Konstantin Pulikovsky: Supervision must be unified.

konstantin pulikovskii nadzor doljen bit edinim

Konstantin Pulikovsky: Supervision must be unified.

– Konstantin Borisovich, what powers in the field of construction of residential and commercial buildings are currently assigned to your department?

– The government of the country instructed Rostekhnadzor to carry out state construction supervision from February 1, 2006.

After the Urban Development Code of the Russian Federation came into force, the system of state supervision in construction has undergone serious changes.

The construction of most objects, including housing, must be controlled at the regional level.

The Urban Development Code prescribed that the design and construction of certain objects — for example, the nuclear industry, hazardous industries, unique structures — be controlled at the federal level.

Meanwhile, the implementation of state construction supervision should be based on the principle of continuous control over the entire cycle of design, construction and operation of various buildings and structures.

And this is possible only in a single system of the federal executive body and regional executive bodies.

According to some data, today almost every second construction project is carried out with violations of construction, technological and other standards.

However, there is also a gaping legal “hole” in this area: the previous GOSTs and SNIPs are outdated, and new technical regulations — about a dozen and a half standards — are still in the development stage.

– What is the state of the existing regulatory framework for the effective implementation of supervisory functions in the fuel and energy complex and in construction?

What, in your opinion, needs to be done in this direction?

– In February, a meeting of the Rostekhnadzor board was held, following which a decision was made to speed up the rule-making process, including in matters of the functioning of the fuel and energy complex.

One of the main tasks of this year is to develop new technical regulations.

This is very important: science does not stand still – new technologies are being developed – and Rostekhnadzor is obliged to promote the introduction of advanced technologies in all sectors of the domestic industry.

This will strengthen industrial safety, introduce modern environmental standards and increase the industrial potential and efficiency of the Russian economy.

It is also necessary to improve the regulatory framework in the field of construction supervision.

New regulations are needed to regulate individual areas of state construction supervision.

New regulations are also needed to determine the procedures for issuing permits for the organization of construction, for construction, for the conservation of construction sites.

These and other regulations are needed to ensure that the new Urban Development Code of the Russian Federation comes into effect.

The Code, in general, is aimed at eliminating administrative barriers in order to increase the volume of housing construction, as well as improving the mechanisms for involving land plots for housing construction in economic circulation.

The amendments also affected the issues of implementing state construction supervision: the list of capital construction projects subject to construction supervision at the federal level has been expanded, and the subject of state construction supervision has been disclosed.

On January 1, 2007, the provisions of the Urban Development Code came into force, which require the organization of construction supervision, which now includes fire supervision, sanitary and epidemiological supervision and environmental control.

– What is the construction supervision carried out by your department today?

What problems did you have to face, and what solutions do you see for the current situation?

– By the RF Government Resolution of February 1, 2006, construction supervision was completely entrusted to Rostekhnadzor.

But now, through skillful lobbying by construction forces, questions are being raised about the need to create some kind of specialized supervisory body in the field of construction. This is being done under the guise of talk about increasing the efficiency of work.

However, all this leads to the emergence of loopholes for unscrupulous developers.

The most basic “loophole” is the allocation of land for construction, which is given by municipal or regional authorities, and the developer most often believes that this is already a building permit.

Regardless of the complexity and uniqueness of the object, the owner begins construction, and when the moment of commissioning of the object approaches, developers try to obtain licenses or building permits.

Last year, when the Government instructed us to conduct construction supervision, we began to deal primarily with objects in Moscow and the Moscow region, because there are many unique, socially significant objects here.

It turned out that for some objects the contractor only has permission to carry out excavation work, or to construct the zero cycle, but despite this, the contractor continues to build, and the owner continues to work with this contractor.

For example, when an accident occurred during the construction of the Auchan shopping center, and 5 workers died, it turned out that the work was carried out by a Turkish company that only had permission to carry out excavation work.

The crane equipment used at this facility was not properly certified and did not have an operating license.

The elevator equipment that was installed there also did not have any permits.

All this shows that the declarative licensing system does not work well in modern Russian realities.

Supervision should still be in the first place, so that it does not happen that an accident occurs, and during the investigation it turns out that construction is being carried out without any permits. This is why it is necessary to change the existing system of permitting activities, and active work is being carried out in this direction today.

Over the past years, due to contradictions between federal and local authorities, it was not possible to form a coherent system of construction supervision, and as a result, the business suffered, people died.

I see the task before me: to introduce the system of construction supervision in full into the legal field in accordance with the Urban Development Code.

Again, it is very difficult to change the thinking of both officials and the business community. With the transition to private ownership, supervision should be strengthened, not weakened.

When the construction complex under Soviet power was in the hands of the state, this in itself forced builders to comply with all norms and rules.

Now, everything is mainly in private hands, and therefore state control and supervision must be strengthened.

– With regard to the design and installation of building engineering systems: what types of work are subject to mandatory licensing?

What is the process for obtaining licenses?

– Current legislation is too liberal in relation to construction owners. The Federal Law “On Licensing Certain Types of Activities” implies a declarative system, but in practice there are cases when a developer begins construction without having not only all the necessary permits, but also the license itself.

The nationwide policy of reducing licensed types of activities has led to the fact that the design and construction of hazardous production facilities; the manufacture, repair and installation of equipment for these facilities; and the qualification training of managers and specialists are no longer subject to licensing.

The quality of design and construction work has also declined, and the level of training of specialists has fallen.

In 2005, as a replacement for licensing in the above-mentioned area, inspection control was introduced by independent inspection organizations accredited in the system of examination and accreditation in the field of industrial safety.

The need for the existence of such a procedure is high, but so far it has not been possible to fully deploy its activities, which is hampered by the low level of awareness of interested parties.

From January 1, 2007, according to the current law on licensing, licensing of design and survey construction companies should be abolished.

Throughout the past year, a heated discussion continued among specialists, during which a number of high-ranking officials, governors, and, oddly enough, representatives of large construction businesses themselves, actively advocated for extending the licensing system.

The main argument: alternative mechanisms for monitoring and ensuring safety during the construction of construction projects and their subsequent operation have not yet been created in the country.

According to the adopted law, these functions should be performed by self-regulatory organizations (public professional associations).

As for the quality of construction, it is supposed to be ensured by the material liability of the entire professional community through mandatory insurance of construction risks and the creation of a special fund for these purposes.

And although the bill on insurance has been written, in general, legislators will not have time to adopt it before the new year.

– Your attitude to the upcoming abolition of licensing and examination in construction and the transition of the industry to self-regulation.

– The trend is positive.

After all, this will eliminate administrative barriers, increase the role and responsibility of the construction community.

We already said at the beginning of the conversation that we must stimulate economic development. The current declarative method in construction supervision is wrong.

The owner approved the project somewhere, picked a company unknown to us and started building the foundation. And only then does he go to Rostekhnadzor to ask for permission to build.

What can we do?

Stop the construction and bury the millions of rubles already spent?

As easy as pie. But this is not beneficial to anyone.

Expertise and supervision should begin with the first steps of the owner, from the moment when the idea of ​​building a unique or especially dangerous facility just occurred to him.

Who will carry out this supervision – us or the public – is another question.

One of the criteria for determining licensed types of activity, established by the Federal Law “On Licensing of Certain Types of Activity”, is that the regulation of the relevant types of activity cannot be carried out by methods other than licensing.

The Urban Development Code of the Russian Federation allows for regulation in the field of engineering surveys, design, construction of capital construction projects by other means, including through state construction supervision.

I hope that self-regulatory organizations will contribute to improving the quality of construction, reconstruction, major repairs, as well as the emergence of financial guarantees. However, hope is hope, but self-regulatory organizations also need to be controlled by the state. The federal government body must check and evaluate the correctness of the actions of such organizations.

I also believe that the presence or absence of a license, as well as membership in a self-regulatory organization, cannot in itself serve as an indicator of the quality of the work performed, their compliance with established technical requirements and design documentation.

In this regard, the role of state construction supervision inevitably increases.

There can be no supervision in Moscow, Smolensk or Khabarovsk style. It must be uniform, with a uniform policy, norms, rules.

This is what our Service does.

We make every effort to ensure that the standards are uniform throughout the country: regardless of the size of the facility, its uniqueness, complexity or technical execution, and regardless of the level at which it is produced.

The regions don't like all this — they want to supervise and have their own control bodies. The developers and owners don't like this either — they also want to get away from clear and precise supervision.

– What is the effectiveness of the existing system of examinations and permitting procedures in construction?

– The Urban Development Code reserves state environmental examination only for design documentation of facilities whose construction and reconstruction is expected to be carried out in the exclusive economic zone of Russia, on the continental shelf, in internal sea waters, and in the territorial sea of ​​Russia.

But previously, environmental assessment was aimed at implementing environmental protection measures everywhere.

Thanks to environmental assessment, we could ensure rational use of natural resources, and our environmental experts prevented many violations in construction.

Until now, there is no procedure for issuing permits for construction on land plots that are not covered by urban planning regulations.

The absence of such a procedure negatively affects the possibility of proper implementation of construction of such important capital construction projects as linear facilities, including oil pipelines, gas pipelines, power lines, highways, as well as facilities provided for the extraction of minerals.

The said facilities are supervised by Rostekhnadzor, because we carry out supervision in the field of industrial, energy safety, mining supervision.

It would be quite logical if Rostekhnadzor issued permits for construction on land plots that are not subject to urban development regulations. We have enough laws regulating the activities of enterprises that our service supervises.

But, as is customary here, “the strictness of Russian laws is compensated by the non-obligatory nature of their implementation.”

Today, it is necessary to create conditions under which it will not be profitable for owners to violate our laws, especially in the field of industrial and environmental safety.

There is currently an urgent need to create a modern regulatory framework.

One of the most important tasks this year for us will be the development of new technical regulations to replace the current SNiPs and GOSTs.

Summarizing our meeting with you, I would like to remind you that the main task of Rostekhnadzor is to ensure safety, protect the environment from harmful emissions of industrial production into the atmosphere, land and water, protect people, their lives and health in the conditions of technical mechanisms and chemically hazardous substances surrounding them.

– The Federal Service for Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Supervision exercises control over the construction sites in the city of Sochi.

What does this work consist of?

– One of the main such sites in 2007 will be the Olympic complex under construction in Sochi. The Olympic Games are to be held in Russia.

Dozens of sports facilities: ski lifts, cable cars, stadiums and hotels, will meet all safety requirements.

As of today, according to our data, the technical condition of the cable cars at the Krasnaya Polyana ski resort in Sochi is safe for operation.

This is the conclusion reached by the commission of the Federal Service for Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Supervision (Rostekhnadzor), which completed a comprehensive inspection of the state of technological and environmental safety at the facilities and structures of the Krasnaya Polyana ski resort in Sochi.

The operation of cable cars, carried out by the “Firm “Alpika-service” at the ski resort, is carried out in accordance with the “Rules for the construction and safe operation of passenger suspended and towing cable cars”.

“The technical condition of the cable cars at the Krasnaya Polyana ski resort in Sochi allows for their safe operation,” — these are the conclusions of the Rostekhnadzor commission.

However, during the work at the facility, the Rostekhnadzor commission did reveal some violations. The management of the Alpika-Service Company was ordered to eliminate the identified deficiencies and take disciplinary action against officials who violated production instructions by April 30, 2007.

“For the violations identified during the inspection, the head of the cable car and the Alpika-Service Company, as a legal entity, were brought to administrative responsibility with the imposition of fines,” the commission’s findings state.

Over the past six months, the ski lifts in Krasnaya Polyana have been inspected three times.

The last order from the operating organization was issued in mid-February 2007.

In addition, the commission drew the attention of the company's management to the quality of the documentation work performed by the following expert organizations: Avtokranservis (Stavropol), Soyuzprommekhanizatsiya (Moscow), and Spetskontrol i Diagnostika (Moscow).

An inspection of the facility's energy supply was also conducted. The commission conducted an unscheduled inspection of the activities of Kubanenergo OJSC for a month.

Only at the Kuban enterprise MES and the Kuban enterprise TO and R MES, 46 and 24 violations were identified, respectively.

The Federal Service for Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Supervision believes that the branches of Kubanenergo OJSC — Sochi Electric Networks and Yugo-Zapadnye Electric Networks — are not properly fulfilling the main task of high-quality and uninterrupted energy supply to consumers.

Operation of power equipment at the inspected enterprises is carried out with serious violations of regulatory requirements. This is the conclusion reached by the Rostekhnadzor commission.

– Recently, information was published in the media that, at the initiative of Rostekhnadzor, the heads of large enterprises in the fuel and energy complex will undergo certification, and then this initiative will also affect the heads of construction companies.

Please comment.

– According to the order, the Central Certification Commission will begin its activities on July 1, 2007, and the formation of lists of examinees will begin in April (before that, the certification of enterprise managers will be carried out according to the old standards).

We will summon to the certification commission the managers of those enterprises that do not listen to the opinion of Rostekhnadzor.

It also happens: we issue dozens of orders, find violations in the operation of hazardous production facilities, and the managers believe that we are interfering with their competence.

The supervisory authority irritates the owners, but we will continue to irritate everyone.

An analysis of inspections conducted in 2006 showed that industrial control organized at controlled enterprises is often carried out formally, its effectiveness in terms of timely detection and elimination of industrial safety violations is low (which is clearly seen when comparing acts based on the results of industrial control and orders based on the results of inspections).

Cases have been identified where organizations do not analyze violations identified by industrial control services, and do not take measures to eradicate the causes that give rise to them.

There is insufficient attention to these issues, and in some cases, a reluctance of a number of enterprise managers to organize the implementation of industrial control.

How can we not call such people for early certification?

We cannot allow people who have no idea about industrial safety to manage companies: he may be a good manager, but he may give an order that contradicts the standards of technological safety, and this will lead to accidents.

Those who, for reasons unknown to me, believe that Rostekhnadzor is responsible for ensuring safety at their production facilities must also be trained and certified.

Russian philosophers believed that thoughts and words can materialize.

What will happen to an enterprise whose manager thinks that it is not he, but the state, who is responsible for technological and environmental safety?

It is the owner who must ensure compliance with the rules and regulations, and it is he who is responsible for the damage caused to people, nature, and the economy.

In this case, the heads of construction companies are no exception. And our task is to monitor how they cope with their duties.

Interview: 2007 K. Pulikosky

    Мы используем cookie-файлы для наилучшего представления нашего сайта. Продолжая использовать этот сайт, вы соглашаетесь с использованием cookie-файлов.
    Принять