CSS Compliance Testing Project

2. CSS Compliance Testing Project Presented by Chris Walker CSS 18 May 2005

3. Introduction • TRL national survey of reinstatement compliance monitoring and testing • Analysis of responses • The Scottish RAUC coring programme • Recommendations for future action

4. Context • Asset management • Improving highway asset life • Risk management • Service levels • Best Value • Network safety, serviceability and sustainability • Gershon • “Living Streets” • TM Act • Customer service • Quality management

5. TRL Survey • Obtain a National picture of Utility reinstatement compliance testing • Review existing advice on detailed testing (coring) • Questionnaire sent to 184 LHA’ in England and Wales and posted on HAUC (UK) and RAUC(S) websites. Also distributed via NJUG • 63 Responses • 52 Highway Authorities • 11 Utilities / Contractors

6. Works Notices Median Values Authority (Actual) = 10,248 Authority (Estimated) = 7,500

7. Extrapolating to English HA’s • Approximately 10,248 works per authority, per annum • In the region of 1.5 million works in England per annum

8. Definitions • Visual • Sample inspections, in accordance with the Code of Practice for Inspections, that include the measurement of defects that an inspector could be reasonably expected to undertake, using basic tools. • Detailed • Any inspections involving testing over and above the basic levels used for a sample inspection. Typical examples of detailed testing include coring and detailed profile measurement.

9. Compliance Testing 92% of Authorities indicated that they undertook compliance testing

10. Extent of detailed compliance testing by Street Authorities 28 out of 46 Authorities indicated that they undertook no detailed compliance testing in 2003/4

11. Compliance Rates • Visual • Survey indicated high level of compliance (on average) • Detailed - Limited and variable data • Compliance rates for detailed testing are generally lower than for visual inspections

12. Detailed testing • Perceived by authorities to improve performance when undertaken • Joint and Undertaker-led testing programmes generally favoured. • Mainly based on coring • Coring best suited to bound materials • Is further research on compliance required for unbound materials in a street works environment?

13. Q5 Detailed Physical Test Methods

14. Q9 Protocols used for detailed testing Notes: Large number of non replies Some respondents used National & Regional protocols

15. Q11 and Q12

16. Summary • 92% of authority respondents carried out a compliance test regime • Currently, compliance primarily based on a visual sample inspection regime • Sample inspections achieved, on average, high compliance • Indication that detailed testing (coring) identifies greater levels of non-compliance • Detailed testing perceived to raise standards when introduced (RAUC) • Joint and Undertaker-led coring programmes generally favoured. • General willingness to participate in a national programme

17. Benefits of compliance testing • Overall reinstatement performance and trends can be monitored • Effect of improvement plans can be assessed • Skills training can be targeted • Performance-related incentives can be introduced • Reduced costs of remedial works through less intervention • Reduced disruption to road users • Contributes to improved asset management

18. Recommendations • Develop a national reinstatement compliance monitoring programme • Produce nationally agreed protocols for compliance testing implemented through an Advice Note and / or Codes of Practice • Develop a Quality Management approach to reinstatements • Further research (unbound layers)

19. Next steps • CSS and HAUC to review recommendations: • HAUC Specification Working Party • HAUC Inspection Working Party • Determine how a national compliance monitoring programme is managed • Commission further research on test methods for unbound materials

20. Compliance Testing Presented by Chris Walker CSS