spot_img
29 C
Philippines
Sunday, May 26, 2024

Firm says govt can’t end MRT pact

- Advertisement -

Busan Universal Rail Inc. said on Thursday the government cannot unilaterally terminate its maintenance contract for the Metro Rail Transit Line 3 because of temporary stoppages to the train system that serves the heart of Metro Manila.

In response to a letter from the Transportation Department, BURI rejected the agency’s claims it failed to “satisfactorily perform work obligations” for the MRT 3 line that traverses Edsa.

BURI said its contract with the government “implicitly recognizes that temporary stoppages of Light Rail Vehicles due to either system error/malfunction, deterioration of track and LRV equipment, etc., are unavoidable, and hence, the contract provided for procedures that BURI is required to undertake to address such matters.”

Moreover, BURI said it has already brought to the Department of Transportation’s attention as early as January last year “the current deteriorated track condition of the MRT 3 system and its consequences, among which include service interruptions and stoppages,” but its recommended measures to address these problem “are still to be acted upon” by the government.

“The MRT 3 record of train removals without unloading numbered to 1,492 even during the first year of the system’s operation. Also, notably, in year 2007 under the first maintenance provider, the MRT 3 record of 532 train removals with passenger unloading is close to last year’s [the 2016 total of] 544 train removals, although the trains have aged an additional 10 years,” the company added.

An independent assessment report on the tracks made on April 2011 showed they were in bad condition, BURI noted, “as the previous maintenance provider did not perform any rail grinding of the whole stretch of the mainline during its 12 years as MRT 3 maintenance provider.”

The company said it restored two to three train cars every month since its contract started in January 2016, to meet the requirements set by DOTr.

Since November 2016, BURI “has essentially satisfied its contractual obligations, and in a number of areas exceeded the minimum level required in its contract. These include providing 66 operational cars, or an average of 20 trains on revenue runs with two extra trains in.”

The firm belied allegations of poor maintenance under its watch, as it performed more maintenance activities than what is required in its maintenance contract “if only to ensure safe train operations.”

Accounting for some issues on the design flaws of the MRT trains, BURI said it introduced works “way above contractual requirements” to keep the trains more reliable than what they were more than a decade ago.

BURI said the design issue on the trains and the current status of the MRT 3 track system “are conditions that cannot be improved overnight by simply following the listed required activities in the contract.”

From the standpoint of contract compliance, BURI said confidently that it achieved more than what its predecessors had performed. It reminded the government that the trains, “with its questioned performance capability, are being made to run along a track system that needs to be rehabilitated.”

“But with the additional works done by us on the rails, we can fully assure all stakeholders of the MRT of safe train operations,” BURI added.

The company said it carried out rail grinding of practically the entire 68-kilometer mainline of the MRT, with manual grinding on the small “switch” portions of the tracks where the machine cannot be used, all as part of its contract. It has also replaced 400 linear meters out of 7,200 linear meters of rail that need changing.

BURI noted that three minor derailments occurred in year 2000, another three in 2001, and one instance in 2012, belying government claims that the April 18 incident at the North Avenue Station was the “first time” a derailment happened.

Considering the difference in interpretation “of the factual circumstances being used by DOTr as grounds for the termination of its contract,” the company said the dispute must be resolved following the contract-provided procedure through “mutual consultation” through “appropriate meetings.”

LATEST NEWS

Popular Articles