Indian Railway making moving Lakshagrih – Part-II

It’s a matter of eye-opener for every one as to how even EN-specification has been diluted and compromised!

This is Part-II of the earlier news story – Indian Railway making moving Lakshagrih – God forbid, a horrible fire incident should turn into reality – whereby we pointed out as to how some vested interested in collusion with private contractors are playing with the life of travelling passengers by way of permitting a highly toxic material in manufacturing the coaches.

In order to prove our point, we had posed 21 questions that still need answers.

Through these questions, we have set-up the contour of investigation.

One of the arguments through which RDSO all along misled everyone that they have specified European specification EN-45545, which is allegedly best in the world also falls flat. 

Though, such an argument is far from truth which we have already brought out in detail in first part of our story, It’s a matter of eye-opener for every one as to how even EN-specification has been diluted and compromised. Let people know the followings-

In continuation of earlier 21 questions, few more questions are here –

22. Is it not true that as per Para 4.6.1 of EN 45545-2, on trains built and approved as per this standard any new components introduced during refurbishments shall be verified to the requirement of Clause 4 i.e. acceptance testing for every lot?

23. Is it not true that the above mentioned condition was diluted in as much as that while framing specification (MMDTS–19020) allegedly as per EN- specification, mandatory toxicity test as per ISO 5659-2 has been deleted from the list of acceptance test? If so, why?  and, to benefit whom?

24. Is it not true that while framing specification (MMDTS–19020) allegedly as per EN-specification, Smoke Generation test as per ISO 5659-2 has been deleted from the acceptance test? If so, why? And, to benefit whom?

25. is it not true that instead of including these most important tests in acceptance tests i.e. for each lot, which are the mandatory requirement of EN-specification, those were made part of the type test, and thus diluting EN-standard?

26. Is it not true that as per MMDTS – 19020, Type tests are required only once in life time till a time sufficient laboratories in India or with firm’s premises are developed? Let us not forget that there is no testing facility in India as per EN standard and even type tests are to be carried out abroad. No authority or procedure to witness the testing or the sampling is specified and it is left totally at the discretion of the vendors. In such situation, no further elaboration is needed and countrymen should draw their own inference about the sanctity of these tests.

27. Does it look proper to proliferate an item on large scale without having any testing facility to test them?

28. Does it not true that in the absence of testing, any specification and its conditions remains on paper as those cannot be tested and verified?

29. Is it not true that in the absence of testing, Railway is paying for Cashew- nuts (for EN compliant material) and  getting peanuts (marketable PU Foam used in household). If anyone has guts to verity this, let them test the PU Foam used in recently turned out Garibrath rakes by RCF. If it is done, it would separate the Milk to one side and water to the other i.e. the truth will be separated and set aside from the lies.

30. Is it not true that high level safety committee had made a specific recommendation that all fire related tests including the toxicity tests should be made as acceptance tests i.e. each lot should be subjected to these crucial tests?

31. Is it not true that despite such a recommdations, while framing specification (MMDTS – 19020) allegedly as per EN-specification, these tests were deleted and removed from the ambit of acceptance tests?

Whereas setting up of a fire tests lab in RDSO is an interesting story of its own kind unheard and unmatchable not only in Indian Railway but probably in the entire government setup/departments of the country.

In 2011, it was decided by RDSO and Railway Board to set up a fire testing lab in RDSO. After 11 long years, tender for purchase of equipments is now due for opening on 02.02.2022. Even this could not have happened as file was gathering dust for 11 years, had Chairman, Railway Board in his VC on 08.01.2022 on the same issue (of fire protection measures of coaches) not enquired about it.

On his enquiry, file was taken out from dustbin, and tender opening date was hurriedly announced.

This unimaginable delay is deliberate with an intention to help suppliers to supply substandard product as no testing is possible. It is another shocking fact that while issuing tender, equipments to test toxicity index has been deliberately removed.

32. Is it not a matter of investigation as to why only one part of EN-455545 has been adopted leaving two crucial parts i.e. Part 4 – Fire safety requirements of rolling stock design and Part 6 – Fire control and management systems?

Represented by Surresh Tripathi

#PUFoam #ENSpecification #CRB #EN455545 #IndianRailway #CEORlys #RailwayBoard #AshwiniVaishnaw #PMOIndia #NitiAyog #CVCIndia