Writing quality assurance specifications is as much an art as a science. The specifications must be introduced and monitored in the field before it can be concluded that they are providing the levels of construction quality and performance that are desired. Even those specifications that have proven their adequacy must continue to be monitored in a changing construction environment. Little guidance currently exists, however, on how a highway agency can objectively assess and monitor its quality assurance specifications. A procedure that responds to this need is presented. The procedure can be used to assess how well a specification is working or to monitor the specification to ensure continuing effectiveness. A major benefit is that the procedure can identify inconsistencies that should be corrected if the specification is to be truly effective. Continuous quality improvement is thus made possible. Therefore, it is emphasized throughout that agencies need to have good pavement or asset management systems and databases. The procedure was tested on a state highway agency's asphalt pavement specifications. It was concluded that the effectiveness of the agency's specifications could be improved. It is likely that some of the suggested improvements also apply to other agencies. Among these is the need for all to know what quality level the agency wants and for the agency to clearly state this in its specifications. In most cases, essentially the same quality level should be specified for a quality characteristic, regardless of the number of samples obtained for evaluation of acceptance to be taken from a lot. Additionally, if specifications are to be not only effective but cost-effective as well, establishing the optimal quality level becomes paramount.
Abstract