Arkady Rotenberg disowned the security of the Crimean bridge

The construction contractor, Stroygazmontazh, does not want to be responsible for these problems, but dumped everything on the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation.
The government is discussing the possibility of removing from the general contractor of the construction of the Crimean bridge "Stroygazmontazha" Arkady Rotenberg responsibility for the transport security of the project. As Kommersant wrote, although the construction is almost finished, the movement of trucks across the bridge will be delayed, as the Ministry of Transport of the Ministry of Transport violated the terms of contracts on transport security. Kommersant sources and lawyers note that the case of the Crimean bridge was initially unconventional: usually the owners or users of facilities are engaged in transport safety, but in this project the government somehow in 2015 assigned these duties to the general contractor.

The general contractor for the construction of the Crimean bridge Stroygazmontazh Ltd (SKM) Arkady Rothenberg in late April, asked Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Kozak, who is in charge of the Crimea (will retain his post and in the new government) to remove from the company the authority of the "transport infrastructure entity to ensure transport security of the bridge" B "two sources familiar with the situation. In the office of Deputy Prime Minister Kommersant confirmed the receipt of the appeal, the Ministry of Transport and law enforcement agencies were instructed to work out the issue and submit proposals. In the Ministry of Transport "Kommersant" confirmed that the instruction was received, the position on the results of elaboration will be submitted to the government. The SGM declined to comment.

Stroigazmontazh received the authority of a transport infrastructure entity in terms of securing the transport security of the Crimean Bridge by order of the government on December 24, 2015 (the company became the general contractor of the project in January of the same year). The total cost of the construction is 228 billion rubles. The state customer is subordinated to the Federal Motorways Administration of the Federal Customs Service of the Russian Federation "Taman" ("Uprdor Taman"). Trains on the bridge should go at the end of 2019, cars and buses - this May, trucks - in the fall.

The phased introduction of the automobile part of the bridge is caused by problems with the execution of state contracts for transport security. Although the SGM was appointed as the "subject" for transport security, it should not perform these works, because in January 2017 the government selected the FSUE "Office of Departmental Protection of the Ministry of Transport" as the only executor of state contracts for transport safety of the bridge and approaches to it. Contracts in the prices of 2017 cost more than 12 billion rubles. And in December 2017 it became known about the problems with the works on transport safety of the road to the bridge from Kerch. As reported by RBC, the head of the Crimea Sergey Aksenov asked Dmitry Kozak and Transport Minister Maxim Sokolov to deal with the backlog. A few days later, the government postponed the terms of the contract from April 30 to September 30, 2018. The project was divided into two phases: equipping overpasses and approaches to the bridge with traffic safety systems (April 30) and construction of interchanges at inspection complexes (September 30).

In late April, it became clear that problems arose with the contract on transport security of the bridge itself. Due to "systematic violations" by the UVO of the Ministry of Transport, the FKU "Uprdor Taman" made claims for 22.5 million rubles. Sources told Kommersant that there are problems for all four state contracts on transport security. As a result, on May 3, the government again postponed the deadline for completion of works on transport safety of the road section from April 30, 2018 as early as December 1, 2019. Thus, now the security systems of both parts of the bridge, including the railway, will be surrendered simultaneously. The deadlines for securing the transport safety of auto-approaches from Taman were also postponed from April 30 to September 30, 2018.

A Kommersant source familiar with the situation explains that the UVO of the Ministry of Transport has a number of problems with the execution of state contracts for transport security, but all responsibility for its provision now lies with the SGM, it is the general contractor that will receive all administrative fines in case of violations. In addition, SGB will be responsible and, for example, in the event of terrorist attacks, which is an additional risk for the company, the source adds. He notes that, usually after construction, the infrastructure facility is handed over to the customer and he assumes all responsibility, including transport security. The customer then conducts an assessment of the vulnerability and on its basis orders a transport security project, which is then implemented by a specialized organization. But the case with the Crimean bridge is non-standard, the interlocutor of Kommersant says, here the subject of transport security was already appointed SGM at the stage of construction.

Igor Valuev from Heads Consulting agrees that the transfer of the authority of the transport infrastructure entity from the transport infrastructure to the Crimean bridge is an "exceptional case". He explains that FZ-16 on transport security assumes that it is provided by the competent executive authorities authorized by the government, and the subjects of the transport infrastructure can be legal entities and individuals who own infrastructure facilities or other persons using these facilities. Formally, "Stroygazmontazh" is neither the owner of the bridge under construction nor the executive authority authorized to deal with transport security, Mr. Valuev reasons. In the sense of the government decree, it turns out that the SGM, as a contractor, works to build the bridge, and since this is associated with the movement of vehicles, the company is obliged to carry out measures to ensure the safety of this movement, the lawyer believes. The refusal of these obligations is possible only after the transfer of functions for transport security at the facility to the executive authorities, says Igor Valuev, which (in theory, since the case of non-standard and practice does not exist) must be preceded by the completion of unsafe operations for the transport of the object and its commissioning.