THEY IGNORED WARNINGS: Chinese contractors alerted the Serbian Railways about unsafe stations!

Less than 20 days after the accident in Novi Sad, Chinese contractors CRIC and CCCC sent a letter to Serbian Railways Infrastructure reminding them that they had warned about the old age of the stations along the Novi Sad-Subotica route. They proposed that their usability and durability be examined, writes Forbes Serbia.

The subject line of the email was “Reminder regarding problems with existing station buildings in the Novi Sad – Subotica section.” The letter was written on November 18 but sent shortly after midnight on the 19th.

At the beginning of the letter, the Chinese remind us that the projected lifespan of a station building, according to the regulations from the time of Yugoslavia, is 50 years.

Who approved it

“The question arises of what basis the decision made in the conceptual design was to reuse old buildings. Before deciding to reuse, were the buildings tested, assessed, and inspected by experts?” the email from the Chinese companies states. The letter was sent to the now former director of Serbian Railways Infrastructure, Jelena Tanasković. The supervisory authority and the acting assistant minister of construction, Anita Dimoski, were copied in.

The Chinese emphasize that it is clear that some buildings in the Novi Sad-Subotica section are exceptionally old.

“For example, the station building in Subotica was built in 1882. The station buildings in Kisač and Bačka Topola were built at the end of the 19th century. The station building in Naumovićevo was built at the beginning of the 20th century. The station building in Žednik was built in 1943, and the station building in Zmajevo was built in the 1990s,” the Chinese remind.

The Chinese companies then reminded that during the renovation and partial repair of old station buildings, they noticed problems that were not addressed in the project documentation. They claim that they submitted letters regarding this to the investor or Serbian Railways Infrastructure in a timely manner. As an example, they cite a letter from February 23, 2023, about problems in the station buildings in Žednik and Bačka Topola and that they also submitted a request for additional work.

“To the aforementioned letter, the Contractor received the following response: These problems are errors in the project, and such risks should have been taken into account before submitting a bid for the execution of this project,” the letter states.

The Chinese companies then point out that “such a response is not acceptable.”

“The contractor submitted its offer based on the draft of the Conceptual Design, and the Construction Permit Project and the Execution Project were drawn up based on the Conceptual Design. The scope of the works itself is defined in the Conceptual Design phase,” the Chinese companies stated.

The problem dates back to the Conceptual Design.

“Given that the scope of works from the Construction Permit Project and the Execution Project for old station buildings is defined by the Conceptual Design, and there is obviously an inconsistency between the project documentation and the field conditions, it can be concluded that the problem is primarily in the Conceptual Design itself and that it should have been changed first,” the consortium CRIC-CCCC points out.

The Chinese state that although they did not receive approval for additional work on the station in Bačka Topola, they nevertheless carried out works on partial reinforcement of the building based on a technical solution approved by the supervision.

“As the works on the aforementioned building progressed, the following problems were discovered. The bricks of the arched structure above the windows on the first floor of the station building were loose. The wooden beams were cracked, and there were no beams mounted on the existing structure. The ceilings in rooms 1-4 were seriously outdated, worn, damaged, etc. The walls on the first floor of the station building are old and not sufficiently stable, and a larger part of the surface is damaged. The wooden beam structure of the station building roof has cracks and is poorly connected,” the Chinese companies listed exhaustively.

They remind us that “none of the aforementioned problems were included in the scope of renovation works for which the contractor was responsible. The station building in Bačka Topola is over 120 years old.”

FIND OUT MORE IN SERBIAN:

It will certainly cause problems in the future

A serious warning follows.

“Although the Conceptual Design only provided for the external surface renovation of the station building, the problem is that all the building materials of the station are old. In the future, it will certainly cause more systemic and overall safety problems, so it is necessary for the investor to examine and determine the condition of the entire station building,” the Chinese companies recommend.

And they come to a final conclusion.

“Given that the station buildings on the Novi Sad – Subotica section are quite old, it is difficult to assess the strength or durability of the existing building material based on appearance, and their lifespan has probably exceeded the projected lifespan. The contractor proposes that the investor hire an expert who will carry out a complete inspection and assessment of the old station buildings. In accordance with this, prepare a Report on the technical assessment and testing carried out, and in this way confirm that the old station buildings are safe, usable, and durable,” the letter signed by the consortium representative Qi Fengzhan states.

No response

Forbes Serbia asked the Chinese consortium to confirm that they sent this letter. And whether they received a response from Infrastructure. However, there was no answer to this question. Nor was there an answer to the question of whether they had any knowledge that Serbian Railways Infrastructure had taken steps to examine the condition of the station buildings on the route from Novi Sad to Subotica.

We also asked the Serbian Railways Infrastructure spokesperson whether they received this letter from the Chinese consortium. We also asked whether any steps have been taken to examine the stability of the buildings or whether it is planned. We did not receive an answer.