Chebotarev, Gull, and Rostec split up Moscow’s waste disposal sector: the victor companies in Ekotechprom’s debated bids secured assets worth 230 billion rubles
- 07.01.2026 07:39
In September, ten tenders under Federal Law No. 223, launched on August 18, 2021, by Moscow’s state-run solid waste operator Ecotechprom, were finalized. Together, the winning companies will receive approximately 230 billion rubles.
In return, they will collect and dispose of waste from all administrative districts of the capital until the end of the current decade. Experts see signs of collusion between the bidders and the customer during the tenders and warn of the risk of unjustified tariff increases in the city.
What this is about
Ecotechprom was appointed Moscow’s regional waste management operator on May 13, 2021, for a term lasting until December 31, 2029. Its responsibilities include organizing waste removal beyond the scope of the existing 15-year contracts concluded in 2014, which mainly concern apartment buildings. The tenders announced by Ecotechprom in August for all districts of the capital contained no details as to where the waste would be collected from or transported to. Apparently, the tender winners are expected to follow the territorial waste management scheme approved in December 2019.
According to that scheme, by the end of 2029 Moscow will transport more than 15 million tons of waste to Kaluga Region and about 9 million tons to Vladimir Region. The scheme also notes that Moscow’s waste will be sorted and disposed of at 11 waste processing complexes in the Moscow Region (including those in Yegoryevsk, Kashira, Kolomna, Roshal, and the villages of Khrabrovo, Yasenevo, Shemetovo, and Annino). Starting in 2022, waste was planned to be sent to four waste-to-energy plants in Naro-Fominsk, Solnechnogorsk, Voskresensk, and Noginsk (350,000 tons annually each).
In total, according to the agreement with the Moscow Region, 3.4 million tons of waste from Moscow will be sent there by 2030.
The largest initial maximum contract price was set for the Southern Administrative District — almost 42.5 billion rubles. For the Central District it was 28.3 billion rubles, and for the Northern District 25.8 billion rubles. Details are shown in the table.
Who won: familiar faces
During the tenders, bids were submitted at the maximum price or with only a minimal discount, as a result of which the total value of the contracts will amount to about 230 billion rubles. At the same time, only two bidders submitted applications for each procurement, with some of them switching places and withdrawing from bidding.
This occurred in the most expensive procurement in the Southern District and in the procurement for waste removal from the Troitsky and Novomoskovsky administrative districts (worth 10.3 billion rubles). Applications were submitted by the Group of Companies “Modern Environmental Technologies” (GC MET) and Kombinat. The first bidder reduced the price in the first procurement by 4 million rubles and in the second by 2 million rubles. The second submitted a price offer equal to the initial maximum contract price and predictably lost.
Ecoline is affiliated with the founder of the gold-mining company GeoProMining and co-owner of the Shokoladnitsa chain, Siman Povarennykh.
Photo: Alexandra Krasnova / ITAR-TASS
At the same time, a closer look at the information on the founders and general directors of the companies shows overlaps between them. The same occurred in other procurements. In particular, Ecoline, Gorodskoy Tranzit, and MKM-Logistika competed with each other and swapped places. Gorodskoy Tranzit and MKM-Logistika shared the same general director. MKM-Logistika is part of the Ecoline group.
As a result, six companies won the tenders:
Ecoline (total contract value — 54.1 billion rubles),
Group of Companies “Modern Environmental Technologies” (52.8 billion rubles),
MKM-Logistika (46.9 billion rubles),
Khartiya (38.6 billion rubles),
MSK-NT (22.9 billion rubles),
and Spetstrans (13 billion rubles).
Given that MKM-Logistika belongs to Ecoline, the undisputed leader of Moscow’s waste market remains the same, receiving contracts totaling over 100 billion rubles.
The company is affiliated with the founder of GeoProMining and co-owner of Shokoladnitsa, Siman Povarennykh. Second place goes to GC MET, owned by businessmen Andrey Burenkov and Kirill Popov and, according to media reports, linked to Rostec. Third place goes to Khartiya, owned by Igor Chaika, the son of Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika.
Signs of violations
Alexander Kulakov, chairman of the public organization STOP Cartel and activist of the ONF Investigations Bureau, believes that the conducted tenders show signs of collusion.
“The fact that in all procurements only two participants submitted bids, that some participants swapped places and withdrew from bidding by submitting price offers at the maximum price, may indicate pre-planned actions agreed upon by all participants to select procurements in which a specific participant would take part and win,” he says.
According to the expert, a thorough analysis of the procurements allows one to speak of signs of violations of Russian legislation (in particular, clauses 1, 2, and 3 of part 1 of Article 11, clause 3 of part 4 of Article 11, and Articles 10 and 15–17 of Federal Law No. 135-FZ of July 26, 2006 “On Protection of Competition”).
“These violations amount to restricting competition, coordination by the tender organizer of the participants’ activities, creation of preferential conditions for certain participants (for example, through lot enlargement), maintaining the initial maximum price, and ultimately dividing the municipal solid waste market in Moscow.”
Alexander Kulakov, Chairman of the public organization STOP Cartel
Kulakov believes that the agreements reached may cause damage to an unlimited number of consumers and to the customer’s budget, as they will result in inflated waste removal tariffs, including for budget institutions such as schools and hospitals.
“The peak of lawlessness”
Sergey Krekov, leader of the People’s Housing and Utilities party, believes that Moscow’s waste market is, in principle, “the peak of lawlessness” in the city’s housing and utilities sector.
“Everything is turned upside down. The waste reform assumes that the entire country pays either per square meter or per person. We conducted studies by region. One third calculates per capita, two thirds per square meter. But Moscow has been taken out of this framework — waste removal is not charged as a separate line item here but is included in the ‘Maintenance and Operation’ tariff. As a result, while the Federal Antimonopoly Service strictly controls tariffs in the regions, this does not happen in Moscow. Since the waste reform provisions do not apply in the capital, the FAS cannot directly control or assess waste removal activities as falling under antimonopoly law. Only whether competitive procedures were violated is assessed. If there were no complaints from participants, then everything is considered fine,” he says.
In Moscow, waste removal is not charged as a separate line item but is included in the “Maintenance and Operation” category, which prevents the FAS from strictly controlling tariffs.
Photo: Maxim Grigoriev / TASS
According to the expert, questions also remain as to how the contract prices were determined.
“For such a time horizon, there is no inflation index, no rates, and no understanding of how the volume of waste removed may realistically change. One can only assume that this figure was invented. The main idea of these procurements is to lock in companies and the city’s obligations to them. The city is effectively burdened with long-term commitments. This is a neat business scheme and a public mockery of common sense.”
Krekov believes that challenging the conducted tenders is practically impossible, since this would require complaints to be filed with the FAS by dissatisfied direct participants in the procurements.
Indeed, according to Oktagon, at least one complaint from a legal entity was sent to the central office of the FAS, but since that entity had not submitted an application to participate in the tenders, the complaint was ignored.
Author: Maria Sharapova
