EIR/202600508806 · FOI/EIR · clarification
Transport Scotland - Environmental performance standards of A90 and A96: EIR release
Information requested
I am writing to formally raise concerns regarding the environmental condition of the A90 and A96 trunk roads in North East Scotland, which are currently maintained under contract by Amey. There is a clear and visible pattern of environmental neglect along substantial stretches of these routes, including: Widespread and persistent litter accumulation Redundant and unused road signs left lying on verges Traffic cones abandoned long after works have concluded Sign frames without signage left in place to rust General failure to remove temporary traffic management materials This is not an isolated issue but a recurring condition that is inconsistent with responsible trunk road management. Amey publicly states that it is committed to protecting biodiversity, preventing pollution, applying the waste hierarchy, and ensuring that “everyone who works for and with Amey” adheres to strict Scottish Ministers, special advisers and the environmental standards. Yet the condition of the A90 and A96 does not reflect those commitments. As the contracting authority, Transport Scotland is responsible for overseeing performance and ensuring compliance with environmental and maintenance standards. If these roads are being maintained in accordance with contract requirements, then the visible environmental degradation raises serious questions about monitoring and enforcement.
I would appreciate clarification on the following:
What environmental performance standards apply to trunk road maintenance contracts for the A90 and A96? How frequently are inspections conducted for verge cleanliness and redundant equipment removal? What KPIs or compliance mechanisms are in place to prevent abandoned materials and ongoing litter accumulation? Have any performance concerns been formally raised with Amey regarding environmental stewardship? What immediate action will now be taken to rectify the current condition?
Public-facing ESG strategies and sustainability commitments are only meaningful if they translate into real-world standards on the ground. The current state of these routes undermines public confidence in both the contractor and the oversight framework.
I would appreciate a substantive response outlining how this issue will be addressed and what accountability measures are in place.
Response
As the information you have requested is 'environmental information' for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.
This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.
Q1. You asked what environmental performance standards apply to trunk road maintenance contracts for the A90 and A96?
A1. Transport Scotland and our Operating Companies including Amey are only responsible for litter cleansing on Motorways and Special roads. The A90 and A96 are not classified as special roads therefore under the terms of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA) the respective local authorities have a statutory duty to litter pick , cleanse and provide roadside litter bins. Prior to vegetation clearance, which for the NE A90 and A96 is Amey’s responsibility, representation will be made to the respective Local Authorities to arrange litter picking and cleansing prior to the works.
Q2. How frequently are inspections conducted for verge cleanliness and redundant equipment removal. A2. The A90 and A96 are subject to twice weekly safety inspections and a yearly detailed inspection.
Q3. What KPIs or compliance mechanisms are in place to prevent abandoned materials and ongoing litter accumulation. A3. KPIs only pertain to Motorways for Litter on the North East NMC contract
Q4. Have any performance concerns been formally raised with Amey regarding environmental stewardship? A4. No.
Q5. What immediate action will now be taken to rectify the current condition. A5. We have made Amey aware of your concerns regarding discarded signs / cones / frame / TM and asked them to monitor this.
All road works are notified via the Scottish Road Works Commissioners register (SRWR) and our Operating Companies are made aware of all works commencement and end dates. Our Operating Companies will pursue third parties such as Statutory Undertakers where surplus signs remain in-situ. Incident Support Units will also be dispatched in response to enquiries from road users. The public can so report discarded signs etc to our Operating Companies, for the A96 and A90 here Contact us | North East Trunk Roads It may also be helpful to know that Transport Scotland has monthly performance meetings with all of their Operating Companies and all contracts are subject to independent audits by the Performance Audit Group.
About FOI
The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.
Contact Please quote the FOI reference Central Correspondence Unit Email: contactus@gov.scot Phone: 0300 244 4000 The Scottish Government St Andrew's House Regent Road Edinburgh EH1 3DG
Detected exemption language
We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA. This exemption is subject to the 'public interest test'. Therefore, taking account of all the circumstances of this case, we have considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes.
Attachments
No attachments found.