The acting Minister of Regional Development and Public Works Nikolay Naydenov revealed irregularities in public procurement for road repair and maintenance. He stopped a dubious order for guardrails for 550 million euros, the technical requirements of which were formulated in such a way as to eliminate all participants except one contractor. “In the public procurement for guardrails, the technical requirements were flawed in order to eliminate all participants and leave only one contractor. I stopped this order, and the report has already been submitted to the acting Minister of Interior Emil Dechev“, he said. Why are guardrails a big topic for roads and road safety… Eng. Yasen Ishev, Chairman of the Management Board of the Scientific and Technical Union for Transport, spoke to FACTI.
- Mr. Ishev, you often claim that the installation of steel guardrails in our country is often justified by “road safety“, but in reality it serves economic interests. 500 million euros for the replacement of guardrails. Who benefits from this model?
- There is a Regulation of the Regional Ministry 02-20-1 of 01.04.2024, which specifies the conditions and procedure for the use of restrictive systems (OS) for roads and the requirements for them. According to the type of material, there are 3 types, steel, reinforced concrete and combined. The indicator of the degree of retention is also important. There are 6 more categories here. Only those who produce, install and repair them win. The biggest fault in this case is the contracting authority API. Are we the smartest not to use reinforced concrete road restraint systems? Look at the neighboring countries, not just them, what is this narrow-mindedness and limitation, I can't explain it...
- In Bulgaria, the minimum permissible distance is widely used when installing guardrails. Is this a compromise with safety?
- The contractors of road restraint systems (RSS) have made the Regulation so that they can now install them where they need to and where they don't... And all under the unshakable pretext of “road safety“. Another question is why 99.9% are steel. The reason that the tests are not good, and the mantra that they are safer, is for the naive, the real reason is something else...
- You say that after installing restraint systems on certain sections, accidents have even increased. How do you explain this paradox?
- By placing guardrails on both sides of a two-lane road, not only the dynamic gauge of the road is significantly reduced, but also the light gauge, which is a prerequisite for reducing the throughput capacity of the road, but also a prerequisite for increasing accidents, especially serious ones for obvious reasons.
- Why do you think concrete restraint systems, which are widely used in Europe and the USA, are almost absent in Bulgaria?
- Concrete and reinforced concrete restraint systems, especially in the median dividing strips of motorways and expressways, naturally “discipline“ drivers, make them more careful, concentrated and focused. And they last longer over time because they do not require maintenance and are cheaper. I think the answer is quite clear.
- Is it possible for the choice of the type of guardrail to be determined not by expert criteria, but by the Contracting Authority – for example, the RIA?
- Everything is in the hands of the Contracting Authority, who is clearly out of place, and someone else dictates to him what to do under the plausible pretext of "road safety". The steel security systems on the motorways, which are 100% complete, only open up work for certain companies to absorb funds. But, while the damaged guardrails are being repaired, which requires at least 2 months, safety in the section has deteriorated.
- You call the installation of steel guardrails "the easiest, but unsuitable option". What are the risks of this approach for drivers?
- At forums and round tables in the Scientific & Technical Union for Transport (NTST), an organization, a long-standing member of the Federation of Scientific and Technical Unions (FNTS) in Bulgaria, we have discussed and made proposals to the RIA and the MRDPW in the Final Documents that we send to them. There it is clearly written by our experts and after analyzing the problems and the discussions held, what should be done as a priority, but we do not see things improving. I am not talking only about restrictive systems on the roads, but also in road safety, in general and in other pressing road problems. It turns out that the reported 456 victims on the roads from road accidents in 2025 are not that many at all, because we have hidden victims. I give an example - such as those who drowned after a road accident, those who died after 30 days as a result of road accidents and other cases removed from statistics. They are about 68 victims in total. So, things are clearly not going well and the measures being taken are not a top priority, there is NO improvement in this indicator.
- If you had to give a specific recommendation to the state - what should change first: the regulatory framework, control or the very model of awarding road projects?
- Changes are needed everywhere - in design assignments, in the development of projects, in the implementation of projects and their control, in timely maintenance and repairs. It is time to divide the State Road Network into National, Regional and Municipal, with new independent structures, personal responsibilities and an annual report to society and institutions.