How far do you go to define ‘testing requirements’ in the Works Information?
I’m referring here to the Supervisor’s role in overseeing that all testing requirements have been carried out during the Contract - and the role of the Contract compiler to define exactly what is required.
Consider, as a simple example, the provision of concrete kerb units for a large highways scheme.
Which one of the following Options is regarded as best practice for the Compiler to include in the works information.
Option 1 - “All work shall be in accordance with current Regulations” (I’ve seen this catch-all statement on a number of projects. It does little to help the either party, and is often the cause of dispute).
Option 2 - All work shall be in accordance with the Specification for Highway Works - i.e. leaving the Supervisor to delve further to identify specific testing and records required. (This statement still leaves the requirements ambiguous - and Is open to dispute).
Options 3 - The Contractor is required to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Appendix 11/1 Kerbs Footways and Paved Areas. (This leaves the requirements ambiguous and open to contractual dispute, particularly given an over-zealous Supervisor).
Option 4 - The Contractor is required to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of BS EN 1340 Concrete kerb units - Requirements and test methods. (This still leaves some ambiguity at to what the Client specifically requires in terms of evidence of compliance).
Option 5 - “The Contractor is required to demonstrate compliance with BS EN 1340 (2003) Part 8 - Testing Report”. (This makes it clear to the Supervisor what is required by the contract - and easy to confirm compliance (or otherwise).)
A number of commentators have also suggested that Overseeing Organisations simply appoint a competent Contractor, operating (say) under an !SO 9001 Quality Management System - and do no more further checks for compliance. Effectively neutering the role of the Supervisor.
Your views, experiences would be very welcomed.
Thanks in advance for anyone who takes the time to respond. Much appreciated.