authority or Development Commissioner Office or creation of . | . . charge by any other agencies, in such case, the liability of the | : oo | applicant shall be ascertained. And in Principle’ shall be given in | | consultation with the other agencics/ authorities approval. . : . LL Procedure for arriving at compensation _ . . | 8 ‘Compensation shall be paid directly by the incoming entrepreneur . | . | | to the applicant’ subject to clischarge of the dués as envisaged } above. : a | || | ° | 10% of differential amount, Le. price offered by the incoming.a 3 | . . : Entreprerieur less the originally allotted price, shall-also be paid to , ! . | The Authority as administrative charges by incoming entrepreneur || Ml. Procedure| apartfor’ fromall ot herment dues mentioned above. oo | = . eet 7 e ‘The public shall be asked to submit application- on the following a | : ‘> Export projection | | 7 | > Davestment envisaged | : | | | > Employment envisaged : . ; a | OLE,7 > PriorityPremiiin sector offered over and above the reserve price 7 a | a > Any other criteria declared by the Authority at that point of time. a ; | | , The nbw entrepreneur would be selected on criteria mehtioned above. : However: preference shall be given to criteria which meet objective of SEZ Act. “a 8s Rules. The entrepreneur so selected shall submit an application to the,UAC | | . 7 for issue of LOA. On issuance of LOA, he will make payment to the outgoing 7 | Unit and thd SEEPZ Authority : | - | The mins also approved additional Guidelines for allotment of : | Government Building Space/SDF on five year lease. | > The existing units who are Possession of more than 35,000 sq. ft. | | ne|| oo | leaseSpace inpremises Governmentand preference SDF’s can beshall encouragedbe given toto optapplicants of long termwho , | | | > Pasthave Possessioncredential ofof lessthe thanunit 35,000Ziving projectionsq. ft. of spaceshouldin Governmentbe checked ! : before accepting the projection. |

| | Agenda-14: ExtensionYear w.e.f. 12.01.2015. of GAS Security Centract for further period. of one | a , : It was notecl that the Proposal isfor continuation of the existing contract | , of G48 for a further period of one year W.e.s, 1 Oth January, 2015. | , , a Decision: | The Authority directed that the Performance of G4S' may be | "assessed and the. matter may be submitted for consideration in the next | “Meeting, | The Authority approved the continuation of the existing | | Other‘arrang t stlos: e ment upto; 31-3-2015, . | | - :: | Pot the Trade Members said that the issue of lease rent beingas Charged. ) | by SEEPZ ‘Authority as well as by the MIDC in respect of MIDC constructed | —_ tbuildings, viz. SDF VII, Tower 1 8 Il and Multi-storied Building, has beex | pending for long ‘time, ‘Similarly, in the case of transfer of premises, the | | SEEPZ Authority as well as MiDC charge the Administrative Charges /Ttansfer | Charges where as: only the SEEPZ Authority should charge the same. They | | | observed that this issue needs’ to be addressed on priority by the Authority as . | | this is alleging all the allottees in the MIDC Constructed buildings in SEEPZ, ; | : The Chairperson observed that this issue has already been taken up with the | | MIDC. There were few meetings between the Legal Advisors of MIDC and | | SEEPZ Authority Thereafter, there was a meeting between DC, SEEPZ and the ! CEO, MIDC on .The concerns ©xpressed by the Trade Members have already , . been taken up with the MIDC and: their response in the Matter is still awaited. : | Decision: ‘After detailed deliberations, the Authority resolved that since . | | the properties in the SERPZ SEZ are belonging to the Authority and the | role of Mb has been only that of a Construction Agency, there is no | legal tequirement for payment. of lease rent or transfer charges to the — : MIDC by the units, Accordingly, the unit shall be required henceforth | to pay lease rent and/or transfer charges to SEBPZ Authority only. - i : | i The Meeting ended with vote of Thanks to the Chair. . : : : - | | | : _ Chaifperson a | . SEEPZ SEZ Authority a ,