CPA disputes NBR study on 11-day cargo clearance time

Chittagong Port Authority rejects 11-day cargo clearance assessment

Bdbusinessdaily.com – The Chittagong Port Authority has challenged an assessment that placed the average clearance period for imported goods at roughly 11 days, saying the figure does not reflect the limited part of the process handled inside the port.

The dispute centres on the National Board of Revenue’s Time Release Study, which reviewed the full chain of activities required before imported consignments can leave the port. The study also highlighted the financial burden that can arise when containers remain beyond the four-day free storage period.

In a rejoinder issued after a 12 October 2026 article on the study’s findings, the CPA described the presentation of the issue as misleading and one-sided. It said the coverage had harmed the authority’s standing and caused uncertainty among port users and the public.

Different measures of the same process

The port authority’s main objection is that its own operating data and the NBR study measure different parts of the import-release process. The CPA uses information from its Terminal Operating System, which tracks how long vehicles remain within port premises after entering through the gate.

Its figures show an average of about five hours from vehicle entry to exit for cargo delivery from the port area. For on-chassis delivery, the stated average is 1.5 hours. That period includes around one hour for customs scanning and gate verification.

The NBR’s Time Release Study, however, considers the broader journey from import arrival through the point at which a consignment becomes ready for delivery. That wider process can involve customs formalities, documents, inspections, testing, approvals and other requirements before a vehicle is even able to collect the cargo.

As a result, a short period spent by a truck inside the port cannot on its own determine the total time an importer waits for release of a shipment. The two sets of figures examine separate stages, meaning they do not necessarily conflict with one another.

CPA points to outside agencies

The CPA said port operations account for 14% of the overall clearance time identified in the process, while customs work represents 8%. It maintained that the bulk of delays arise from procedures handled by other government bodies.

Among the agencies named by the authority are the Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution, quarantine authorities, the explosives department and chemical testing facilities. Their inspections or approvals may be required depending on the nature of a consignment.

The authority said that 70% to 80% of imported consignments leave within the four-day free storage allowance. It said the remaining 20% to 30% generally stay longer because of processes involving agencies outside the CPA’s direct control.

For importers, the distinction matters because storage costs can begin accumulating even when cargo-handling activity at the port itself has been completed. A container may be physically available for collection but still unable to leave until required formalities are finished.

Cost pressure after free storage expires

The Time Release Study calculated that a twenty-foot equivalent unit, or TEU, could incur $6.90 a day during the first seven chargeable days after the free-storage window. Over an 11-day clearance period, that would equal $48.30, estimated at about Tk5,965.

The CPA argued that it should not be held accountable for storage charges caused by delays linked to external agencies. It said it remains focused on efficient cargo handling and supports stronger coordination among all bodies involved in the clearance system.

The additional cost is not described as a charge imposed solely by the port authority. Rather, it reflects the expenses that may affect importers when goods stay uncleared for longer than the available free period. The 11-day figure likewise represents the broader clearance timeline examined in the NBR study, not simply time spent in CPA-controlled operations.

Why the debate matters for importers

For businesses bringing goods into Bangladesh, cargo clearance is not a single step. It is a sequence involving port handling, customs processes, document checks, gate procedures and, where applicable, technical or regulatory approvals. A delay at any point can keep a consignment in storage and increase the final cost of importing it.

The disagreement therefore highlights the importance of identifying where time is lost across the full chain rather than assigning responsibility through one measure alone. Port turnaround data can show how quickly cargo moves once collection begins, while a time-release study can reveal how long it takes before that collection can happen.

The CPA’s response does not dispute that importers can face costs over an extended clearance period. Instead, it contests any implication that the authority is the sole cause of those delays. Its position is that a complete assessment must account for the involvement of customs and other regulatory agencies.

Improved coordination across those agencies could be particularly significant for consignments requiring inspections, testing or specialised approvals. Faster information sharing and smoother sequencing of formalities would help reduce the period during which containers remain at the port, while also making the process clearer for importers.

The issue ultimately concerns both operational efficiency and accountability. The CPA’s vehicle-to-gate figures offer one view of port performance, while the NBR study provides a wider picture of the time and costs attached to the import-clearance system. Understanding both is essential when assessing why a shipment takes days to leave the port.