The act of delimiting the balance sheet ownership of water supply networks. Disputes regarding the definition of the boundaries of utility networks of the mkd Act on the delimitation of operational responsibilities of Vodokanal

For the operation of industrial, commercial, office buildings and structures, their owners enter into contracts for energy supply, as well as water and heat supply, sanitation, etc. According to the terms of such contracts, subscriber companies receive for a fee, for example, electricity and are required to maintain the relevant networks in technically sound condition , through which utilities are supplied. However, sharing the burden of responsibility under such contracts, or more precisely, determining its boundaries, is not an easy task and in practice leads to numerous disputes between subscriber companies and supplying organizations.

The design of the energy supply contract is a general contractual model within which the supply of various utility resources is carried out. Accordingly, the general rules on energy supply contracts, enshrined in §6 of Chapter 30 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, equally apply to contracts for heat supply, water supply and other contracts for the supply of utility resources by virtue of Art. 548 Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

In addition to the general rules, special rules contained in the relevant regulatory legal acts apply to certain types of such agreements (for example, for a water supply agreement, such a legal act is the Federal Law of December 7, 2011 No. 416-FZ “On Water Supply and Sanitation”).

However, regardless of the type of communal resource being sold (water, thermal energy in hot water, etc.), its supply is carried out within the framework of the same contractual subtype “energy supply agreement”, which belongs to the contractual type “supply agreement”. The latter, in turn, belongs to the contractual type “purchase and sale agreement”. In this regard, in the absence of rules in special laws regulating relations relating to the supply of a certain communal resource, the rules of §1-3 of Chapter 30 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as general provisions on obligations and contracts, can be applied to these contracts.

This article examines the legal positions of the courts on the issue of delimiting the zone of operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership of the subscriber and the energy supply company, which apply equally to all mentioned contracts, taking into account their specifics.

The act of demarcation is of great importance

Subscribers are responsible for carrying out maintenance and repair of their networks either on their own or by contracting organizations. Companies place their power receiving devices on networks that fall within the area of ​​their responsibility under the energy supply agreement, which are part of the general infrastructure of the corresponding complex.

To determine the areas of responsibility of the energy supplying organization and the subscriber company, a document is signed between them called “Act of delimitation of operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership,” in which the parties approve the network layout and who is responsible for what.

Establishing agreed boundaries for the operational responsibilities of the parties and the balance sheet ownership of their facilities is important for owners of buildings and structures, since the volume of their financial obligations depends on this. For example, the subject of proof in cases of collection of debt for payment for electricity actually lost in the electrical networks during its transmission includes establishing the following circumstances:

• ownership of electric grid facilities and the boundaries of balance sheet ownership of networks;
• the fact of the flow of electricity through the power grid;
• methods for recording the volume of electricity at the entrance to the power grid and at the exit from it;
• the amount (quantitative value) of electricity supplied to the network;
• the amount (quantitative value) of electricity leaving the network (the total value of the volume of useful output supplied to consumers and the volume transferred to adjacent electrical networks);
• the difference between the two previous values, which will amount to the loss;
• arrears of payment, calculated as the difference between the cost of lost electricity and the amount of payment actually made for it.

These circumstances, as well as the evidence on which the court’s conclusions are based, are indicated in the reasoning part of the decision (clause 4 of Article 170 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). In this case, priority is given to determining the volume of energy resources (including the amount of losses in networks) using metering devices (Determination of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 15, 2014 in case No. 308-ES14-91, A53-16593/2013).

Conflicts in determining the boundaries of responsibility

As practice shows, subscriber companies often refuse the version of the act in the form in which energy supply organizations propose it for signing, believing that they unreasonably expand the companies’ area of ​​responsibility. Energy supply organizations in their variants provide for the zone of responsibility of subscribers not on the boundaries of objects belonging to them (for example, along the outer part of the wall of a building or structure), but a little further than these boundaries, assigning a longer area to subscribers.

Subscribers who disagree with this approach refer the disagreements that have arisen to the court for consideration in accordance with Art. 445 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and if the agreement is concluded, they wait until the end of its validity period in order to change the existing procedure. Often, disputes also arise in situations where the act of delimiting operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership is not signed at all. Let's look at what to consider in such cases.

In relation to such a service as the supply of thermal energy in hot water, the obligation to carry out scheduled repairs (routine and capital) by the person in charge of the heating networks in accordance with the act of delimiting balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility follows, in particular, from the following regulatory legal acts: Civil Code of the Russian Federation (Part 2), Standard instructions for the technical operation of heating networks of public heating systems, approved. by order of the Gosstroy of Russia dated December 13, 2000 No. 285 “On approval of the Standard Instructions for the technical operation of heat networks of public heating systems” (subclause 6.4—6.5), Rules for the technical operation of thermal power plants, approved. by order of the Ministry of Energy of Russia dated March 24, 2003 No. 115 (clause 2.1.5).

To establish the subscriber's area of ​​responsibility, the content of the agreement signed between him and the energy supply organization with the act of delimiting operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership is taken into account. This takes into account how the border of the zones of responsibility lies, which sections of the heating main are transferred to the jurisdiction of each of the parties, the actual order of relationships between them in this regard, the operation of networks exclusively for the needs of one subscriber and their non-use as intermediate networks for the needs of other subscribers, etc. .d.

Thus, in one case, the court found that the subscriber actually consumes and can consume heat energy only through the use of a disputed section of the heating main connected to the network of the energy supply organization. Therefore, this section of the heating main is actually the subscriber’s connected network, and it is the subscriber’s responsibility to maintain it in good condition and carry out repairs as necessary (Appeal ruling of the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court dated November 21, 2012 in case No. 33-8692/2012).

The fact that the subscriber has been fulfilling the energy supply agreement for consumers of thermal energy in hot water for a long time without objection will also testify in favor of the energy supplying organization, and before it, agreements of similar content and with identical acts of delimitation of operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership were previously concluded.

At the same time, accompanying documents, for example, a situational plan of the land plot, which shows the layout of the heating main, are not important for resolving the issue of determining the area of ​​responsibility of the parties to the energy supply agreement. The mentioned documents serve the purpose of determining the boundaries of the location of the heating main and the location of the heating networks and do not themselves determine the balance sheet affiliation of sections of the heating main.

If the act of delimitation of operational responsibility is not signed, the court takes into account the balance sheet ownership of the networks, that is, it will determine who exactly they belong to. The ownership of the networks by the subscriber can follow from the design documentation for the object belonging to him, which included a section of the heating main, accounting of networks as part of the subscriber's fixed assets, the presence of signed acts of acceptance and transfer of objects, etc.

Changing areas of responsibility can be discussed when concluding a new contract

The presence of certain zones of operational responsibility in the energy supply agreement does not deprive the subscriber, upon expiration of the validity period of this agreement and when discussing the draft of a new agreement, from presenting his objections to the border of the balance sheet ownership of heating networks.

In Section 1 of the Rules for Accounting for Heat Energy and Coolant, approved. Ministry of Fuel and Energy of Russia 12.09.95 No. VK-4936, it is stipulated that the boundary of the balance sheet ownership of heating networks is the line of division of elements of heating networks between owners on the basis of ownership, lease or full economic management.

In accordance with clause 1.9 of the order of the Gosstroy of Russia dated December 13, 2000 No. 285, the balance sheet boundary is the line dividing the elements of heat supply systems on the basis of ownership or other legal basis, and the boundary of operational responsibility is the line dividing the elements of the heat supply system on the basis of duties (responsibility) for operation certain elements of heat supply systems, established by agreement of the parties. In the absence of such an agreement, the boundary of operational responsibility is established along the line of balance sheet ownership.

In the absence of an agreement on boundaries, everything is decided by balance sheet ownership

If the corresponding section of the heating main is not taken into account on the subscriber’s balance sheet as fixed assets, then when discussing a draft energy supply contract, the subscriber will be able to insist on establishing in the act the delimitation of operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership not in accordance with a previously approved scheme, but according to the outer wall of the facility owned by him.

If the energy supplying organization refuses to sign an energy supply agreement with the subscriber with a demarcation act along the external wall of the facility, the subscriber will have the right to legally demand the conclusion of an agreement on terms acceptable to itself on the basis of Art. 445 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, since the energy supplying organization does not have the right to evade its conclusion.

If the heating networks along the section of the heating main from the outer part of the subscriber’s facility are not taken into account by the subscriber as part of fixed assets, were not transferred to him under an acceptance certificate, are not part of the general infrastructure of the facility owned by him, there is no basis for establishing a zone of operational responsibility in this place, since in the absence of balance sheet ownership of the corresponding part of the heating networks, operational responsibility could only be established by an energy supply agreement.

Thus, in one case, when establishing the zone of operational responsibility of the subscriber for the outer part of the wall of an apartment building, the court proceeded from the fact that the energy supply organization did not provide evidence in the case file indicating that:

• the disputed sections of the network (from the outer border of the wall of apartment buildings to the thermal chambers) belong to the composition of the common property of citizens living in apartment buildings;
• about the presence of the will of the owners to change the boundaries of operational responsibility;
• the disputed sections of the network outside the wall of the house are used exclusively for the needs of this house (intended to supply energy exclusively to this apartment building).

Acts on connection, delimitation of balance sheet ownership, which are drawn up upon completion of the technological connection to the heating networks and signed by the parties to the technological connection agreement, were also absent, as well as evidence that the common property of the owners of the premises of an apartment building includes a land plot located outside the perimeter of the buildings.

During the consideration of the dispute, the energy supply organization referred to the fact that the networks also do not belong to it.

But the court noted that the absence of documents drawn up in the prescribed manner confirming the fact of the transfer of the disputed sections of heating networks into municipal ownership is not a basis for assigning responsibilities for the maintenance of these sections of networks to the company managing the apartment building, which is not their legal owner (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Ural District dated 10/16/2013 No. F09-10246/13 in case No. A60-2413/2013).

The court made a similar conclusion in another case: the absence of heating networks in the list of municipal property does not in itself indicate that these networks do not belong to municipal property. In addition, the absence of duly executed documents on municipal ownership of these networks is not a basis for imposing the responsibility for the maintenance of such networks on a subscriber who is not their copyright holder (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District dated December 7, 2009 No. F03-6856/2009 in case No. A04-1814/2009).

In another case, the court noted that the disputed networks were not on the subscriber’s balance sheet and were not an element of the building owned by him. The energy supply organization did not provide evidence that these networks were created as an integral (servicing) part of this building, and therefore the court rejected its argument that responsibility for the maintenance of these networks under the terms of the energy supply agreement should fall on the subscriber (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District dated June 28, 2013 No. F03-2673/2013 in case No. A59-3781/2012).

Tools for putting pressure on subscribers

At the same time, in the event of a refusal to accept heating networks on the balance sheet when concluding a new contract, it should be taken into account that the energy supplying organization will have the right to take into account its costs for maintenance, repair, and operation of such networks when setting tariffs for the supply of thermal energy in hot water on the basis of Art. 8 and 15 of the Federal Law of July 27, 2010 No. 190-FZ “On Heat Supply,” which will lead to an increase in the cost of services for the supply of thermal energy in hot water for the subscriber.

The energy supplying organization also has the right to present to the subscriber for reimbursement its costs for the repair and restoration of heating networks, since the deterioration of their condition occurred during the period when they were in the area of ​​its operational responsibility. This right to reimbursement of costs and the corresponding obligation of the subscriber arise from the terms of the energy supply contract and the provisions of Art. 15 Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

In addition, the energy supplying organization will be able to use other instruments of pressure on the subscriber, making it economically unprofitable for him to return the heating networks to its jurisdiction.

For example, if, along with the main networks, a section of the heating main runs through intermediate networks, which the energy supply organization uses to supply heat to the subscriber in the event that the main networks require repairs, it may stop using them.

This is possible if the subscriber refuses to include in the zone of his operational responsibility a section of the heating main from the outer wall of his property. The energy supplying organization may simply not provide an intermediate network, given that there is a main network made specifically for the subscriber.

As for the main network, the utility may refuse to use the network to supply heat until the customer has paid the costs of correcting the deficiencies. For example, citing a possible breakdown of networks due to their poor technical condition, which will deprive the subscriber of heat supply.

As can be seen in the above situation, even if the subscriber refuses to include in his operational responsibility the section of the heating main from the outer wall of his property, the subscriber will still be obliged to repair the heating networks, and he will pay for thermal energy at an increased tariff. In addition, it is possible that the energy supplying organization may disconnect the subscriber from intermediate networks, which makes refusal to prolong the energy supply contract with the approved act of delimitation of operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership impractical.

How to determine the boundaries of balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility in a resource supply agreement? Is it possible to change them against the will of the RSO if the corresponding acts were previously signed by the subscriber?

Utility service providers from different regions of the country turn to our company for legal assistance when disputes arise with RSO in the process of concluding and executing contracts. Most of the disputes arise regarding the determination of the delivery points of the relevant resource and the boundaries of operational responsibility under the contract. In order to reduce losses on networks, RSOs strive to establish the delivery point as far as possible from the end consumer, which is absolutely unprofitable for the other party to the contract, since in addition to losses, the manager of the apartment building also bears the burden of maintaining such utility networks.

Using the accumulated experience in similar cases, we will consider a method for legally determining delivery points and the boundaries of the operational responsibilities of the parties. Thanks to the recent determination of the RF Armed Forces, this has become possible in relation to already concluded agreements.

Concepts and regulations

The concepts of delivery points, as well as the boundaries of balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility are presented in legislative acts regulating the procedure for supplying the corresponding resource:

• in the Rules for the Organization of Heat Supply (approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 08.08.2012 No. 808);
• in the Hot Water Supply Rules (approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 29, 2013 No. 642);
• in the Rules for cold water supply and sanitation (approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 29, 2013 No. 644);
• in the Rules for the supply of gas to meet the household needs of citizens (approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 21, 2008 No. 549);
• in the Basic Provisions for the Functioning of Retail Electricity Markets (approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated May 4, 2012 No. 442).

Despite the fact that in the listed legislative acts the concepts of the point of delivery and the boundaries of balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility differ, their essence still boils down to the following.

Delivery point– the place of fulfillment of the obligations of the RSO, which is located at the place of installation of the control center, and in its absence, at the border of the balance sheet.

Balance sheet limit– the boundary between networks based on ownership.

Operational Responsibility Limit– the boundary of division of networks based on the imposition of the burden of maintenance, which runs along the boundary of the balance sheet, unless the parties to the agreement have agreed otherwise.

Changing boundaries with the consent of the owners

The provisions of the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, the Rules for the provision of utility services, as well as the Rules for the maintenance of common property regulate the relationship under the resource supply agreement, since it is concluded by the utility provider with the RSO for the purpose of providing utility services to citizens. In accordance with the Housing Code of the Russian Federation, under an apartment management agreement, the executor is responsible to the owners for the maintenance of common property in the house.

The common property of the owners of premises in an apartment building includes, among other things, engineering communications located inside the house (clauses 5 – 7 of the Rules for the maintenance of common property) or outside it on a land plot that is part of the common property in an apartment building (clause “g” clause 2 of the Rules for the maintenance of common property), and intended for the maintenance of this house.

In accordance with clause 7 of the Rules for the maintenance of common property, the control center is installed at the border of the networks that are part of the common property of the owners of premises in the apartment building, and refers to the common property.

According to clause 8 of the Rules for the maintenance of common property, the external boundary of the networks that are part of the common property is the external boundary of the wall of the apartment building, and the boundary of operational responsibility in the presence of the control center of the corresponding communal resource is the place of connection of the meter with the corresponding engineering network of the apartment building. An agreement between the owners of the premises and the utility service provider or RSO may establish a different limit of operational responsibility.

Consequently, the boundary of the balance sheet is the outer boundary of the wall of an apartment building or the boundary of a land plot in the case when the boundaries of the plot are determined on the basis of state cadastral registration data and when the utility networks located within the boundaries of this land plot serve exclusively one house. The boundary of balance sheet ownership is at the same time the boundary of operational responsibility, unless the owners of the premises have established a different boundary.

The installation location of the control unit is the boundary of the networks that are part of the common property in the apartment building.

There are differences regarding the outer boundary of the gas supply networks: this is the point of connection of the first shut-off device with the external gas distribution network.

Thus, the RSO can change the boundaries of operational responsibility only by agreement with the owners of premises in the apartment building, who have signed acts of delimitation of operational responsibility with boundaries that go beyond the balance sheet (or have made this decision).

Acts of delimitation

The boundaries of operational responsibility and balance sheet ownership are established by the parties when concluding an agreement and determine which areas of engineering equipment will be serviced by the utility service provider. In order to avoid disputes during the execution of the contract with RSO, we recommend that performers sign the above-mentioned acts at the stage of concluding the contract. The following must be taken into account.

Acts of delimitation of balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility are signed by the parties in the process of technological connection of consumer networks to RSO networks; they can also be signed (in the absence of previously drawn up acts) in the process of concluding an agreement with RSO.

In accordance with Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated August 13, 2006 No. 491, local self-government bodies must determine the boundaries of the land plot related to the common property of the house for each apartment building. The boundaries of the land plot that is part of the common property in the MKD determine the boundaries of balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility, which must be recorded in the relevant acts with the RSO. Consequently, if the boundaries of a land plot are larger than the area of ​​​​the apartment building, the maintenance of engineering communications passing through this land plot is assigned to the management company on the basis of a management agreement.

If state cadastral registration has not been carried out in relation to the land plot, the boundary of the balance sheet of the networks is the external wall of the apartment building.

Ownerless networks

Quite often, utility networks are not the responsibility of any party to a resource supply agreement, that is, they are ownerless. Who is responsible for maintaining these networks and paying for losses of utility resources in them?

According to the current legislation, if a section of networks between the MKD networks and the DSO networks is ownerless, when setting the tariff for the DSO, the costs of maintaining, repairing and operating this section of the networks are taken into account. This is what it says:

• in the Federal Law of July 27, 2010 No. 190-FZ “On Heat Supply” (Part 4, Article 8, Parts 5, 6, Article 15);
• in the Federal Law of December 7, 2011 No. 416-FZ “On Water Supply and Sanitation” (Parts 5, 6, Article 8);
• in the Federal Law of March 26, 2003 No. 35-FZ “On Electric Power Industry” (Part 4, Article 28).

It is illegal to blame consumers and providers of utility services for losses of utility resources in ownerless sections of networks. This conclusion regarding electricity losses was made in the Decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated October 28, 2013 No. VAS-10864/13.

We establish the boundaries of utility networks according to the law

When concluding an agreement with RSO

The ideal option for the manager of an apartment building is to establish legal boundaries of operational responsibility when concluding an agreement with the RSO. But how can this be achieved if the RSO insists on different boundaries of responsibility? The manager should not rush to sign acts delineating operational responsibilities on illegal terms.

In accordance with civil law, a contract is considered concluded if an agreement is reached between the parties on all the essential terms of the contract. The legislator also included the condition on the limit of operational responsibility as an essential condition of the energy supply agreement. This condition is agreed upon by the parties by signing an act of delineation of operational responsibilities.

Consequently, if RSO proposes to conclude an agreement with an act of delimitation of operational responsibility, in which the boundaries go beyond the common property of the owners of premises in the apartment building, it is necessary to sign such an agreement with a protocol of disagreements regarding the boundaries of responsibility. In the protocol of disagreements, it is necessary to indicate the condition on the boundaries of operational responsibility with reference to clause 8 of the Rules for the maintenance of common property: the boundary of operational responsibility runs along the outer boundary of the wall of the apartment building (the boundary of the land plot that is in the common shared ownership of the owners of the premises in the house).

When considering disputes regarding the settlement of disagreements when concluding energy supply contracts, the courts approve such contracts in relation to the conditions on the boundaries of operational responsibility. Examples from practice include the decisions of the Supreme Court AS of November 19, 2015 in case No. A29-10092/2014, the ZSO AS of November 9, 2015 in case No. A75-1441/2015, the SKO AS of December 11, 2015 in case No. A25-953/2014 .

If the network boundaries are not agreed upon in the agreement with RSO

If the parties did not go to court to resolve disagreements when concluding a resource supply agreement and the protocol of disagreements remained unsigned by the RSO, if disputes arise regarding the volumes of supplied resources and the limits of responsibility, the agreement will not be recognized by the court as not concluded, since the condition on the limits of operational responsibility can be regulated by law.

In Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 7, 2010 No. 3409/10, the court came to the conclusion that the absence of an act of delimitation of balance sheet ownership agreed upon by the parties cannot indicate that the parties did not conclude an agreement. In the absence of an act of delimitation of the operational responsibilities of the parties, the boundary of operational responsibility is established according to the balance sheet, and the latter is determined on the basis of ownership.

If the agreement with RSO establishes network boundaries not according to the law

As a rule, an agreement is concluded for a certain period and is considered extended on the same terms if neither party declares within a certain period of time its intention to conclude an agreement on new terms.

In the manner established by the resource supply agreement, the utility service provider has the right to declare termination of the agreement and the conclusion of a new agreement on different terms. In the new agreement, he will be able to achieve agreement on the boundaries in the wording he proposed (if necessary, in court).

Recognition by the court of the terms of the agreement on establishing the boundaries of networks as void

Now let’s consider the option when, when concluding an agreement with RSO, in the acts of delimitation of balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility, boundaries were agreed upon that went beyond the common property of the owners of premises in the apartment building, and in the process of executing the agreement, the parties had a dispute about payment for heat losses.

By the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 21, 2015 in case No. 305-ES15-11564, the case was sent for a new trial to the court of first instance with recommendations to establish whether there was an expression of will of the owners of the premises in the apartment building to move the balance sheet boundary beyond the outer boundary of the wall of the apartment building and change the composition common property.

When reconsidering the case, the court of first instance found that the act of delimiting balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility was inconsistent with mandatory rules of law, as well as the absence of a decision by the owners to classify the disputed section of utility networks as common property. The agreement with RSO regarding the delineation of operational responsibility was declared void, RSO was refused to recover losses from the management company for the disputed section of the networks.

Arbitration courts, when considering such disputes, already use this definition of the Supreme Court and make decisions to impose on RSO the burden of maintaining and servicing utility networks outside the common property of the owners of premises in apartment buildings, as well as the obligation to pay for losses on such networks. For example, in the decisions of the Eleventh Arbitration Court of Appeal dated 04/20/2016 in case No. A72-9399/2015, the Fifteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated 04/05/2016 in case No. A53-23569/2014, the Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Ulyanovsk Region dated 01/27/2016 in case No. A72-9399/2015, when adopting judicial acts, the arbitrators referred to the above-mentioned determination of the RF Armed Forces.

The points of supply of utility resources (regardless of the presence or absence of public utility facilities) must be located on the border of the balance sheet, which runs along the border of the common property of the owners of premises in the apartment building.

The boundary of operational responsibility runs along the boundary of the balance sheet, unless a different boundary is agreed upon by the parties to the resource supply agreement in the relevant act and unless there is a decision by the owners to move the boundary.

The easiest way to coordinate the boundaries of utility networks is during the process of concluding a contract, including in court.

The terms of the concluded agreement and signed acts of delimitation, which contradict the rules binding on the parties to the resource supply agreement, are void in the absence of a decision by the owners of the premises in the apartment building to establish other boundaries of the common property in the apartment building.

Made in response to a claim by a heat supply organization against the management company for the recovery of losses in the network section from the installation site of the control unit (pipeline entry point into the apartment building) to the balance sheet boundary, defined in the delimitation act as the point of exit (tie-in) of the pipeline with coolant from the central heating substation.

The act of delimiting balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility of water supply and sewerage networks is otherwise called in abbreviation RBP or ARBP.

What is and what does the act of delimitation contain?

Before answering these questions, you need to understand the concepts of these terms, namely what it distinguishes and from whom!
Everyone knows that utility networks, be it sewerage, electricity or water supply network have owners. If you own a plot of land or a house, you have already completed the initial permitting documentation for connecting your property to the water and sewerage utility network (water supply or sewerage), then you will definitely encounter this problem drawing up an act.
As a rule, main water supply networks belong to the city and the municipality maintains and repairs them. You ask for a connection point in one of the sections of their network and draw pipelines for yourself to connect to water. It is precisely the section from the point of insertion to your house that will be on your balance sheet; it is you who will have to maintain and repair it at your own expense, no matter what happens at your service area. That's why act of demarcation must contain information about boundaries balance sheet and operational responsibility. These areas are shown schematically on topographic surveys at a scale of M1:500, 1:1000 or 1:2000.

What is the boundary of operational responsibility?

This is the area that is schematically indicated in the deed, which must be exploited by the owner. In this case - to you. Often the network company tries to push this boundary as far away from itself as possible in order to place responsibility for a possible accident on YOU.

What is needed to compile an ARBP

You will need a topographic survey, a copy of the technical specifications and a design solution for connecting the facility to the networks. It must be approved by the network company.

Where can I get it and who does the BPR act?

Act of dividing the boundaries of water supply networks You can order from us, just call and make an appointment. Cost of the balance sheet delineation act not high and ranges from 1500 to 5000 rubles per set.

One of the most painful issues when concluding contracts with resource supply organizations (RSOs) for HOAs, housing cooperatives and management companies is the delimitation of the operational responsibilities of the parties and the determination of the boundaries of balance sheet ownership. Practice shows that for HOAs and housing cooperatives, this issue often becomes relevant when accidents occur on networks that are not related to the common property of the owners in an apartment building, when, due to a recklessly signed agreement, the responsibility for repairing these networks is assigned to the HOA and housing cooperatives.

In this article you will read:

• How to differentiate between the operational responsibilities of the parties and balance sheet ownership
• Key problems of delimiting the boundaries of small residential buildings

Delimitation of operational responsibilities of the parties, As practice shows, for HOAs and housing cooperatives it often becomes a pressing issue when accidents occur on networks that are not related to the common property of the owners in an apartment building, when, due to a recklessly signed agreement, the responsibility for repairing these networks is assigned to the HOA and housing cooperatives.

Additional meters of engineering communications impose on the management organization (and therefore on the owners of apartment building premises) an additional financial burden for their maintenance and repair, which is sometimes beyond the power of the HOA, and also imply inevitable costs to cover losses of communal resources.

Regulatory regulation of the operational responsibilities of the parties

When considering the issue of delimiting the operational responsibilities of the parties, you should first of all turn to the Civil Code, which governs all energy supply contracts. According to Art. 539 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under an energy supply agreement, the energy supplying organization undertakes to supply energy to the subscriber (consumer) through the connected network, and the subscriber undertakes to pay for the received energy, as well as to comply with the regime of its consumption stipulated in the agreement, to ensure the safe operation of the energy networks under its control and the serviceability of the devices used by it and equipment related to energy consumption.

An energy supply contract is concluded with the subscriber if he has a power receiving device that meets the established technical requirements, connected to the networks of the energy supply organization, and other necessary equipment, as well as providing metering of energy consumption.

Division of operational responsibilities of the parties and balance sheet attribution

Basic concepts. In the listed acts, the concept of the boundaries of operational responsibility invariably stands next to the concept of the boundaries of balance sheet ownership, while a general definition for neither one nor the other is not enshrined in the legislation. Meanwhile, there are a number of definitions within the framework of regulation of various energy supply contracts.

So, in accordance with clause 1 of the Water Supply Rules:

• balance sheet boundary - the line of division of elements of water supply and (or) sewerage systems and structures on them between owners on the basis of ownership, economic management or operational management;
• operational responsibility line - the line dividing elements of water supply and (or) sewerage systems (water supply and sewerage networks and structures on them) on the basis of duties (responsibility) for the operation of elements of water supply and (or) sewerage systems, established by agreement of the parties. In the absence of such an agreement, the boundary of operational responsibility is established along the line of balance sheet ownership. Regarding the supply of thermal energy, there is no such definition at all, but paragraph 31 of the letter of the Federal Tariff Service of Russia dated 02.18.2005 No. SN-570/14 states that supplied thermal energy is thermal energy supplied to the thermal energy consumer (consumers) at the border of operational responsibility ( balance sheet).

Thus, the boundary of balance sheet ownership when concluding resource supply agreements for apartment buildings is always the external boundary of the wall of such a house, and the boundary of operational responsibility is not established imperatively - it can:

• established by agreement of the parties;
• coincide with the point of connection of the collective (common building) metering device with the corresponding utility network included in the apartment building;
• coincide with the border of the balance sheet (for owners of apartment buildings this is the external wall of the house).

• Conclusion of an agreement with the North Ossetia during the transition period: features and new rules

Litigation regarding the delimitation of operational responsibilities of the parties

An analysis of legislation and judicial practice allows us to conclude that if there is no agreement between the management organization and the RSO on the issue of determining the boundary of operational responsibility, the latter is determined by the boundary of the balance sheet, which is the external wall of the apartment building.

Any building, without a certain internal filling and all those housing and communal services without which we now cannot imagine our lives, is in itself something like an empty box. It doesn’t matter whether it’s an apartment building or a private mansion, a manufacturing plant or an office space - they all need certain services: heating, electricity, water.

At this stage, special organizations are engaged in providing the building with these benefits: management companies (management companies), HOA (Home Owners Association) and other commercial organizations. They are responsible for concluding agreements on the supply of certain services with resource companies on behalf of the owners of square meters of a given house. It should be noted that resources do not appear out of nowhere, but come through pipes, wires, etc. It seems simple, but when these supply lines break down, the question arises as to who should be responsible for repairing them.

The act of demarcation and responsibility

According to the norms of civil law of the Russian Federation, it is possible to determine responsibility for the preservation and operation of supply routes for housing and communal services only by reading the information contained in the act of delimiting balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility. In order to understand this legal concept, you first need to clarify the auxiliary terms:

Boundary Rules

With modern technologies, finding the approximate content of a particular regulatory act is not a problem. The corresponding thematic sites are filled with samples of the necessary documents.

Table of engineering systems and responsibilities of the parties

After the demarcation act is concluded, a lease agreement for the relevant housing and communal services must be concluded between the parties. The owner of the home will be assigned a personal financial account through which he will pay utility bills. The resource supply company, in turn, undertakes to supply the goods necessary for modern life. And if there is a breakdown of communication lines, then the responsibility for its well-being will be borne by the party specified in the act of delimiting balance sheet ownership and operational responsibility.