Reply from TCDD to the news that Millions escaped to the tunnel: The subject covered in the news was included in the 2012 Court of Accounts Audit Report and discussed at the KIT Sub-Commission meeting. In the same Court of Account report, our Agency's response to the TCA proposal is also included. It is not understood that the deputy has just discovered and reported as a “scandal”.
Tır The contractor has manufactured in certain quantities in accordance with the contract and the manufacturing items in the 2012 year work program. With the bid given by the contractor firm to the unit price business items and the price comparison over the overall price including all the quantities, the proposal was found to be the cheapest and the most appropriate price according to the other tenderers. The firm's bid is deducted at the average 36 of the approximate cost. In the proposal, the mentioned tunnel productions which are excluded from the scope of the contract and have given high unit price quotations according to the approximate cost; contract and work program in the tunnel production. The entire tunnel production consists of 17 pieces of work items. Of the 15.893 tunnels that are subject to controversy within the total length of 9 mt tunnels, 2 manufactures only the lower half and invert concrete from the work items belonging to the tunnels. d. Contractor, for the purpose of safety of the tunnel stability (security) to provide the lower semi-inverted concrete production and the need for the transaction made by the Hacettepe University made a report on the necessity of the establishment. In addition, TCDD demanded that the necessary safety measures for the tunnels be taken and terminated. It is understood from the inspections and controls that the contractor firm is in compliance with the contract, the specification and the technique necessary for the safety of the tunnels. However, considering the suggestions in the report of the Court of Accounts 1350, the contractor's profit and overheads were deducted from the productions made by the contractor and the payment to the firm was evaluated accordingly and accordingly it was made accordingly.