MDS 81 35.2004 Appendix 2 sample 1. Documents. Requirements for registration and preparation of estimate documentation for work under the reconstruction and technical re-equipment program

LETTER

The Federal Agency for Construction and Housing and Communal Services reports on the issues raised.

In accordance with clause 4.7 of the Methodology for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation - MDS 81-35.2004, work performed during the repair and reconstruction of buildings and structures, similar to processes in new construction, should be standardized according to the relevant collections for construction and special construction work (except norms of the collection using coefficients of 1.15 to feed labor costs and 1.25 to norms for operating time of construction machines).

Since finishing and plumbing work relate to construction and special work, the above-mentioned procedure applies to these works, as well as to drainage work, the cost rates of which are given in Collection No. 1 GESN-2001 “Earthworks”.

As for whether the mentioned coefficients apply to the installation and dismantling of scaffolding, attention should be paid to which scaffolding will be used. If it is intended to use inventory scaffolding, the cost of installation and disassembly of which is given in Collection No. 8 GESN-2001 “Structures made of bricks and blocks,” then the use of the above coefficients is justified.

If it is intended to use non-inventory scaffolding, the cost standards for installation and dismantling of which are given in the GESNr-2001 Collections for repair and construction work, the specified coefficients should not be applied.

2. Double interpretation in these documents occurs due to the fact that such double interpretation takes place in the third document, which was published before the publication of the mentioned documents. In clause 3.3.1 of the Guidelines for the development of collections (catalogues) of estimated prices for materials, products, structures and collections of estimated prices for the transportation of goods for the construction and major repairs of buildings and structures MDS 81-2.99 in the list of components of the estimated price for materials including others, loading and unloading work is also given with a clause in brackets; as a rule, the cost of loading work is taken into account directly by the selling price, and the cost of unloading work is included in the unit prices for construction, installation and repair work, and then the bracket is closed.

What is stated in parentheses is true in essence, since the resource consumption standards given in the GESN and in the GESNr take into account both the costs of unloading materials and structures at the on-site warehouse, which was not practiced either in the 1984 database or in the 1991 database, and the costs of intra-building transportation of materials and structures.

However, Appendix 10 of the same MDS 81-2.99 provides a typical example of calculating transport costs, in which the list of costs includes unloading work and intra-building transportation of materials.

Considering that on the basis of GESN and GESNr, Federal unit rates (FBR) and territorial unit rates (TER) have been developed, in which the costs of unloading materials and structures at the on-site warehouse and the costs of intra-building transportation of materials and structures are also taken into account, the costs of unloading materials at on-site warehouse and for loading and unloading into vehicles during intra-building transportation should be taken into account as part of the item for labor costs in direct costs.

STATE COMMITTEE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION FOR CONSTRUCTION AND HOUSING AND COMMUNAL COMPLEX (Gosstroy of Russia)

DETERMINATION METHOD
COST OF CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS
ON THE TERRITORY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
MDS 81 - 35. 2004

Moscow 2004

Methodology for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation, (MDS 81-35. 2004)

DEVELOPED by the Department of Pricing and Estimated Standardization of the Gosstroy of Russia (head - V.A. Stepanov, executive officer - E.E. Ermolaev, I.Yu. Nosenko), with the participation of the Baltic Construction Company (V.M. Simanovich), the Central Research Institute Institute of Economics and Management in Construction (V.I. Koretsky, V.M. Didkovsky, Zh.G. Chernyshova), Scientific and Technical Center "Stroyinvestnauka" of the Moscow State Construction University (N.M. Shumeiko, V.P. Berezin, S. .B.Sborshchikov), GASIS (I.T.Tsirunyan), Transstroy Corporation (S.S.Abdrakhmanov, Kh.Z.Bashirova), CJSC "INiK" (Yu.V.Zhabenko, V.M.Beznos), Committee for the Operation of the Housing Fund of the Administration of St. Petersburg (N.M. Letenko).

APPROVED by the Scientific and Technical Council of the State Construction Committee of Russia.

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL by the Department of Pricing and Estimated Standardization of the Gosstroy of Russia.

ADOPTED AND ENTERED INTO EFFECT on March 9, 2004 by the resolution of the State Construction Committee of Russia dated 03/05/2004
№15/1.

REVIEWED by the Ministry of Justice of Russia and recognized as a document that complies with the legislation of the Russian Federation and does not require state registration (letter dated March 10, 2004 No. 07/2699-UD).
IN REPLACEMENT of the “Code of Rules for Determining the Cost of Construction as part of Pre-Project and Design Estimate Documentation” SP 81-01-94, introduced by the letter of the Ministry of Construction of Russia dated December 29, 1994 No. VB-12-276, “Methodological guidelines for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation” Federation" MDS 81-1.99, put into effect by Decree of the State Construction Committee of Russia dated April 26, 1999 No. 31, "Instructions for the use of GESN-2001 for construction and special construction work" MDS 81-28.2001, "Instructions for the use of GESNm-2001 for installation of equipment " MDS 81-29.2001, "Instructions for the use of GESNp-2001 for commissioning work" MDS 81-27.2001, General instructions for the use of GESNp-2001 for repair and construction work, as well as "Temporary guidelines for determining the cost of work during the construction and repair of automobile roads" MDS 81-30.2002.
INTRODUCTION

The methodology for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Methodology) was developed in accordance with the current legislation of the Russian Federation on the basis of methodological and regulatory documents provided for by the 2001 cost estimate and regulatory framework for pricing in construction.
The methodology includes general methodological provisions for drawing up estimate documentation and determining the estimated cost of construction, performing repair, installation and commissioning work at all stages of developing pre-project and design documentation, forming contract prices for construction products and making payments for work performed. The Methodology covers the main provisions for the application of elemental estimate norms and prices, as well as limited and other works and costs provided for by the 2001 estimate and regulatory framework for pricing in construction.
The Methodology takes into account the requirements and provisions of regulatory legal methodological documents as of March 1, 2004.
In accordance with the order of the Government of the Russian Federation dated November 27, 2003 No. VYa-P10-14161, the provisions given in the Methodology apply to all enterprises of the construction complex of the Russian Federation when determining the cost of construction of new, reconstruction, expansion and technical re-equipment of existing enterprises, buildings and structures, implementation repair and commissioning work, regardless of sources of financing, carried out on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as when setting prices for construction products and payments for work performed.
Disagreements regarding the application of estimate standards are subject to consideration by the authorized federal executive body in the field of construction.

Application
to the Resolution of the State Construction Committee of Russia
dated 03/05/2004 No. 15/1
METHODOLOGY

RUSSIAN FEDERATION

STATE COMMITTEE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
ON CONSTRUCTION AND HOUSING AND COMMUNAL COMPLEX
DECISION of March 5, 2004 No. 15/1
ABOUT APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE METHODOLOGY
DETERMINING THE COST OF CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS IN THE TERRITORY
RUSSIAN FEDERATION
List of amending documents (as amended by Order of the Ministry of Regional Development of Russia dated June 1, 2012 No. 220,
Order of the Ministry of Construction of Russia dated June 16, 2014 No. 294/pr)
The State Committee of the Russian Federation for Construction and Housing and Communal Sector decides:
To approve and put into effect from March 9, 2004 the attached Methodology for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation.
Chairman N.P. KOSHMAN
Does not require state registration. Letter of the Ministry of Justice of Russia dated March 10, 2004 No. 07/2699-UD.

List of changing documents
(as amended by Order of the Ministry of Regional Development of Russia dated June 1, 2012 No. 220, Order of the Ministry of Construction of Russia dated June 16, 2014 No. 294/pr)
In accordance with the order of the Government of the Russian Federation dated November 27, 2003 No. VYA-P10-14161, the provisions given in the Methodology apply to all enterprises
construction complex of the Russian Federation when determining the cost of construction of new, reconstruction, expansion and technical re-equipment of existing enterprises, buildings and structures, performing repair and commissioning work, regardless of sources of financing, carried out on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as when setting prices for construction products and calculations for completed work.
DEVELOPED by the Department of Pricing and Estimated Standardization of the Gosstroy of Russia (head - V.A. Stepanov, responsible executive - E.E. Ermolaev, I.Yu. Nosenko), with
participation of the Baltic Construction Company (V.M. Simanovich), the Central Research Institute of Economics and Management in Construction (V.I. Koretsky, V.M.
Didkovsky, Zh.G. Chernyshov), Scientific and Technical Center "Stroyinvestnauka" of the Moscow State Construction University (N.M. Shumeiko, V.P. Berezin, S.B. Sborshchikov), GASIS (I.T. Tsirunyan), Transstroy Corporation (S. S. Abdrakhmanov, Kh.Z. Bashirova), CJSC "INiK" (Yu.V. Zhabenko, V.M. Beznos), Committee for the Maintenance of the Housing Fund of the Administration of St. Petersburg (N.M. Letenko).
APPROVED by the Scientific and Technical Council of the State Construction Committee of Russia.
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL by the Department of Pricing and Estimated Standardization of the Gosstroy of Russia.
ADOPTED AND ENTERED INTO EFFECT on March 9, 2004 by Resolution of the State Construction Committee of Russia dated March 5, 2004 No. 15/1.
CONSIDERED by the Ministry of Justice of Russia and recognized as a document that complies with the legislation of the Russian Federation and does not require state registration
(letter dated March 10, 2004 No. 07/2699-UD).
IN REPLACEMENT of the “Code of Rules for Determining the Cost of Construction as part of Pre-Project and Design Estimate Documentation” SP 81-01-94, introduced by a letter from the Ministry of Construction of Russia dated
12.29.94 No. VB-12-276, “Guidelines for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation” MDS 81-1.99, put into effect
Resolution of the State Construction Committee of Russia dated April 26, 1999 No. 31, “Instructions for the use of GESN-2001 for construction and special construction work” MDS 81-28.2001, “Instructions for the use of GESNm-2001 for installation of equipment” MDS 81-29.2001, “Instructions for the use of GESNp -2001 for commissioning work" MDS 81-27.2001, General guidelines for the application of GESNr-2001 for repair and construction work, as well as "Temporary guidelines for determining the cost of work during the construction and repair of highways" MDS 81-30.2002.

DEVELOPED by the Department of Pricing and Estimated Standardization of the Gosstroy of Russia (head - V.A. Stepanov, executive officer - E.E. Ermolaev, I.Yu. Nosenko), with the participation of the Baltic Construction Company (V.M. Simanovich), the Central Research Institute Institute of Economics and Management in Construction (V.I. Koretsky, V.M. Didkovsky, Zh.G. Chernyshova), Scientific and Technical Center "Stroyinvestnauka" of the Moscow State Construction University (N.M. Shumeiko, V.P. Berezin, S. .B. Sborshchikov), GASIS (I.T. Tsirunyan), Transstroy Corporation (S.S. Abdrakhmanov, Kh.Z. Bashirova), JSC "INiK" (Y.V. Zhabenko, V.M. Beznos), Committee for the Operation of the Housing Fund of the Administration of St. Petersburg (N.M. Letenko).

APPROVED by the Scientific and Technical Council of the State Construction Committee of Russia.

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL by the Department of Pricing and Estimated Standardization of the Gosstroy of Russia.

ADOPTED AND ENTERED INTO EFFECT on March 9, 2004 by Decree of the State Construction Committee of Russia dated March 5, 2004 No. 15/1.

IN REPLACEMENT of the “Code of Rules for Determining the Cost of Construction as part of Pre-Project and Design Estimate Documentation” SP 81-01-94, introduced by the letter of the Ministry of Construction of Russia dated December 29, 1994 No. VB-12-276, “Methodological guidelines for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation” Federation" MDS 81-1.99, put into effect by Decree of the State Construction Committee of Russia dated April 26, 1999 No. 31, "Instructions for the use of GESN-2001 for construction and special construction work" MDS 81-28.2001, "Instructions for the use of GESNm-2001 for installation of equipment " MDS 81-29.2001, "Instructions for the use of GESNp-2001 for commissioning work" MDS 81-27.2001, General instructions for the use of GESNp-2001 for repair and construction work, as well as "Temporary guidelines for determining the cost of work during the construction and repair of automobile roads" MDS 81-30.2002.

In accordance with the order of the Government of the Russian Federation dated November 27, 2003 No. VYa-P10-14161, the provisions given in the Methodology apply to all enterprises of the construction complex of the Russian Federation when determining the cost of construction of new, reconstruction, expansion and technical re-equipment of existing enterprises, buildings and structures, implementation repair and commissioning work, regardless of sources of financing, carried out on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as when setting prices for construction products and payments for work performed.

FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION AGENCY

AND HOUSING AND COMMUNAL SERVICES

Letter dated February 14, 2006 No. sk-481/02 on the release from publication of instructions on the use of federal unit prices for commissioning work

The Federal Agency for Construction and Housing and Communal Services announces the publication of the Instructions for the application of federal unit prices for commissioning works (MDS 81-40.2006), approved by Resolution of the State Construction Committee of Russia dated September 1, 2003 No. 160.

With the publication of this document, the coefficients for the conditions of work should be taken according to tables 2 and 3 of the Guidelines for the use of federal unit prices for commissioning work instead of the recommended coefficients given in table 4 of Appendix No. 1 to the Methodology for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation (MDS 81-35.2004).

COMMENTS

to the Methodology for determining the cost of construction products on the territory of the Russian Federation MDS 81-35.2004

This Methodology was issued to replace a number of documents previously issued by the Russian State Construction Committee. First of all, this concerns the Methodological Guidelines for Determining the Cost of Construction Products on the Territory of the Russian Federation MDS 81-1.99, which was a similar document that preceded the new one.

The New Methodology is not simply a rewriting of old postulates from previous similar documents into a new document with a small addition of some materials, mainly taking into account changes in current legislation. In the new Methodology, a number of postulates are illuminated in a new way.

First of all, you should pay attention to the following question. In all previous estimate-normative and methodological documents, starting with the estimate-normative base of 1969 (the estimate-normative base of 1955 is vaguely remembered). There are phrases “elemental estimate standards do not apply to unique buildings and structures...”. At the same time, not a single regulatory or methodological document really gave a clear concept of what “unique buildings” or “unique structures” are. A lot of questions, disputes and disagreements arose, but I don’t remember that for any object, even a truly unique one, individual estimate standards and unit prices were drawn up due to the uniqueness of the building and, as a consequence, the uniqueness of the work. In the absence of certain state elemental estimate norms and unit prices, individual elemental norms and unit prices, calculations were compiled more than once, what was, was. And now they are being compiled. But that’s not it. That's not what we're talking about. But in order to calculate something just because of its uniqueness, individual estimates and prices were drawn up - I don’t remember something. Although contractors from time to time made such demands (and I, too, included) tried to demand from time to time the determination of the cost of certain works or structures based on individual calculations, citing the uniqueness of the building, but the designers quite easily fought back. What's unique about this wall? What makes this column unique? - they asked. And so, by breaking down the questions and translating them into the plane of individual structures and types of work (and the standards are precisely developed for individual structures and types of work), thereby simplifying the very formulation of the question, they, the designers, quite easily fought off all the claims of the contractors. Moreover, their customers also supported them. Indeed, what is unique about this wall, what is unique about this column?

In the new methodology, the topic is presented differently. The second sentence of clause 2.7 of the Methodology says this: “GESN do not apply to individual structures and types of work, the capital structure, accuracy class and quality of which are subject to increased requirements...”. This is something else. What is the accuracy class? These are permissible deviations from the design dimensions given in the regulatory documents - SNiP for the execution of work. And this is already a document. For example, in SNiP 3.03.01-87 “Load-bearing and enclosing structures”, clause 7.90 and table. 34 states that the maximum deviations of the thickness of brick wall structures are ±15 mm, and the maximum deviations of the displacement of the axes of brick wall structures from the alignment axes are 10 mm. But, if, for one reason or another, the working drawings indicate a different size of deviation, more stringent, i.e., smaller than given above, then the contractor has the right to demand individual elemental standards and prices for these works - standards for labor costs and work time construction machines and mechanisms are designed for standard conditions, i.e., conditions for compliance with the tolerances given in SNiP 3.03.01-87. And when the conditions are more stringent, it will take more time to work. This means it is necessary to develop individual elemental cost estimates. In the same SNiP, similar tolerances are given for concrete and reinforced concrete structures, and for metal structures, and the principle of the approach is always the same - in the case of design requirements that are more stringent than the tolerances given in this SNiP, it is necessary to develop individual elemental estimate standards and prices . More details about this are written in the three-volume book “Estimates for construction and repair work according to the new regulatory framework.”

By the way, if there are no more stringent requirements in the project, it is not difficult to allow a situation where the brick external and internal walls will be shifted from each other by 10 mm each, therefore, the distance between them will increase by 20 mm. And, in addition, each of the walls will have a thickness deviation of minus 15 mm. Everything will be within tolerances, and the distance between the walls will increase by 50 mm. For other signs of deviation, the distance between the walls will decrease by the same 50 mm. In both cases, if you need to line the transverse walls with granite or marble or install floors from granite or marble slabs, you cannot do without a stone-cutting machine; local adjustment is required. Consequently, the standards and prices for both facing stone walls and installing stone floors should provide for the use of stone-cutting machines and the time for sawing the slabs, taking into account their fit. It turns out that in the above cases it is useful to know the tolerances given in SNiP 3.03.01-87 “Load-bearing and enclosing structures”. But this is from a different area.

In the above second sentence of clause 2.7 of the Methodology, it continues: “... as well as for types of work in mountainous areas performed at an altitude of more than 3500 meters above sea level.” Nothing like this has ever been mentioned before in any of the regulatory documents; this is the first time. But building in the mountains, at high altitudes, in the area of glaciers and mountain passes is probably much more difficult than under normal conditions and on the plain, isn’t it? Consequently, the norms and prices should also differ.

In Appendix 1 to the Methodology, in the tables of coefficients for the norms of labor costs, wages of workers, norms of time and costs for operating machines, increasing coefficients are given for the construction and repair of objects in mountainous areas, separately at an altitude of 1500 to 2500 m, from 2500 to 3000 m, from 3000 to 3500 m, but this will be discussed below when we consider these tables.

Further, paragraph 2.7 of the Methodology ends with the following sentence: “For such types of work, individual elemental estimate standards or correction factors are developed that take into account the relevant features of the work.” Consequently, it is possible to develop individual standards and prices, or correction (increasing) factors. And this is already simpler, since individual standards and prices will have to be developed for each type of work, and correction (increasing) coefficients can be developed for the main, most common types of work, determining the size of the coefficients as follows - individual estimate standards and prices are developed for these main types works are compared with state elemental estimate standards and unit prices for the same types of work, based on the comparison, correction (increasing) coefficients are derived, after which these coefficients apply to the remaining types of work that are not related to the main ones. This method is much simpler, in its own way it allows you to avoid calculating a large (often prevailing) number of all kinds of small auxiliary work, the total estimated cost of which is often significantly lower than the cost of the main work (hence, possible calculation errors with this method will not have a significant impact on the reliable determination of the estimated cost). cost). Otherwise, the need to calculate a large number of works will scare off the estimators involved in this work due to its labor intensity.

The above applies both to cases of construction in mountainous areas, and to cases of erection of structures and performance of work, for which increased demands are placed on capital, accuracy class and quality.

You should pay attention to the text of the third paragraph of clause 2.2. Methods: “Given that estimate standards are being developed based on averaging principle with flow minimization all necessary resources, it should be taken into account that standards to the side their decreases are not adjusted" This is a very important point. It must be said that in our country, resource consumption rates have always been calculated at a minimum, but it was one thing when before, everything was state-owned, everything was built at the expense of the state, including people who tried to save everywhere and on everything. And it’s a completely different matter when today many objects are being built at the expense of interests that have the right to know what they will get for their money. If, for example, the rate of linoleum consumption when installing linoleum floors is 102.0 m2 per 100 m2 of floor, i.e., only 2% is allocated for losses and waste, it is not difficult to imagine that all linoleum trimmings will lie on the floor in our apartments. Which is what happens in reality. The same is true with rolled roofs, where the standard consumption of rolled materials, taking into account losses, waste, and overlaps, makes us assume that all the scraps of rolled materials will be put into use. And the more scraps that are placed in the roof, the more joints there are. And leaks, as you know, occur precisely at the joints. But investors may not agree with such resource savings at the expense of quality. They are ready to accept the higher (within reasonable limits) cost of linoleum floors and roll roofing, as long as the scraps are not used. But some customer officials are trying to adjust these standards downwards, just to prove their usefulness. And here it is important to imagine the consequences of such decisions.

This phrase was previously absent in the text of methodological and regulatory documents, and its appearance in this Methodology is the first such precedent - less is not possible, but more is possible. Previously, it was always thought the other way around.

It should be noted that the text does not talk about estimated standards, but about estimated standards. This means that the question is posed more broadly. Indeed, in addition to the elemental estimate standards, there are other estimate standards; it is also unacceptable to adjust them downward. Otherwise, some zealous customers are trying to reduce or even eliminate procurement and storage costs from the composition of estimated prices, the standard of which is in the amount 2% has existed from time immemorial and continues to have the right to exist, in an average amount. For more information about this, see the magazine “Estimated Review” No. 2 p. 77 in the “Consultations and Explanations” section.

The technical parts of some GESN collections state that the consumption of materials given in the tables of GESN collections can be taken as standards for write-off. This, for example, is said in clause 1.5 of the main provisions for the use of GESNr-2001 for repair and construction work: “Data on the composition and quantity of resources obtained on the basis of GESNr can be used to determine the duration of work, draw up various technological documentation and write-off of materials.” But what is stated regarding the write-off of materials is fundamentally incorrect. In elemental estimate standards, the consumption of resources, including materials and products, is determined based on the principle of averaging, and this is correct. And when writing off, you should have standards not averaged, but for a specific type of work, that is, production (and not estimated) standards for the consumption of materials. In the book “Estimates for construction work” an example was given when, when concreting columns with a cross section of 30x30 cm, 40x40 cm, 50x50 cm, the estimated consumption rate of formwork panels (or lumber, i.e. boards), taking into account turnover, is given one for everything about everything , and when calculating per 1 m3 of concrete, the consumption of formwork panels for columns with a section of 30x30 cm per 1 m3 of concrete will be the greatest, and for columns with a section of 50x50 cm - the least. So in such cases for the write-off of materials, the averaging principle is not suitable and there must be production standards, with gradation- separately for columns with sections 30x30 cm, 40x40 cm and 50x50 cm. A similar situation is with painting or glazing windows. Windows can be with or without vents, double-hung, triple-hung or single-hung, narrower or wider, with or without sills, and the estimated rates of material consumption both for painting windows and for glazing them are the same, averaged. But production standards for paint or glass consumption must be specified by type of window. And it is no coincidence that in the last paragraph of paragraph 2.5. The methodology says: “Resource indicators obtained on the basis of GESN (meaning all elemental estimate standards - both GESN as such, and GESNr and GESNm) can serve as the basis for production standards for the consumption of materials and their write-off.” Everything is correct, exactly like that. GESN norms can be the basis for the development of production standards for consumption and write-off of materials, but they cannot be the basis directly for write-off of materials for the reasons stated above.

It is worth paying attention to one discrepancy or even a contradiction that took place in the estimate and regulatory framework of GESN-2001. This is the application of coefficients of 1.15 to the norms of labor costs and 1.25 to the operating time of construction machines when performing repairs and reconstruction of buildings and structures, work similar to technological processes in new construction (including costs for the construction of new elements). The last paragraph of paragraph 1.28 of Collection N46 GESN-2001 “Work during the reconstruction of buildings and structures” says: “In this case, the coefficients differentiated by the conditions of work, given in the “General Guidelines for the Application of GESN”, do not apply.” But in the second paragraph of clause 1.13 of the main provisions for the application of GESN-2001 there is no such condition. With the release of the Methodology, this discrepancy has been eliminated, since in the second paragraph clause 4.7. Methodology says: “ Performed during the repair and reconstruction of buildings and structures, work similar to technological processes in new construction should be standardized according to the relevant collections of GESN-2001 for construction and special construction work (except for the standards of the collection of GESN N46 “Work during the reconstruction of buildings and structures”) using coefficients of 1.15 to labor cost standards and 1.25 to the operating time standards for construction machines. The specified coefficients may be used in conjunction with the coefficients given in Appendix N1 to this Methodology.”

So we have quietly approached the issues of applying increasing coefficients that take into account complicating factors in the production of work (people often call them “constraint coefficients,” but there are other coefficients). Such tables were in the estimate and regulatory framework of 1969, 1984, 1991. They are presented in the Methodology, in Appendix N1 to it and are presented much more widely.

Firstly, previously there have always been coefficients that take into account the cramped conditions of work in existing buildings and structures in the presence of harmful working conditions for workers in the main production (and therefore for builders too) - with or without transfer to a shortened working day, at 36. 30 and 24 hour work weeks. But coefficients that take into account these most harmful working conditions, but without constraint, have not been previously presented. But harmful working conditions in themselves are complicating factors in the production of work, especially with a shortened working day and a shortened working week. Now such coefficients are provided.

Secondly, in the Instructions for the use of GESN-2001 for construction and special construction work - MDS 81-28.2001, in the Instructions for the use of GESNm-2001 for installation of equipment - MDS 81-29.2001, as well as in the general instructions for the use of GESNr-2001 increasing coefficients that take into account the production of an existing high-voltage overhead power line (HVTL) in the security zone. But why only near power lines? Is work inside existing transformer substations and distribution points less dangerous? Or work in production workshops near existing electrical equipment. In the Methodology, this point is stated in the following wording: “Construction and other work near objects under high voltage, including in the security zone of an existing overhead power line.” Moreover, in the first paragraph of paragraph 1 of the Notes to the table of coefficients taking into account complicating factors, it is said “Work near live objects also includes work inside existing buildings, the internal wiring in which is not de-energized.”

Many people know how difficult it is to work in the mountains. Both shortness of breath and strength dry up much earlier, and you want to take a break more often. And equipment with an internal combustion engine at altitude, in rarefied air conditions, works less efficiently. But coefficients for labor cost standards have not previously been provided for since the operation of construction machines and mechanisms when working in mountain conditions. Now they are.

The notes to the mentioned tables have been significantly supplemented. We have already talked about working inside buildings with unpowered wiring. In addition, earlier, in applications to similar tables, speaking about cramped conditions, 4 factors were listed, and in the new Methodology, 2 more were added to the above four: during the construction of facilities, when the building density exceeds the standard by 20% or more; during the construction of facilities, when, in accordance with the requirements of safety regulations, the construction organization project provides for restriction of the rotation of the tower crane boom.

The notes also stipulate that harmful production conditions also include work in existing healthcare enterprises (tuberculosis dispensaries, leprosariums, etc.), where, in accordance with current legislation, workers in primary production are provided with a shortened working day.

Both in the previously existing estimate and regulatory frameworks and in the new Methodology, the coefficients taking into account cramped conditions in the presence of hazardous working conditions in open and semi-open areas are set somewhat smaller than in the conditions of work inside buildings and structures. It is understandable when harmful working conditions mean the presence of steam, dust, harmful gases, smoke, etc. - in semi-open and open areas, ventilation is higher and, therefore, the influence of these harmful working conditions is reduced. However, in such harmful working conditions as the presence of lead, zinc, mercury or heavy metal dust or radiation, ventilation cannot reduce the impact of such harmful working conditions, therefore this issue is discussed separately in the appendix.

It should be noted that Appendix No. 1 to the Methodology contains 4 tables of complicating factors:

During construction work;

During repair and construction work;

During commissioning works, which correspond with each other and at the same time have their own characteristics. So, for example, the table of complicating factors during repair and construction work shows increasing coefficients that take into account the repair of existing buildings (including residential buildings) without resettlement, as well as the repair of individual structural elements of buildings located in the built-up city center:

Facade repair;

Repair of complex roofs;

Repair of courtyards and landscaping adjacent to buildings. To be continued.

Candidate of Economic Sciences