Bhoomipujan of Charkop-Bandra-Mankhurd Metro Rail Project.

V. K. J. RANE – IRSE (Retd.) Ex-M.D./IRCON
F-5, 2nd floor, 48/49 Grafikon Paradise, NIBM Road, Kondhwa Khurd, Pune - 411 048
Tel: (020) 2685 4132, Mobile: 093710 05396 Email: vkjrane1930@hotmail.com

Date 17th Aug 2009

Respected Smt. Pratibha Patil,
Hon’ble President of India
New Delhi - 1

Sub - Bhoomipujan of Charkop-Bandra-Mankhurd Metro Rail Project.

Let me congratulate you for Bhoomipujan of Charkop-Bandra-Mankhurd Metro Rail Project.”

Your kind attention is drawn to my letter dated 14th July 2008 which was forwarded by your office to the Ministry of Railways vide S.N. PI-D/4088 dated 29th Aug 08, who in turn forwarded the same to the Ministry of Urban Development vide their letter no – 99/Proj./DLI/37/3Pt dated 31.10.08, for remarks, with copy endorsed to me, stating that the Ministry of Railways are in favour of adoption of BG for all metro projects in the country.

I am still awaiting a reply from you on the above subject.

Today’s full page advertisement for the above Bhoomi Puja given by MMRDA in Indian Express dated Monday 17th Aug 09 is a sad reflection of how the country is spending huge amounts on infrastructure projects without consideration of techno-economic merits of the project and spending precious foreign exchange, in their implementation, when the country has the capability of implementing this project on BG at 40% less, cost with indigenous expertise for equivalent standards of performance.

I would request an early reply to my comments at annexure A.

The grand children of this country deserve a better and wider vision, while planning infrastructure Metro projects in the country.

With highest regards


V K J Rane – IRSE (Retd)
Ex-MD/IRCON

Copy to:
1. Shri Manmohan Singh/ Hon’ble The Prime Minister of India,
2. Mr. Pranad Mukharjee - Hon’ble Finance Minister
3. Mr. Jaipal Reddy / Hon’ble Urban Development Minister
4. Mr. Gurudas Kamat – Union Min. of State for Communication information and technology
5. Mr. S.C. Jamir/ Hon’ble The Governer of Maharashtra
6. Mr. Ashok Chavan / Hon’ble Chief Minister of Maharasthra
7. Mr. Chhagan Bhujban – Hon’ble Deputy Chief Minister.
8. Mr. Chandrakant Handore – Hon’ble Minister of Social Justice
9. Mr. Hasan Mushrif – Hon’ble Minister of State for Urban Development
10. Dr. (Smt) Subha Raul – Hon’ble Mayor of Mumbai
11. Shri Priya Dutt – Hon’ble Member of the Parliament
12. Mr. Kri pashankar – Hon’ble Member of the Legislative assembly
13. Mr. Janardan Chandurkar - Hon’ble Member of the Legislative assembly
14. Mr. Johny Joseph – Chief Secretary Govt. of Maharashtra
15. Mr. T.C. Benjamin Hon’ble Principle Secretary Urban Development Department Govt. of Maharashtra
16. Mr. Ratnakar Gaikwad – Metropolitan Commissioner & Additional Chief Secretary Govt. of Maharashtra – Bandra – Kurla Complex



Annexure A

CHARKOP – BANDRA – MANKHURD METRO RAIL PROJECT

Hearty Congratulations on the occasion of “Bhoomipujan of Charkop-Bandra-Mankhurd Metro Rail Project.” In Mumbai.

I would request you to find time to go through my critical observations, in national interest, on the various issues brought out in the MMRDA’s advertisement in the Indian Express dated 17th Aug 09, for the above occasion, in projecting a narrow and misguided vision to the public in connection with the planning of the above metro rail project.

AS ADVERTISED BY MMRDA
CRITICAL COMMENTS
1) MUMBAI VISION
Transforming Mumbai into a world classs metropolis with vibrant economy and globally comparable quality of life for all its citizens

1) WHY NARROW MUMBAI VISION? Advertisement does not indicate the gauge and the narrow width imported coaches of 3.2m wide with reduced capacity less than 25% on Standard Gauge (SG), against wider indigenous coaches 12’-0” adopted on the Mumbai Suburban Section, providing crush capacity life of more than 100 years in lieu of 25 yrs as now proposed on SG.
2) This corridor will provide North-South and East-West connectivity
2) There is no track connectivity with the existing North-South Mumbai Virar – Churchgate section at Bandra, due to adoption of narrow width SG (4’-8.5”) instead of the existing Broad Gauge (BG) 5’-6”
3) Serves areas not having rail based mass transport
3) Does not serve public requiring to carry more than 15kg luggage NOR the Dabbewalas, even during non-peak period
4) The master plan consists of 146.5 km metro network to be implemented in three phases
4) As indicated by MMRDA & DMRC in their DPR the crush capacity of this corridor would be reached within 25 years rendering the corridor NOT useful to the commuters for comfortable travel, thereafter.
The corridor cannot be converted to BG to adopt wider coaches without dismantling the concrete way structure and track.
5) Work on 11 km Versova-Andheri-Ghatkopar (VAG) corridor (cost Rs 2356cr) is already under execution- Expected to be completed by 2010, ahead of schedule
5) This corridor is being constructed at Rs 214 cr / km (Rs 2356cr / 11km) against the project estimated cost of Rs 1500cr (Rs 1500cr / 11km = 136.36cr/km)
The present progress of the VAG corridor is much behind schedule and cannot be completed by 2010.
6) The consortium led by Reliance Infrastructure will construct the Charkop-Bandra-Mankhurd corridor
6) This consortium is in association of overseas Company. Why it is necessary to have consortium with a foreign company, paying inflated price for the project, when the construction, manufacturing, operation and maintenance technology is available with the Indian Railways for the last more than 75 yrs. in Mumbai suburban section? No consortium was required for Kolkata Underground Metro.


7) Govt. of India to provide Viability Gap Funding of Rs 1532cr and MMRDA to provide the balance viability gap funding of Rs 766cr
7) The project is being awarded at a price of Rs 11,000 cr (Rs 343.75cr/km) at an abnormally high cost as compare to the MMRDA’s estimates of Rs 6100cr (Rs 190cr/km). With indigenous wider coaches on BG the project can be executed at 40% less cost, with no need for VGF subsidy and the fares will be reduced by 50%
8) This is the longest metro corridor of 32km on Public Private Partnership
8) The project cost has abnormally increased because the PPP model. For railways / metros The PPP model has not been economically adopted. Procurement of Mobile assets and Operation should have been done by DMRC as was done for Delhi metro, while fixed assets and maintenance could be done under PPP/BOT, with payments spread over the concession period.
9) Trains will be fully air-conditioned and will run from 5.00 am till midnight
9) Air-cooled trains are being operated on the existing suburban section in Mumbai from 5:00am till midnight.

BENEFIT OF CHARKOP-BANDRA-MANKHURD CORRIDOR

1) Connects Central & Western suburbs by environment – friendly, safe, reliable and efficient mass transit system
1) Mumbai suburban section on BG is also environmental friendly, and is more safe, more reliable and comfortable and more efficient, mass transit system than the one proposed at abnormally high cost and high fare charges
2) Provides interchange facility with other corridors
2) Does not provide track connectivity due to adoption of SG. Adoption of BG would have provided seemless travel without physical interchange of passengers at lower fares and less capital investment and reduced operation and maintenance cost.
3) Travel time expected to be reduced from about 2hrs. to 1hr.
3) Due to a single line in each direction, the corridor cannot provide fast trains to reduce travel time from 1hr to 30 min.
On the existing suburban section on Western and Central Railways, the distance of 32km is covered in less than 30min, unlike the proposed 1 hr. on the SG Metro
4) Scope for future extension from Mankhurd to proposed airport in Navi Mumbai
4) The existing constitution –Article 366/20 and Art. 246 does not provide legal jurisdiction to the States to extend the metro lines from Mankhurd to Navi Mumbai, unless “Metro Railway” is specifically excluded from the definition of “Railways” in the constitution











The best of the world technology on metros has been provided by Bay Area Regional Authority, San Francisco USA, on BG, since 2003 and is being further extended on BG for improved safety considerations against overturning, though their existing system is on SG. The above BG metro is on 120m radius sharp curves. The metro system can be designed for identical performance, to provide connectivity and computability with the existing BG system, which has the additional advantage during emergencies and disaster management.

Do you think that we are serving the nation for the good of the people by adoption of imported metro coaches on SG, at abnormally high costs, with no provision for increasing their capacity beyond 25 yrs, specifically when the country has the expertise and experience and capability of implementing metro projects with indigenous coaches on BG for identical performance and to suit the capacity requirements of more than 100yrs.

The Govt. should ask themselves if they are really serving the future generation of this city by the adoption of the proposed metros on SG.

Awaiting an early reply



With highest regards
V K J Rane – IRSE (Retd)
Ex-MD/IRCON
Date : 17th Aug 2009