Challenging Aspects of the Legal Support of Security in the Operation of Main Gas Pipelines

Despite some intensification of the development of energy laws, the legal regime of main gas pipelines as objects of operating relations is characterized by gaps and legal uncertainty elements, which entails the appearance of controversial situations and causes an imbalance of interests of energy markets players. The author singles out the most acute legal regulation problems, reviews the possible options for the further development of the legal support of the operation of main gas pipelines taking into account the available law enforcement practice. The paper concludes that it is expedient to study the raised problems further and unify the provisions governing the operation of main gas pipelines.

Keywords

energy law, legal regime of power facilities as operation facilities, minimum distance zones

Received

01.09.2021

Publication date

30.09.2021

Number of characters

10887

Cite Download pdf

GOST	Zhukovskaya M. Challenging Aspects of the Legal Support of Security in the Operation of Main Gas Pipelines // Energy law forum – 2021. – Issue 3 C. 69-72 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://mlcjournal.ru/S231243500022469-3-1 (circulation date: 27.04.2024). DOI: 10.18572/2410-4396-2021-3-69-72
MLA	Zhukovskaya, Maria V "Challenging Aspects of the Legal Support of Security in the Operation of Main Gas Pipelines." Energy law forum 3 (2021):69-72. DOI: 10.18572/2410-4396-2021-3-69-72
APA	Zhukovskaya M. (2021). Challenging Aspects of the Legal Support of Security in the Operation of Main Gas Pipelines. Energy law forum (3), pp.69-72 DOI: 10.18572/2410-4396-2021-3-69-72


1	The Russian Federation is one of the largest gas suppliers on the world market. The domestic economy of the country largely depends on gas supplied for the needs of enterprises, organizations and the population.
2	Gas is transported for export and across the country through main pipelines.
3	Ensuring security during gas transportation is a guarantee of the timely fulfillment of all undertaken obligations, safety of life and health of the population of the country and protection of the environment. The content of the legal regime of main pipelines, the zones of the minimum distance to infrastructure facilities arouse fair interest in legal publications [1].
4	In this article, the author studies challenging aspects of the legal support of the operation of gas pipelines.
5	These challenging aspects include the following: 1) existing violations of the minimum distance zones (MDZ) preventing the operation of gas transportation system facilities at the maximum discharge capacity. I will not rest separately on the causes of such violations, I will only note that despite the fact that the legislator has classified the minimum distance zones as zones with special conditions of territories (ZSCT), the Government of the Russian Federation has still approved no regulations on a zone with special conditions for the use of the territory of the corresponding type, which keeps in suspense the operating of main gas pipelines put into operation as early as in the 1970s–1980s.
6	In the absence of detailed regulation, we are stuck in a vicious circle: there are coordinates of all MDZs, but the Federal Service for State Registration, Cadastre and Cartography refuses the cadastral registration as municipal or regional authorities provided land plots for construction to citizens and organizations within the borders of such MDZs, and requires a decision of local selfgovernment authorities on the establishment of such MDZs dated as of today, although the pipelines were put into operation more than 30 years ago. Well, and the local selfgovernment authorities do not approve such decisions, of course.
7	Despite the fact that such situation is typical for the entire country, there are regions without any MDZ violations, where such MDZs were registered as early as in 2018–2019.
8	Enterprises operating main gas pipelines are correcting MDZ violations in court. However, it has become more difficult after 2018 as the legislator has provided for compensation for damage caused in the event of demolition of buildings located within an MDZ to protect the owners of buildings, structures and constructions. One of successful solutions in this case is the inducement of owners of land plots and buildings to file claims against the municipalities that provided land plots and issued construction permits for compensation for damage associated with the impossibility to use the existing objects. An organization operating a main gas pipeline acts as a third party in the legal proceedings supporting the plaintiff and submitting evidence that the municipality had no right to allocate the land plot for construction and allow construction. This approach was first applied in 2018. Over the course of two years positive judicial practice standing up at all judicial levels has established. There are satisfied judgments available as well.
9	2) refusal of owners of land plots, where underground pipelines are laid, to provide such land plots for temporary use (lease with compensation for damage caused to agricultural lands, easement, etc.) to carry out scheduled repairs of the main pipeline infrastructure due to the desire to receive the lease and compensation amount exceeding the market average by 2–7 times and the absence of a mechanism in the legal regulation that would promptly induce such owners to document the legal relations concerning the use of a land plot for the period of repair works, which jeopardizes secure operation of the relevant main pipeline section.
10	There are four solutions in such cases: to wait for success in negotiations (this almost never happens); to create a public easement as the required land plot is located in the protected zone of a main gas pipeline. For emergency situations, this is a time-consuming solution (obtainment of a decision on the creation of a public easement from the authorized executive authority; performance of an assessment to establish the easement fee; documentation of the contractual relations with the land plot owner. Plus, the trial period if the owner disagrees with the payment or other easement terms and conditions); to notify the owner of the commencement of works and start such works with no authorization or properly made documents in accordance with Art. 42 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation [2] and Art. 28 of the Federal Law On Gas Supply [3] as a land plot owner may not interfere with the maintenance and repair works in respect of gas supply facilities located on and (or) underneath land plots performed by an organization owing a gas supply facility or its authorized organization. In this case, it is necessary to additionally notify the territorial department of the Federal Service for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Surveillance and the regional prosecutor’s office that the land plot owner poses an obstacle to the performance of works and that the major repair deadlines may not be met. The risks in this situation are as follows: the land plot owner will suspend the works by addressing the law enforcement authorities and the Federal Service for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Surveillance. There may be imposed an administrative fine in the amount of 2 to 3 percent of the cadastral value of the land plot, but not less than one hundred thousand rubles; — to document repair works as an emergency upon subsequent execution of all necessary documents. If the owner disagrees with the calculations and the price, the decision is made by court. In this case, there is a need to notify the Federal Environmental, Industrial and Nuclear Supervision Service of Russia and the EMERCOM, which will react to such message by conducting an unscheduled inspection. This mechanism should only be used in real emergency situations.

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Lipski S.A. Trends in Changing the Legislator’s Approaches to the Establishment and Maintenance of the Legal Regime of Land Plots / S.A. Lipski // Legal Issues of Real Estate. 2019. No. 2. P. 19–23. ; Koryakin V.I. New in the Legal Regulation of the Placement of Infrastructure Facilities / V.I. Koryakin // Property Relations in the Russian Federation. 2016. No. 6. P. 17–30. ; Prikhodko I. Gray Zones (a Commentary on the Judicial Practice on Disputes over Buildings and Land Plots Located near Main Gas Pipelines) / I. Prikhodko // Economy and Law (supplement). 2017. No. 4. P. 3–48.

2. Land Code of the Russian Federation // Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation. 2001. No. 44. Art. 4147.

3. Federal Law No. 69-FZ of March 31, 1999 On Gas Supply in the Russian Federation // Collection of Laws of the Russian Federation. 1999. No. 14. Art. 1667.

4. Order of the EMERCOM of Russia No. 77 of February 27, 2018 On the Approval of a Checklist Form (the List of Control Questions) Used within the Framework of the Federal State Supervision in the Field of Protection of the Population and Territories from Natural and Man-Made Emergencies during Scheduled Inspections to Monitor the Compliance with the Mandatory Requirements in the Field of Protection of the Population and Territories from Natural and Man-Made Emergencies // Official Internet Portal of Legal Information. URL: http://www.pravo.gov.ru, 27.03.2018. ; Order of the EMERCOM of Russia No. 78 of February 27, 2018 On the Approval of a Checklist Form (the List of Control Questions) Used within the Framework of the State Supervision in the Field of Civil Defense during Scheduled Inspections to Monitor the Compliance with the Established Requirements in the Field of Civil Defense // Official Internet Portal of Legal Information. URL: http://www.pravo.gov.ru, March 28, 2018.