Publication - FOI/EIR release

A75 maintenance contract and Unacceptable Actions Policy: FOI release

Published: 26 Mar 2019

Information request and response under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

Published:
26 Mar 2019
A75 maintenance contract and Unacceptable Actions Policy: FOI release
FOI reference: FOI/19/00533
Date received: 21 Feb 2019
Date responded: 15 Mar 2019
Information requested

 

You asked for the following information:

“1) We wish to know the performance standards specified in the A75 maintenance contract currently in force with Scotland TranServ in so far as these specify a minimum carriageway surface maintenance standard, frequency of surface defect monitoring, timescale for rectification of contractor identified/3rd party reported surface defects and the requisite standard(s) for rectification, both temporary and permanent.

 

2) We wish to know the performance standards specified in the A75 maintenance contract currently in force with Scotland TranServ in so far as these specify a minimum carriageway road signage and surface markings maintenance standard, frequency of defect monitoring, timescale for rectification of contractor identified/3rd party reported signage road marking and the requisite standard(s) for rectification, both temporary and permanent.

 

3) We wish to know (without identifying details) how many and from what dates and for what durations individuals or organisations have been informed in writing  that they are judged by senior Transport Scotland officials to be corresponding or communicating in a manner relating to the road network which, in the judgement of such officials, triggers Transport Scotland's Unacceptable Actions Policy. We wish to know if any supporting reasons have been given to such persons and, if so, what these were. We also wish to know the number of appeals made by such subsequently restricted contact complainants against such official judgements, past or pending and the outcomes thereof i.e. whether the complainants concerned were thereafter restored to normal status or that their ongoing communications remained to be treated differently and restricted, as per the policy, with no reply being issued as matter of routine.

 

4) We wish to know what external oversight is given to the framing and implementation of Transport Scotland's Unacceptable Actions Policy and what avenue exists, if any, to any aggrieved party for taking an appeal against its application outwith Transport Scotland.

 

5) Assuming our current appeal is refused we wish to know the timescale within which Transport Scotland's Management Board will be invited to review our restricted contact status and what opportunity  in terms of natural justice or otherwise we shall then be afforded to make representations to the Board in advance of the conclusion of their periodic review.

 

6) We wish to know what action(s) in terms of revised hard engineered carriageway design, as adopted as a first resort calming intervention at many other trunk road residential street gateways e.g. Crocketford, or by some other measure, Transport Scotland proposes to take to address the actions of very large numbers of speeding drivers, many of whom are revealed to be adopting speeds between twice and three times WHO road safety standards beside vulnerable pedestrians present on the exiting channels at Springholm as revealed by the ongoing speed bin data collected at the ATC SH1 channel 2 and SH4 channel 1 monitoring points. We have drawn specific attention to the speed data extract for SH4 channel 1 for the week 7-14 January 2019 wherein 3,370 drivers were revealed as adopting speeds there of 41mph and upward in the 30mph limit.”

 

Response

 

Question 1 – The information you have requested is available from the web links below.  Under section 25(1) of FOISA, we do not have to give you information which is already reasonably accessible to you.  If, however, you do not have internet access to obtain this information from the websites listed, then please contact me again and I will send you a paper copy.

The Scottish Ministers’ Requirements, set out in the 4th Generation Term Contracts, are a bespoke set of requirements specific to the management and maintenance of the Scottish Trunk Road Network. The requirements meet or exceed the standards set out in the national codes of practice. The relevant 4th Generation Term Contract for management and maintenance of the Scottish Trunk Road Network can be viewed with the following web link:

https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/35900/sw-combi.pdf

 

The sections relevant to inspections are- 

  • Schedule 7: Part 1 of the contract provides an overview of inspections, surveys and defect categories and response times
  • Schedule 7: Part 2: Section 2.7 of the contract provides details of inspections and their frequency during winter
  • Schedule 7: Part 6: Section 3 of the contract details the inspections and their frequency for Structures

 

Information in relation to Customer Contact Services can be found in Schedule 3: Part 6. 

Minimum carriageway road signing and surface markings maintenance standards can be accessed in the Design Manual for Roads & Bridges (DMRB), Traffic Signs Regulations & General Directions (TSRDG) and the standards for rectification can be found in the Trunk Road Condition Manual.

These can be accessed at:

TSRGD - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/contents/made

DMRB - http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/

Trunk Road Condition Manual - 

https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/foi-eir-release/2018/09/foi-18-02131/documents/foi-18-02131---annex-a---inspection-manual_part1/foi-18-02131---annex-a---inspection-manual_part1/govscot%3Adocument

 

Question 2 – Minimum carriageway road signing and surface markings maintenance standards can also be found in the DMRB and TSRDG.

The frequency of defect monitoring and the timescale for rectification of contractor identified / 3rd party reported signage road markings and standard for rectification is as in question 1.

 

Question 3 - From 2016 there have been three cases where correspondence has been restricted under our Unacceptable Actions Policy. The reasons for restrictions were due to the volume and frequency of correspondence.

One appeal has been received and was under consideration at the date of your request.

 

Question 4 – Our policy is an internal procedure which does not require external oversight. If an individual is unhappy with our decision then they are entitled to contact the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman.

 

Question 5 - As set out in our Unacceptable Actions Policy, the Transport Scotland Management Board will review the status of all complainants with restricted contact arrangements on a regular basis.

 

Question 6 - Under section 25(1) of FOISA, we do not have to give you information which is already reasonably accessible to you.  As you are aware from previous discussions and correspondence (e.g. our letter references 2017/0032506, 2018/0017761 and 2018/0044378) we are not proposing to take any further action in terms of revised hard engineered carriageway design in Springholm.  If, however, you do not have copies of these letters then please contact me again and I will send you copies.

 

Additional Information - It may be helpful to note that the speed data previously provided is in kilometres per hour. On that basis and using our calculations for the speed data extract for SH4 channel 1 for the week 7-14 January 2019, there were less than 835 vehicles over the 30 mph speed limit.

 

Correction issued 25/03/2019

I can confirm that the unit of measurement for the speed bins is mph and the 85th percentile speeds is kph. I apologise that due to the discrepancy between the units of measurement used on the one data sheet, an incorrect assessment of this information was provided. The data however is robust.

We acknowledge that the speed compliance at this location, which measures speed at the eastern limit leaving the village, is lower than at other points in the village. This is not unexpected as it is recording the speed of vehicles exiting the village and we believe represents vehicles starting to accelerate as they leave the village. The speed compliance for SH4, in the direction that corresponds with exiting the village for the particular week that you have noted is 17%. The compliance of vehicles entering the village at this location during the same week was 87%.

This should be set in the context of the other monitoring locations through the village over the same week where compliance of vehicles with the speed limit is generally between 82-96% with the exception of SH1 westbound. SH1 is located at the western end of the village recording speeds at the extremity of, and exiting the village. The compliance with the speed limit at SH1, exiting the village was 50%. The compliance of vehicles entering the village at this location during the same week was 96%.

As you are aware the speed management system is a pilot of its type. The sole purpose of the scheme is to manage vehicle speeds by seeking to encourage amendments to driver behaviour. Early results are positive and we contimue to monitor the effect the signals are having on driver behaviour.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at http://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.

Contact

Please quote the FOI reference
Central Enquiry Unit
Email: ceu@gov.scot
Phone: 0300 244 4000

The Scottish Government
St Andrews House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG