Civil engineering assets

Strategic risk chapter

3. Compliance expectations

Why compliance matters

Health and safety legislation places clear duties on dutyholders to reduce risks arising from failure of Civils assets so far as is reasonably practicable, including risks to employees, passengers and the public. Failure of these assets can lead to derailment, serious injury or significant operational disruption.

Compliance expectations exist because long-standing challenges continue to affect Civils assets management, including incomplete asset information, examination and evaluation weaknesses, inconsistent implementation of standards, and vulnerability to extreme weather and third-party actions.

Compliance is also essential as the industry faces future changes, including more frequent and severe weather events, constrained renewals programmes, the need for more resilient design, and increased use of remote monitoring and system-wide engineering approaches.

Reasons why compliance with civil engineering asset requirements matters. These include legal duties, long-standing system challenges, and new or emerging pressures. Non-compliance can lead to derailment, serious injury, and significant operational disruption.

The law

The management of Civils assets is governed by:

These laws require dutyholders to:

  • reduce risks so far as is reasonably practicable;
  • carry out suitable and sufficient risk assessments;
  • ensure effective inspection, maintenance and renewal;
  • manage construction, repair and operational activities safely (CDM duties).

ORR’s expectations of dutyholders

Dutyholders must maintain accurate asset inventories, recognising that incomplete asset registers or missing Civils assets data delays inspection, maintenance and renewal.

They must improve their understanding of asset condition, consequences of failure and control of risk, particularly where knowledge is variable.

Dutyholders must ensure that the reasonably foreseeable consequences of Civils assets failures are identified and mitigated.

Dutyholders must embed learning from the Carmont derailment, including improved understanding of water behaviour, drainage performance, and use of more accurate weather forecasting and real-time information.

Dutyholders are expected to ensure that improved intelligence about likelihood and consequence of failure informs prioritised renewal programmes and interim contingency arrangements.

Dutyholders should maintain effective programmes of examination and inspection, followed by assessment, and then renewal, refurbishment and maintenance, supported by complete and accurate asset information.

ORR expects increased adoption of technology and remote monitoring to reduce reliance on human systems and improve early identification of failures.

Dutyholders should adopt a systems engineering approach, recognising interactions between earthworks, drainage, structures and track, and between infrastructure and outside-party activities.

Key expectations for dutyholders managing civil engineering assets. These include maintaining accurate asset and condition information, learning from Carmont, applying risk-based renewals, balancing maintenance regimes, adopting remote monitoring and innovation, and using systems engineering.

ORR activity

ORR undertakes inspection, investigation and liaison activities across all sectors, with significant emphasis on Network Rail due to residual risk levels and affordability constraints on renewals.

ORR is increasing its scrutiny of London Underground, light rail and heritage Civils assets management, reflecting their specific challenges and varying levels of maturity.

ORR focuses on helping dutyholders achieve an effective balance between renewal, refurbishment, maintenance and consequence management, ensuring compliance with the law.

The ORR will encourage duty holders to achieve this by prioritising:

ORR regulatory priorities for managing civil engineering asset risk. These focus on improving asset information, embedding learning from Carmont, strengthening climate resilience, guiding risk-based renewals and mitigations, promoting effective asset management and engineering innovation, improving consequence management under extreme weather, and promoting a systems engineering approach.

Enforcement experience

ORR’s enforcement history identifies priority risk areas. Improvement Notices have addressed visual examination weaknesses, earthwork inspection, and consequence management during adverse weather.

Enforcement action required Network Rail to strengthen consequence management, reflecting that many Civils assets cannot reasonably be renewed to modern standards in the short term. Enforcement has resulted in fewer derailments despite increasingly extreme weather.

Recent enforcement relating to ancillary structures (e.g. Newbury signal post collapse) highlighted the need for clearer examinations, removal of hidden elements and proper reporting of defects.

The following case studies summarise key events from 2009–2020 and the learning that has informed current compliance expectations:

Key civil engineering asset incidents and learning over time. Examples include the River Crane bridge failure in 2009, Newbury signal post collapse in 2014, improved consequence management demonstrated at Hunton Bridge in 2016, and the Carmont derailment in 2020. Together, these events highlight weaknesses in inspection, asset information, and resilience to extreme weather, and the regulatory learning that followed.