Winter service audits and contract compliance
NE - BEAR
Overall BEAR’s performance was good.
PAG’s early winter audit identified excellent management by the OC of the winter service plan, clearly showing that it had everything in place for winter events. A subsequent audit identified continued good performance, although improvements in footway treatment were required and this will be addressed by
the OC.
SE - BEAR
BEAR fulfilled its main obligations, although improvements are required.
Early in the winter season PAG found the OC had a baseline capability to deliver winter service requirements. There were, however, some items to be addressed such as some routes in excess of target treatment times and salt testing arrangements.
An end of season audit subsequently identified problems with information recording and a lack of accurate records.
As in NE, footway precautionary treatment also required improvement. Some of these issues had already been identified by the OC’s quality system and are being dealt with accordingly.
NW – Scotland TranServ
Winter service was broadly carried out in line with the contract.
Early in the season the OC demonstrated everything was in place for any winter events. A subsequent audit raised some issues which were addressed by the OC in accordance with its quality system.
SW - Amey
Winter service in SW was satisfactory.
PAG’s early audit identified that the OC was prepared for winter 2007/08, but some minor issues were raised and subsequently resolved.
Footway treatments were carried out in SW, but did not reflect carriageway treatment frequencies.
Value study 3 – winter service
Winter service operations are paid for on a fixed monthly lump sum payment basis, and accounts for around 5% of the overall spend on the network. Delivery of winter service is important to road users. PAG has investigated the following over the 2007/08 winter:
• Precautionary de-icing material application rate per route.
• Precautionary de-icing material usage.
• Winter service KPIs.
| Unit | 2007/08 (g/m2) |
| NE | 3401 |
| SE | 1648 |
| NW | 3705 |
| SW | 1217 |
Precautionary de-icing material application rate per route
The OCs’ winter records were examined by PAG to identify the quantity of precautionary de-icing material spread on the network. Treatments varied within the contract requirements of 10g/m2 and
40g/m2 depending on the weather conditions anticipated and encountered. As in previous years, a 20g/m2 spread
rate was the most common application rate used.
Ethylene glycol is used as the precautionary de-icing material on certain major structures instead of pre-wetted salt. However, the use of ethylene glycol is outwith the scope of this value study
The variations in altitude, landscape and climate throughout Scotland mean the extent of precautionary treatment varies across the network.
PAG’s detailed analysis of the OCs’ records allows the cumulative average precautionary treatment spread rates to be calculated for individual routes across the network. The results of this analysis are shown in figures 33 and 34.
The study showed:
• The highest average precautionary spread rates were in NW, with all routes being treated with more than 1,800g/m2. Over 4000g/m2 was spread on A86, A9, A889 and A84.
• All routes in NE were treated with more than 2,400g/m2. On M90 and A985 BEAR spread over 5000g/m2.
• Nearly all the routes in SE and SW were treated with less than 1800g/m2.
• In SW, the average precautionary spread rate was less than any of the other three Units, reflecting its milder, wetter climate.
