October 28, 2025 • 44 mins
Brian and Kim discuss the newly redesigned AAP Procedures Manual. It presents the requirements of the AASHTO Accreditation Program in a new format that is easier to read and understand. This new version integrates the old procedures manual with the newer policy and guidance documents that AASHTO re:source had been issuing on its website. It also includes helpful links that can take the reader to other documents or websites to learn more.
There are also additions to the procedures manual that are the result of AASHTO re:source Administrative Task Group (ATG) precedents that are not being stated directly in this document to promote transparency such as more specific language about the minimum acceptable situations for approval of situations in which management is provided to more than one facility and other shared personnel situations.
Due to the release of this new version, a few of the policy and guidance documents were retired and others revised because the content was incorporated into the main body of the procedures manual. There will still be policy and guidance documents that explain some of the requirements in greater detail, but the intent is to incorporate the requirements into the procedures manual where possible.
The organization of the procedures manual is intended to present some of the essential information that everyone needs to know up front, and then starting in Section 7, it takes the reader through the accreditation process.
Starting in Section 14, the procedures manual starts to describe other situations that could be of interest like ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation, project laboratories, and mobile laboratories.
Finally, there are other important topics explained like confidentiality, external complaints, refusal of service, and information about certificates of accreditation, accreditation directory listings and how to properly promote laboratory accreditation.
Have questions, comments, or want to be a guest on an upcoming episode? Email podcast@aashtoresource.org.
Related information on this and other episodes can be found at aashtoresource.org.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_01 (00:02):
Welcome to Ashto Resource QA.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing,
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory best
practices and qualitymanagement.
We're covering topics importantto you.
SPEAKER_00 (00:18):
Welcome to Ashto Resource QA.
I'm Brian Johnson.
SPEAKER_01 (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson.
And we are here today to talkabout the App Procedures Manual.
I know it's everyone's favoritesubject, right?
SPEAKER_00 (00:31):
It is.
People love the App ProceduresManual.
Uh they they can't get enough.
So we are we're gonna give youplenty of information about that
today.
Uh and I'm happy this is ourfirst recording where it's just
me and Kim this season.
SPEAKER_01 (00:47):
Yep.
SPEAKER_00 (00:48):
Previous seasons we had a lot of these, not so much
this season.
Uh, but it's a special occasionbecause this is big news that we
have to tell you about.
And and I I did want to say thatwe already did email all of our
customers about this andspecifiers so that they're aware
of these changes.
(01:08):
But sometimes it's good to hearabout these changes uh instead
of going to read through this18-page document on your own.
So we're gonna hit thehighlights in this episode.
So so listen up.
SPEAKER_01 (01:24):
So, first off, where do people find the app
procedures manual?
SPEAKER_00 (01:28):
Well, I'm so glad you asked.
That is another change that wemade.
SPEAKER_01 (01:32):
Well, a tweak.
I wouldn't say it's a change,it's a tweak.
SPEAKER_00 (01:36):
It's a tweak, it's an adjustment.
So, right now you can go to ourdocument library on our website,
re-university page to find it,or you can go through the
accreditation page and find itthere.
But once you're there, you'regonna see a reorganization of
the documents.
(01:56):
There are several subcategories.
You've got uh policies anddocument uh policy and guidance
documents listed by topicinstead of by title.
Uh, so what this allows you todo is find what you're looking
for a little easier than it usedto be.
Uh, so starting with the appprocedures manual as the top
(02:18):
document.
Uh you know, it's sort of likewhen you're you want your
business to be found first, youcall it like triple A something.
Uh well, we've got AA uh ASHO,accreditation program,
procedures manual as the topdocument, followed by assessment
(02:38):
documents, uh calibrationinformation, confidentiality,
and it'll take you all the waydown through the alphabet until
you get to training andcompetency evaluation, which is
the bottom one.
Then you get policy and guidancedocuments by standards.
So that's where anystandard-specific policies are
(02:59):
in play.
You will find those there.
Then we've got our forms afterthat, assessment prep lists that
helps you get prepared for yourassessment.
Uh, and then just randominformational documents after
that.
They'd cover all kinds ofdifferent uh topics that didn't
quite fit in anywhere else.
And then you've got the R18examples, and that is that's
(03:21):
another new thing.
So I will tell you about thatbriefly.
That stemmed from a ballot onAshto R18, which is another very
popular document that wemaintain or help maintain
through the Ashto Committee onMaterials and Pavements.
We made a huge change.
(03:42):
Well, it's in the works.
Uh a huge ballot that uh changesthe way R18 is uh identifies a
lot of the requirements.
Uh, but one of the big changesis we removed all of the kind of
outdated and and not thateffective examples that were in
(04:05):
the back of R18.
So that ballot to remove thoseexamples passed.
So in exchange for removingthose examples, we are hosting
some useful, more useful andup-to-date examples on our
website for people to use.
So if you are new to theprogram, those would be very
(04:26):
useful for you to say, okay,what would one of these
documents look like?
I can go now to our website andfind them, uh, at least a few
examples.
Plus, we have some uh morecomplicated examples uh that
were created for situationswhere people get confused about
how to determine uh a result.
(04:48):
Uh the one example that comes tomind is sieving sufficiency for
aggregate testing.
There are multiple differentrequirements, and this table
that we put in our examples uhencapsulates all of them.
So you can record your resultsand see if they if you passed on
several different standards.
SPEAKER_01 (05:08):
Yeah, so our document library has a bunch of
stuff on it.
I will say you can also get tothe app procedures manual uh by
going to the accreditation,astro accreditation link on our
homepage.
And then in the left hand sideat the bottom, it just says
procedures manual and it'll takeyou right there.
(05:29):
So there are a couple ofdifferent ways to get there.
You could also search for it onour website if that's easier.
But so we covered where thechanges of where it's at, not
really changes, the tweaks towhere it's at.
Um, but if people are unaware,the procedures manual is part of
the requirement, you have tofollow that to be ASHTO
(05:50):
accredited.
So you have to follow R18, likethe minimum requirements for
Astro accreditation are you meetthe standards of R18 and you
follow the app proceduresmanual.
That's the bare minimum that youhave to do.
Is there anything else aboutthat that we should talk about
before we dive into what the bigchanges were?
SPEAKER_00 (06:10):
Yeah, I I think it's good to talk about the
importance of that document andand why these changes were made.
Uh so this this has been kind ofhanging in over my head for
years that this document hadreferences to old information,
old terminology.
(06:31):
Uh, it was not organized thebest way.
Uh and it and it wasn't thateasy to find what you need.
And it also didn't make anyconnections between our policy
and guidance documents and thethe overarching uh overarching
procedures manual.
(06:51):
Uh so what I tried to do in thisballot was give you some
background on ASHTOaccreditation in the beginning,
then get into some of theessential requirements, and then
take you through the process ofgetting accredited.
Uh so that this proceduresmanual, as it's written, is a
lot easier to follow for a newlaboratory, which that's
(07:14):
typically who the audience isgoing to be for a lot of this is
somebody who doesn't know thatmuch about the accreditation
program.
They want to learn more, theywant to see what they need to do
uh to be able to qualify foraccreditation.
And it's also use uh usable forany specifying agencies who are
considering requiring ASHTOaccreditation.
(07:36):
So this will more clearlydifferentiate uh what
requirements exist in ourprogram that are not just in the
standards uh that are listed uhon somebody's accreditation
directory uh uh list of testmethods.
SPEAKER_01 (07:53):
And so you mentioned that the changes to R18 were
balloted.
And I want to explain thatprocess a little bit for people
that we can't just make changesor you can't just make changes
to the Astro AccreditationProcedures Manual, willy-nilly.
It goes through a formal processwhere you ballot those changes.
And is it the ATG, theadministrative task group for
(08:15):
Astro Resource?
Do are they the only ones thathave to approve it, or does it
go to all of the uh committee onmaterials?
SPEAKER_00 (08:21):
So the app procedures manual, because of
the importance of the document,it has to get balloted to the
full ASHTO committee onmaterials and pavements.
So the ATG, our oversightcommittee, that's sort of like
the subcommittee that handlesit.
So that's like the first stageuh for the changes to be run
through and then it goes to thefull committee.
(08:43):
Now, this because there are somany changes to this, uh, this
version, and and really a lot ofit is just editorial changes.
But because it was going to besuch a big change, I asked for
permission to ballot itconcurrently to get all of the
opinions of everybody on thecommittee of materials and
(09:04):
pavements uh to weigh in onthese changes.
Uh, so then I could have one bigchange uh to take all of their
comments, apply them, workthrough some of them.
Because sometimes when youballot something to a big group,
you'll get conflictingnegatives.
So, like one person says, Idon't like it, it should say
this.
And someone who says, Well, Idon't like it, but I think it
should say this other thingthat's also not what the other
(09:26):
person said.
So then you have to kind of workthrough with those voters to
figure out what you're gonna do.
And and we we did uh actuallythis one went pretty smoothly
compared to R18.
Uh R18 had had been a bigger uhchallenge, especially uh getting
through the uh the the voters'negatives because of those
(09:51):
conflicts of expectations.
Uh, but this one was a littlebit easier, I think, because
everybody is already adhering tothe requirements and they were
just kind of reframed in in thisversion.
Although there are there are afew new wrinkles that we'll talk
about today.
But the ultimate goal of thiswas to make it easier to use and
(10:12):
more transparent.
Uh so that the transparency camewith trying to uh link to the
policy and guidance documentsthat are uh more explanatory for
people and also to embed someATG precedents that have kind of
uh evolved over time withvarious ATG chairs uh and try to
(10:35):
put those right in therequirements document so that
people don't have to guess uh ifa situation is acceptable or
not.
SPEAKER_01 (10:44):
Yeah, I think it's an important clarification that
only a few things have actuallychanged or been added, and
mostly it was just a restructureand organize of the document.
But I would love for you to tellour listeners more about what
the difference is or why we evenhave the policy and guidance
documents and why those aren'tjust part of the procedures
(11:06):
manual or the standard thatthey're about.
Why is there separate policy andguidance documents?
SPEAKER_00 (11:13):
Yeah, so the policy and guidance documents evolved
because there are often umthere's often a need to explain
why things are the way they are,um, so that people have some
context for the decisions thatour program has made over the
years.
Uh, and and I think this reallyhelps to educate the customers
(11:37):
and and the specifiers aboutwhat you know the these
requirements exist, this is whythey exist, and and this is how
you apply these requirements.
So one good example is thepolicy and guidance document on
how we handle proficiency samplesuspensions.
Uh so the procedures manualmight just say, well, if you get
(11:58):
consecutive low ratings or or orno data for uh a sample round,
then you would get a suspension.
And to resolve it, they cangenerally tell you how that is.
Uh, but we get so many questionsabout, okay, well, what about if
I get this number and thisnumber, but then this one is
(12:18):
this other number?
So like they they always want toknow, okay, what about this
scenario?
What about this scenario?
So, what a policy and guidancedocument enables us to do is get
into really get into the weedsabout all the like this is
something that looks bad, but itwon't result in a suspension,
and this is something that looksbad and will result in a
(12:40):
suspension, and this is why, andthen this is what you'd have to
do to resolve it, and this ishow this process works.
So we can also explain more ofour procedures rather than just
laying out the requirements, andand and that's very helpful to
kind of put the customers atease about what to expect if
(13:01):
they do get a suspension uh oror if they do get a low rating
on a proficiency sample.
So we have a lot of those kindof explanations in our policies
and guidance documents.
SPEAKER_01 (13:12):
And are those documents um do they need to be
reviewed and validated or no?
Are those separate from theprocess?
SPEAKER_00 (13:20):
So those those are separate from the process, but
uh what what we've done is up toI'd say up to this year, we had
been kind of putting them out uhand basing them on ATG
decisions, but not having thetext reviewed.
But but since this change to theapp procedures manual, uh we are
(13:43):
now passing them through atleast the ATG level so that even
though these are based on orjust completely uh copying what
the ATG decisions were and justmaking them something that's
easier to digest, uh, I did wantto get ATG approval on the
(14:04):
wording just to make sure thatthey agree with it before we put
it out in the public space.
Uh so one thing that happenedwhen the App Procedures Manual
was issued, the the newest one,I went through with our group uh
here at Ashto Resource and I hada uh a meeting with everyone and
(14:25):
went over some of the changes.
And I received quite a fewquestions on on two of the
topics that were addressed.
It's kind of funny, it's veryhard.
I think people underestimate howdifficult transparency can be,
because it it seems likesomething that would be obvious.
Oh, you just say what it is.
(14:46):
Uh, but what's hard is once youstart saying all of the
exceptions, people come up withother exceptions that didn't
happen or or haven't happenedyet or may never happen.
And you think, oh boy, well, Iguess I should address some of
those in case they do happen.
Uh, and then the document getsvery long when you're trying to
explain it.
And and you do have to be likereasonable about it.
(15:08):
You can't put all sorts ofcrazy, uh, like uh off the wall
ideas, but you do like if yourun into situation or you you
you think about plausiblesituations that could occur and
you try to identify those.
So the two topics that I'maddressing right now are on uh
personnel situations.
(15:28):
So what that's intended to do iscover uh all of the different
types of personnel arrangementsthat could exist or we have
found to exist, and which onesare okay and which ones are not
in the context of a laboratorymaintaining ash to
accreditation.
Uh, that went from a one-pagedocument to a full two-page
(15:53):
documents with all thescenarios.
Uh, but it now it is at the ATGfor review.
And on Friday, so we'rerecording this today on October
7th and 2025.
And on Friday, that's thedeadline for the ATG to get me
their comments, and then I'lltake those comments.
(16:14):
And as long as there are no bigissues, I'll publish it the
following week.
Uh, so that's one of them.
The other one is on equipmentownership.
So it's assumed that alaboratory is this is the kind
of strange thing that will soundstrange to some people, is you
(16:35):
would just assume that alaboratory is like, okay, it's a
business, they employ engineersand technicians, and they own
equipment and they use thatequipment.
But people are always trying toinvent ways to make money
without doing work.
So it's really you have toaccount for all of these
(16:55):
scenarios where a a middlemansituation is created, and and if
that situation exists, how doesthat get resolved in the context
of a laboratory or a testingfirm maintaining accreditation?
(17:16):
So we try to define these thingsand like okay, can I rent all
the equipment?
Do I have to own it?
Do I have to have a building?
Do I have to actually do thetesting?
Those are things that youwouldn't think rationally you'd
have to worry about.
But those scenarios do presentthemselves in real life.
So we so we do have to addressthem.
(17:37):
So the the second document is onequipment ownership and what
needs to be owned and what canbe rented and what where could
it be maintained or how can itbe maintained and who can
maintain it.
It gets very messy, as you canimagine.
SPEAKER_01 (17:56):
I can I can imagine that getting very complicated
when people are not doing thingsmaybe the traditional way or
what has historically happened.
Um, yeah, I can see that beingvery challenging.
So thank you for describing andtalking about what's about to
come out, those two new policyand guidance documents, but also
(18:18):
talking about the differencebetween the policy um and
guidance documents and theprocedures manual.
So let's dive into some of thechanges in the procedures
manual.
That was a lot of groundwork toget to the meat of this uh
episode.
SPEAKER_00 (18:36):
It is, yeah, that was a big, big preamble.
Uh but but but yeah, let's getinto the people should be used
to that by now if they listen toour podcast.
SPEAKER_01 (18:46):
If this is not your first episode, I'm generally
used to it.
SPEAKER_00 (18:49):
Yeah, I'm I'm generally like uh 40% build up
to what I'm gonna talk about inany episode.
Okay, so if you're looking atthe app procedures manual, the
first thing I want to draw yourattention to is that if you open
up the tabs on the side, you cannavigate to all the different
sections very easily.
Uh but the but like I alreadysaid kind of how it's laid out,
(19:13):
but in the introduction, it kindof tells you about the CFR,
which is the requirement thatspecified ashtode accreditation
in the first place.
Uh, we take you through theapplication process, scope, and
limitations of the program.
So under scope, it expands intookay, well, what standards are
relevant to ASHTO accreditation?
(19:34):
Uh, what type of facilities areappropriate for ASHTO
accreditation?
What personnel or equipment areinvolved in the assessment for
ASHTO accreditation?
Um, and then what, and then itgoes into a deep dive into those
personnel uh qualifications.
So that's where we get into thisoffshoot that is going to be
(19:58):
this other policy and guidancedocument about okay, who needs
to work there or whatarrangements can exist.
Um right now, the only uh theonly person it says has to be a
full-time uh employee of thelaboratory is the technical
director or manager.
But the the typical scenario isthat all the people that work
there actually work there.
(20:19):
Uh, but but you'll get into moredetails.
And and it this will require uhbefore I said no changes take
place without going through someapproval process.
I am going to have to link tothat new policy and guidance
document.
So a change like that, I'm notgonna run through anybody uh
because all it is is connectingthe dots between these two
(20:40):
documents, and I'm consideringthat to be an editorial change.
But but now we're gonna get intosomething that got really
specific.
SPEAKER_01 (20:47):
Okay, good.
SPEAKER_00 (20:48):
And this this was in the spirit, completely in the
spirit of transparency.
And I know some people are gonnasay, okay, that makes sense.
And some people are gonna belike, this is outrageous.
How how dare you, how dare youtell me what I can and can't do?
Uh, but but keep in mind this isfor Ashto accreditation.
This is not saying that everycompany in the world has to
operate this way.
(21:08):
This is just saying if you'regonna get accredited through us,
this applies to you.
Okay, so a lot of times peoplehave multi-site personnel.
Uh and those situations have tobe reviewed and approved for
Ashto accreditation to be uhmaintained.
Uh now, one thing we run intosometimes is that uh I'm not
(21:29):
gonna say it's a shortage of PEsbecause I don't think it's truly
a shortage of PEs out there, butit is a shortage of people
wanting to employ PEs asfull-time managers at different
locations.
Uh so often you will have uh aPE technical director that is a
PE is a professional engineer uhthat is overseeing or directing
(21:52):
uh more than one facility.
Okay.
Uh, and we do have a form, wemake them fill out and it gets
evaluated, and we figure outokay, is this is this plausible
that they could provideeffective technical direction
being spread this thin?
Um what we've learned over timeis there are certainly limits to
(22:13):
how many facilities one personcan manage without things
falling apart.
And what we've done is we'veidentified uh no more than five
facilities in the astralaccreditation program.
Uh, five is even a lot.
I think that's kind of pushingit.
Uh, but we have found situationswith small scope laboratories
(22:34):
where that's doable.
Um if you're a large scopelaboratory, you're probably not
going to be very effective uh intrying to maintain or manage
that many facilities with oneperson.
So I would not recommend it.
And uh there is a everything,well, everything is kind of
based on it, does it work ornot?
(22:55):
So there is a limit, but then itsays that uh, you know, these
situations are all based on howeffective this situation is.
And if it's found to be noteffective, then the approval can
be removed.
SPEAKER_01 (23:10):
And just for if those following along, this is
in uh section 4.9.2 is wherethis is specifically in in the
Ash Ashto accreditationprocedures manual.
Um, so the off-site andmulti-site personnel is section
4.9, but 4.9.2 gets into what uhwe're talking about right now.
SPEAKER_00 (23:35):
Right.
Thank you.
And the other one on there in492 that is different is it it's
a supervising supervisory andtesting personnel may be
approved to perform testing inmultiple accredited laboratory
locations if those laboratoriesare less than 100 miles apart.
Now, is 100 miles arbitrary?
(23:55):
Somewhat.
I'm not gonna lie.
There had to be, we're trying tofigure out what's a reasonable
distance for somebody to travelto work.
Uh, and I know that there areexceptions for certain
situations.
I know that the country is verybig and situations can be
different.
So if you are in a situationthat is different than that, you
(24:17):
would have to uh send us anexplanation and we'd have to
review it.
But this is saying, okay, thesesituations may be approved.
Um, it also says, though, thisis a very important caveat
testing personnel shall notperform the same practice or
test method during an on-siteassessment for more than one
location of an accreditedlaboratory during the same
(24:38):
assessment tour.
So, what that says is we can'thave one person go around the
like, let's say you have thisgreat technician, and you're
gonna say, well, we don't wantour real technicians running the
test there because they're notas good as this technician.
So we're gonna have thistechnician go around all the
sites and get them all approved,and then we're gonna go back to
business as usual.
(24:59):
So we don't allow that tohappen.
SPEAKER_01 (25:02):
So you can't have a ringer of sorts.
SPEAKER_00 (25:04):
I cannot have a ringer.
That's right.
Gotcha.
SPEAKER_01 (25:06):
Now, what if they actually do work at multiple
laboratories, though?
SPEAKER_00 (25:09):
We do have that situation.
So uh this is very common in theworld of hot mix asphalt plants,
where they'll have multipleplants in the in a in a region,
and they'll have the same crewkind of go uh to from plant to
plant and run tests wheneverthere's a project active and
that plant's firing up to beoperating.
(25:32):
Uh, so what we do in thosesituations is we'll say, okay,
that that's that's what you'vegot going on.
Uh just mix it up during theonset assessment.
So have this technician runthese tests, have the this
technician run these othertests, and just don't have them
do the same ones during a tour.
That that's worked out reallywell.
Uh so that that has that hasproven to be a uh possibility.
SPEAKER_01 (25:56):
So it's running the same exact test.
Yeah, not that general.
Okay, okay.
That makes sense.
SPEAKER_00 (26:02):
And it's really to avoid a ringer situation.
SPEAKER_01 (26:04):
So if you only have one one person, one technician,
that's your laboratory.
And that one position goes.
Is that a thing?
Why am I making this morecomplicated?
SPEAKER_00 (26:12):
This is how this is why it's hard to write a policy.
It is because you have to thinkabout all these different
scenarios.
And really, if there is not it,let's say we run into that
situation, yeah, uh, then we'llhave to update our policy and
guidance document and address itbased on whatever the decision
is from the ATG.
But you know, we we have um wewe also have to address
(26:37):
situations like seasonallaboratories uh that certainly
exist in places like Alaska andthe the more northern climates
where you don't really have aconstruction season in the
winter.
Uh so in the policy and guidancedocument on personnel, we try to
address that.
SPEAKER_01 (26:53):
But the changes currently made currently that
have been made, are there anycurrently accredited or
astro-accredited laboratoriesthat are not following the
change, like they're notfollowing the changes and that
they are gonna lose theiraccreditation because of these
changes, or is it justincorporating what's already
into practice and providingclarity and transparency around
(27:16):
that?
SPEAKER_00 (27:16):
Uh the latter is is what the intent is.
So I'm not gonna say, I can'tsay with 100% certainty that
there is not a laboratory outthere that is violating these
things, these requirements,without our recognition of that
deviation from the policy aswritten.
So as we run into thosescenarios, we will have to
(27:39):
address them.
So the way we'll address them isone of two ways, right?
Uh we'll present the situationto the ATG.
If the ATG says, well, thatshould have never been approved,
then we'll say, okay, well,guess what?
Uh, you're gonna have to changethe way you're operating if you
want to stay accredited.
Uh, however, if the situation ispresented to the ATG and they
(28:02):
say, Oh, yeah, that's that'sfine, that should be approved,
then we'll have to address thatin our policy and guidance
document to make it stated sothat that is permissible.
SPEAKER_01 (28:13):
So there's is there ever, I guess, just a one-off
exception that it is just forone specific laboratory and it
will never be applied toanywhere else, that you don't
necessarily need to make achange.
Or once you make it for onelaboratory, then that has to be
available to all laboratories.
SPEAKER_00 (28:31):
That you know, that's the spirit of of
transparency is to not haveone-offs anymore, right?
SPEAKER_02 (28:38):
Okay.
SPEAKER_00 (28:39):
Is like what our objective is in being this
transparent is to say, hey, thissituation was approved in this
case.
If your situation is similar, itcan be approved in your case
too.
Um, but without presenting that,so like I I think as we as we uh
(28:59):
develop these policy andguidance documents to describe
all these scenarios, uh, they'regonna get pretty specific,
right?
Because not not all situationsare going to be exactly the
same, even if the basicrequirements or the let's say
the basic uh arrangement withoutasking too many questions appear
(29:24):
to be the same.
But then you find out, oh, well,in this scenario, this specific
scenario, this is reasonable,but in this other specific
scenario, that is notreasonable.
So, like the I think that thepolicy and guidance document is
going to be very long in a yearcompared to what it is now,
(29:46):
because once we start uhencountering scenarios that we
didn't define, uh our intentionis to define them.
A lot of times people Are verynervous, not just because it's
hard to do, but then they feellike, oh, now I'm on the hook
for all these arguments thatpeople are going to make about,
(30:09):
well, why not this and why notthis?
And and is it a pain?
Yes, it is a pain, but I thinkthe fairness is more important
than the hassle that that youget from adjudicating all these
different scenarios.
At least that's that's ourintention with this.
So I don't know.
(30:30):
We'll we'll see how it goes.
Uh whoever, whoever comes afterme may say, this guy is an
idiot.
Why did he get this specificabout everything?
We need to peel it back.
SPEAKER_01 (30:43):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (30:44):
And go back to just general requirements and then
just have a bunch of uhexceptions to the rules, which I
I'm not a big fan of exceptionsto rules.
And yeah, and I'm not a fan ofgrandfathering.
You know, you were asking aboutthat question earlier.
I am a very uh I am very muchopposed to the concept of
grandfathering.
When you when you make a policychange, uh you should assume
(31:09):
that people can adjust towhatever that change is, uh,
because these are not things,these are not uh uh these
testing firms are not monuments.
And and and really our programis not a monument either.
Like we can we can change withthe times and we can make
adjustments with the times.
Uh and and it's I think it'sjust really important to do that
(31:31):
and to be able to adjust uh uhwith the with the change in the
the operational climate thatyou're in.
We're not doing this to savetime because it's not gonna save
time.
Um, but I I think it's justhelpful for everybody to know
what the rules are going in uhand to have them be clear and
unambiguous, at least as much aspossible.
(31:51):
I mean, there's always gonna beweird scenarios out there that
we haven't accounted for, but umwe we tried.
I guess that's that's all Icould say is we tried we tried
our best, yeah.
We tried our best, and and ifit's not good enough, we'll
we'll try to make someadjustments.
Um okay, so the lastcomplication with this is
(32:13):
terminology.
So when I balloted the um thepersonnel uh policy and guidance
document, there are all kinds ofterms like contractor,
subcontractor, consultant.
Uh some people considereverybody, like if you talk to
(32:34):
DOT people, a lot of times likeeverybody who's not them is a
consultant.
Whether they're on a contract orthey're a subcontractor or
they're an actual consultant,they're all put in the
consultant bucket.
But I differentiate those.
So I think what I'm gonna haveto do is put a terminology
(32:54):
section to define those terms sothat we can even have more
clarity.
SPEAKER_01 (32:58):
Yeah, I think that that is definitely an option uh
improvement opportunity becauseit I yeah, I can see that
getting really muddled andpeople not using and not even
using the right term, justconsistently using the terms
when talking about thosedifferent situations in regards
to Ashto accreditation.
(33:19):
Right.
So is that right or wrong, justconsistently labeling them?
I think it will be helpful.
SPEAKER_00 (33:24):
Yeah, and and just for those of you who are out
there who who may not like whatI'm saying, just just know that
we are very reasonable over hereand we're always up for making
changes and improvements to toimprove things.
So uh or to to be more clear oruh be more transparent or be
more fair or um whatever,whatever you're looking for, let
(33:49):
us know, and we can tell you ifit's uh reasonable and can be
considered to be acceptable ornot.
Next thing I want to talk aboutis laboratory identification and
ownership.
Uh this this has been expandedover the years, and uh a lot of
it is because there's been somuch consolidation going on with
a lot of the materials testingfirms.
(34:10):
Uh so we've learned a lot aboutownership and and naming
conventions.
So we tried to explain those inmore detail.
Uh, and we have a lengthy policyand guidance document that's
linked in there as well.
One, oh, you know what I forgotto talk about?
SPEAKER_01 (34:27):
What?
SPEAKER_00 (34:28):
This is another big thing.
So I know a lot of times whenwhen there are changes made,
people think, oh God, what areyou gonna do to us now?
What what new requirements areyou levying on our laboratories?
Well, I have good news for you.
Sometimes we actually removerequirements.
Yeah, and this is one of thosesituations.
So years ago, uh there was arequirement for room temperature
(34:54):
added to the app proceduresmanual, and this requirement had
been uh met with either cheersor boos, depending on where you
live and uh what kind offacility you have.
Uh, but we were pretty strictabout the requirements, and now
(35:19):
the wording is a littledifferent and it allows more uh
consideration for differentlaboratory situations.
So uh what it says now is thatthe laboratory temperature is to
(35:39):
be maintained at a uh consistenttemperature that allows for
proper performance of testing uhbased on all the standards that
you're accredited for.
Uh and and that temperaturerange is still uh 60 to 85
Fahrenheit.
(36:00):
Uh but it it's written in such away that it it tells you that
the evaluation or judgment ofconformance is based on how much
it impacts the testing.
And that can be indicated quitea few different ways, like
(36:22):
sometimes during the assessment.
Uh, but sometimes it's throughuh poor results on proficiency
samples, or maybe it's fromcomplaints, or it it could be it
could be a number of ways thatwe find out that there are
problems at that facility.
But there is, I guess, a littlebit more allowance for different
(36:45):
types of facilities.
Uh, there is even a veryspecific allowance for deviation
for uh sulfur capping stations,which a lot of people have kind
of moved away from.
But when they do have to cap,they put it on a cart and
they'll put it in an uh outsidearea.
Uh uh sometimes large mechanicalshakers and LA abrasion
(37:09):
machines, uh, which are veryloud, uh, are put in uh
containers outside of the normallaboratory operating area
because of the noise problemsand the dust that they create.
Uh so there are specificallowances for deviations for
those as well.
SPEAKER_01 (37:29):
And what section is that in if people are following
along?
SPEAKER_00 (37:33):
You will find that in section 3.4.5.
Now, the one question I knowwe're gonna get is so does that
mean that we don't have to careabout that anymore?
Um, that it is not what thatmeans.
Uh, you really should beoperating within these uh these
parameters as a testinglaboratory because you are gonna
(37:56):
run into problems withmaintaining bath temperatures,
oven temperatures, uh competencyof your technicians operating in
extreme cold or extreme heat.
Uh and really it is based on uhtheir the quality of testing.
This is not a uh Ashto trying todip their toes into OSHA space.
(38:18):
Uh and I know that's that's beenan accusation that that we've
gotten with this requirement.
It's just assumed that you're anormal uh business that has a
operating temperature thatfacilitates the proper
performance of these tests.
Uh that's that's really whatwhat we're after with those
(38:38):
requirements.
But you can read uh section3.4.5 and see how that impacts
your laboratory.
SPEAKER_01 (38:47):
All right.
Thank you for being specific onthat because I was trying to
skim very quickly and couldn'tfind it.
So when I was looking at thedocument.
SPEAKER_00 (38:56):
I skipped over that one earlier, and and that it is
an important one to payattention to because I know some
laboratories have reallystruggled with that.
Uh there are some laboratoriesthat really are not even trying,
though, and and I think it'sit'll it'll be revealing in
their their test results.
So I I don't I don't think it issmart to just ignore that
(39:20):
completely.
Uh other other things, uh, weget into proficiency testing
requirements.
I talked before about not havinga ringer for laboratory
assessments.
You also can't have a ringer forproficiency samples.
So we specifically have thatwritten into the requirements
that you cannot have the sameperson uh performing proficiency
(39:43):
samples and and reporting theresults for multiple locations.
So uh that that would be anotherone, you know, you asked about
potentially, okay, well, what ifthere's only one person?
Well, we'll have to we'll haveto cross that bridge when we get
to it.
I'm not sure if we have any ofthose situations currently in
the program.
I know years ago we did.
I'm not sure if they exist, butif they do exist, they'll have
(40:06):
to uh reach out to us and andwe'll have to get that reviewed.
But that is one of those reallytricky ones where if I were to
put that in the policy andguidance document, it'll have to
be very specific about why thatwas allowed.
Um, because if we just say, ohyeah, yeah, it's no problem,
then we're gonna have uh, youknow, one company with 50
(40:27):
locations submitting one roundof PSP data for the entire
organization, which would not beallowed.
Other things we get intocorrective actions for
proficiency samples,assessments, accreditation
decisions.
SPEAKER_01 (40:39):
Those were all in there before, though, right?
SPEAKER_00 (40:41):
They were all in there before.
It's just laid out in a morelogical order now.
It talks about you knowsuspension, revocation,
temporary facilities, mobilelaboratories, confidentiality,
um, refusal of service, and howdo you advertise your
accreditation?
What's a certificate look like?
(41:02):
Where's a you know a link to thedirectory, which is a nice thing
to have?
Uh so that so that that's prettymuch it.
That's that takes you throughthe whole manual.
SPEAKER_01 (41:12):
The whole manual.
Now, did anybody specify orlocal government this something
say section?
You have like reference the oldnumbering system of the
procedures manual where theywill then have to update it
based on the new one.
Or is that not a thing?
SPEAKER_00 (41:32):
No, that's probably a thing.
That's probably a thing.
Okay.
Uh that is that is probablysomething that people will be
doing.
SPEAKER_02 (41:38):
Okay.
SPEAKER_00 (41:39):
Is if they're referring specifically to
sections, they will have toupdate those references.
Now, I'm not really aware of toomuch of that.
SPEAKER_02 (41:47):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (41:48):
Uh, however, for R18, that definitely is a thing.
SPEAKER_02 (41:51):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (41:52):
So, like people have designed their entire quality
management systems around thenumbering in R18.
So that was that was anotherthing that was difficult.
I was trying very hard not tochange the sections too
drastically because I know howmuch heartache that will bring
to people who have to deal withthe changes on the back end.
SPEAKER_01 (42:13):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (42:15):
So we do think about those things when we when we
ballot.
Trying to be somewhatthoughtful.
SPEAKER_01 (42:21):
So if your organization did reference the
old app procedures manual priorto September 17th, 2025, um, any
numbers or sections in that willbe need to be update updated in
whatever format is needed.
I'm just gonna throw that outthere then.
(42:42):
Uh is there anything else thatwas new for this that's like
brand new and not just thereorganization?
SPEAKER_00 (42:48):
There's a really great diagram that I made that
shows what Ashto resource doesand what CCRL does.
I've presented I've presentedwith this diagram before, and I
see all these uh acknowledgmentsin the audience, like, oh now I
get it.
(43:08):
And so I I said, okay, thisneeds to go in the procedures
manual because it seems to itseems to make sense to people.
And that's figure one in the uhprocedures manual.
SPEAKER_01 (43:19):
Before we go, and uh I want to let everybody know uh
that we are have recorded andthis will be published this
episode in October.
So that means that if you'relistening to it when it first
comes out, you have time toregister for the virtual
technical exchange happening uhNovember 5th and 6th.
(43:40):
And if you go toashtoresource.org slash events
and you will have informationthere.
Also, there's information aboutthe 2026 Ashto Resource
Technical Exchange in person,and that will be March 9th
through 12th in Louisville,Kentucky.
Thanks for listening to AshtoResource QA.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
(44:01):
an email at podcast at ashtoresource.org.
Or call Brian at two four zerofour three six four eight two
oh.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out Ashto
Resources' social media accountsor go to Ashto Resource dot org.
Welcome to Ashto Resource QA.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing,
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory best
practices and qualitymanagement.
We're covering topics importantto you.
SPEAKER_00 (00:18):
Welcome to Ashto Resource QA.
I'm Brian Johnson.
SPEAKER_01 (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson.
And we are here today to talkabout the App Procedures Manual.
I know it's everyone's favoritesubject, right?
SPEAKER_00 (00:31):
It is.
People love the App ProceduresManual.
Uh they they can't get enough.
So we are we're gonna give youplenty of information about that
today.
Uh and I'm happy this is ourfirst recording where it's just
me and Kim this season.
SPEAKER_01 (00:47):
Yep.
SPEAKER_00 (00:48):
Previous seasons we had a lot of these, not so much
this season.
Uh, but it's a special occasionbecause this is big news that we
have to tell you about.
And and I I did want to say thatwe already did email all of our
customers about this andspecifiers so that they're aware
of these changes.
(01:08):
But sometimes it's good to hearabout these changes uh instead
of going to read through this18-page document on your own.
So we're gonna hit thehighlights in this episode.
So so listen up.
SPEAKER_01 (01:24):
So, first off, where do people find the app
procedures manual?
SPEAKER_00 (01:28):
Well, I'm so glad you asked.
That is another change that wemade.
SPEAKER_01 (01:32):
Well, a tweak.
I wouldn't say it's a change,it's a tweak.
SPEAKER_00 (01:36):
It's a tweak, it's an adjustment.
So, right now you can go to ourdocument library on our website,
re-university page to find it,or you can go through the
accreditation page and find itthere.
But once you're there, you'regonna see a reorganization of
the documents.
(01:56):
There are several subcategories.
You've got uh policies anddocument uh policy and guidance
documents listed by topicinstead of by title.
Uh, so what this allows you todo is find what you're looking
for a little easier than it usedto be.
Uh, so starting with the appprocedures manual as the top
(02:18):
document.
Uh you know, it's sort of likewhen you're you want your
business to be found first, youcall it like triple A something.
Uh well, we've got AA uh ASHO,accreditation program,
procedures manual as the topdocument, followed by assessment
(02:38):
documents, uh calibrationinformation, confidentiality,
and it'll take you all the waydown through the alphabet until
you get to training andcompetency evaluation, which is
the bottom one.
Then you get policy and guidancedocuments by standards.
So that's where anystandard-specific policies are
(02:59):
in play.
You will find those there.
Then we've got our forms afterthat, assessment prep lists that
helps you get prepared for yourassessment.
Uh, and then just randominformational documents after
that.
They'd cover all kinds ofdifferent uh topics that didn't
quite fit in anywhere else.
And then you've got the R18examples, and that is that's
(03:21):
another new thing.
So I will tell you about thatbriefly.
That stemmed from a ballot onAshto R18, which is another very
popular document that wemaintain or help maintain
through the Ashto Committee onMaterials and Pavements.
We made a huge change.
(03:42):
Well, it's in the works.
Uh a huge ballot that uh changesthe way R18 is uh identifies a
lot of the requirements.
Uh, but one of the big changesis we removed all of the kind of
outdated and and not thateffective examples that were in
(04:05):
the back of R18.
So that ballot to remove thoseexamples passed.
So in exchange for removingthose examples, we are hosting
some useful, more useful andup-to-date examples on our
website for people to use.
So if you are new to theprogram, those would be very
(04:26):
useful for you to say, okay,what would one of these
documents look like?
I can go now to our website andfind them, uh, at least a few
examples.
Plus, we have some uh morecomplicated examples uh that
were created for situationswhere people get confused about
how to determine uh a result.
(04:48):
Uh the one example that comes tomind is sieving sufficiency for
aggregate testing.
There are multiple differentrequirements, and this table
that we put in our examples uhencapsulates all of them.
So you can record your resultsand see if they if you passed on
several different standards.
SPEAKER_01 (05:08):
Yeah, so our document library has a bunch of
stuff on it.
I will say you can also get tothe app procedures manual uh by
going to the accreditation,astro accreditation link on our
homepage.
And then in the left hand sideat the bottom, it just says
procedures manual and it'll takeyou right there.
(05:29):
So there are a couple ofdifferent ways to get there.
You could also search for it onour website if that's easier.
But so we covered where thechanges of where it's at, not
really changes, the tweaks towhere it's at.
Um, but if people are unaware,the procedures manual is part of
the requirement, you have tofollow that to be ASHTO
(05:50):
accredited.
So you have to follow R18, likethe minimum requirements for
Astro accreditation are you meetthe standards of R18 and you
follow the app proceduresmanual.
That's the bare minimum that youhave to do.
Is there anything else aboutthat that we should talk about
before we dive into what the bigchanges were?
SPEAKER_00 (06:10):
Yeah, I I think it's good to talk about the
importance of that document andand why these changes were made.
Uh so this this has been kind ofhanging in over my head for
years that this document hadreferences to old information,
old terminology.
(06:31):
Uh, it was not organized thebest way.
Uh and it and it wasn't thateasy to find what you need.
And it also didn't make anyconnections between our policy
and guidance documents and thethe overarching uh overarching
procedures manual.
(06:51):
Uh so what I tried to do in thisballot was give you some
background on ASHTOaccreditation in the beginning,
then get into some of theessential requirements, and then
take you through the process ofgetting accredited.
Uh so that this proceduresmanual, as it's written, is a
lot easier to follow for a newlaboratory, which that's
(07:14):
typically who the audience isgoing to be for a lot of this is
somebody who doesn't know thatmuch about the accreditation
program.
They want to learn more, theywant to see what they need to do
uh to be able to qualify foraccreditation.
And it's also use uh usable forany specifying agencies who are
considering requiring ASHTOaccreditation.
(07:36):
So this will more clearlydifferentiate uh what
requirements exist in ourprogram that are not just in the
standards uh that are listed uhon somebody's accreditation
directory uh uh list of testmethods.
SPEAKER_01 (07:53):
And so you mentioned that the changes to R18 were
balloted.
And I want to explain thatprocess a little bit for people
that we can't just make changesor you can't just make changes
to the Astro AccreditationProcedures Manual, willy-nilly.
It goes through a formal processwhere you ballot those changes.
And is it the ATG, theadministrative task group for
(08:15):
Astro Resource?
Do are they the only ones thathave to approve it, or does it
go to all of the uh committee onmaterials?
SPEAKER_00 (08:21):
So the app procedures manual, because of
the importance of the document,it has to get balloted to the
full ASHTO committee onmaterials and pavements.
So the ATG, our oversightcommittee, that's sort of like
the subcommittee that handlesit.
So that's like the first stageuh for the changes to be run
through and then it goes to thefull committee.
(08:43):
Now, this because there are somany changes to this, uh, this
version, and and really a lot ofit is just editorial changes.
But because it was going to besuch a big change, I asked for
permission to ballot itconcurrently to get all of the
opinions of everybody on thecommittee of materials and
(09:04):
pavements uh to weigh in onthese changes.
Uh, so then I could have one bigchange uh to take all of their
comments, apply them, workthrough some of them.
Because sometimes when youballot something to a big group,
you'll get conflictingnegatives.
So, like one person says, Idon't like it, it should say
this.
And someone who says, Well, Idon't like it, but I think it
should say this other thingthat's also not what the other
(09:26):
person said.
So then you have to kind of workthrough with those voters to
figure out what you're gonna do.
And and we we did uh actuallythis one went pretty smoothly
compared to R18.
Uh R18 had had been a bigger uhchallenge, especially uh getting
through the uh the the voters'negatives because of those
(09:51):
conflicts of expectations.
Uh, but this one was a littlebit easier, I think, because
everybody is already adhering tothe requirements and they were
just kind of reframed in in thisversion.
Although there are there are afew new wrinkles that we'll talk
about today.
But the ultimate goal of thiswas to make it easier to use and
(10:12):
more transparent.
Uh so that the transparency camewith trying to uh link to the
policy and guidance documentsthat are uh more explanatory for
people and also to embed someATG precedents that have kind of
uh evolved over time withvarious ATG chairs uh and try to
(10:35):
put those right in therequirements document so that
people don't have to guess uh ifa situation is acceptable or
not.
SPEAKER_01 (10:44):
Yeah, I think it's an important clarification that
only a few things have actuallychanged or been added, and
mostly it was just a restructureand organize of the document.
But I would love for you to tellour listeners more about what
the difference is or why we evenhave the policy and guidance
documents and why those aren'tjust part of the procedures
(11:06):
manual or the standard thatthey're about.
Why is there separate policy andguidance documents?
SPEAKER_00 (11:13):
Yeah, so the policy and guidance documents evolved
because there are often umthere's often a need to explain
why things are the way they are,um, so that people have some
context for the decisions thatour program has made over the
years.
Uh, and and I think this reallyhelps to educate the customers
(11:37):
and and the specifiers aboutwhat you know the these
requirements exist, this is whythey exist, and and this is how
you apply these requirements.
So one good example is thepolicy and guidance document on
how we handle proficiency samplesuspensions.
Uh so the procedures manualmight just say, well, if you get
(11:58):
consecutive low ratings or or orno data for uh a sample round,
then you would get a suspension.
And to resolve it, they cangenerally tell you how that is.
Uh, but we get so many questionsabout, okay, well, what about if
I get this number and thisnumber, but then this one is
(12:18):
this other number?
So like they they always want toknow, okay, what about this
scenario?
What about this scenario?
So, what a policy and guidancedocument enables us to do is get
into really get into the weedsabout all the like this is
something that looks bad, but itwon't result in a suspension,
and this is something that looksbad and will result in a
(12:40):
suspension, and this is why, andthen this is what you'd have to
do to resolve it, and this ishow this process works.
So we can also explain more ofour procedures rather than just
laying out the requirements, andand and that's very helpful to
kind of put the customers atease about what to expect if
(13:01):
they do get a suspension uh oror if they do get a low rating
on a proficiency sample.
So we have a lot of those kindof explanations in our policies
and guidance documents.
SPEAKER_01 (13:12):
And are those documents um do they need to be
reviewed and validated or no?
Are those separate from theprocess?
SPEAKER_00 (13:20):
So those those are separate from the process, but
uh what what we've done is up toI'd say up to this year, we had
been kind of putting them out uhand basing them on ATG
decisions, but not having thetext reviewed.
But but since this change to theapp procedures manual, uh we are
(13:43):
now passing them through atleast the ATG level so that even
though these are based on orjust completely uh copying what
the ATG decisions were and justmaking them something that's
easier to digest, uh, I did wantto get ATG approval on the
(14:04):
wording just to make sure thatthey agree with it before we put
it out in the public space.
Uh so one thing that happenedwhen the App Procedures Manual
was issued, the the newest one,I went through with our group uh
here at Ashto Resource and I hada uh a meeting with everyone and
(14:25):
went over some of the changes.
And I received quite a fewquestions on on two of the
topics that were addressed.
It's kind of funny, it's veryhard.
I think people underestimate howdifficult transparency can be,
because it it seems likesomething that would be obvious.
Oh, you just say what it is.
(14:46):
Uh, but what's hard is once youstart saying all of the
exceptions, people come up withother exceptions that didn't
happen or or haven't happenedyet or may never happen.
And you think, oh boy, well, Iguess I should address some of
those in case they do happen.
Uh, and then the document getsvery long when you're trying to
explain it.
And and you do have to be likereasonable about it.
(15:08):
You can't put all sorts ofcrazy, uh, like uh off the wall
ideas, but you do like if yourun into situation or you you
you think about plausiblesituations that could occur and
you try to identify those.
So the two topics that I'maddressing right now are on uh
personnel situations.
(15:28):
So what that's intended to do iscover uh all of the different
types of personnel arrangementsthat could exist or we have
found to exist, and which onesare okay and which ones are not
in the context of a laboratorymaintaining ash to
accreditation.
Uh, that went from a one-pagedocument to a full two-page
(15:53):
documents with all thescenarios.
Uh, but it now it is at the ATGfor review.
And on Friday, so we'rerecording this today on October
7th and 2025.
And on Friday, that's thedeadline for the ATG to get me
their comments, and then I'lltake those comments.
(16:14):
And as long as there are no bigissues, I'll publish it the
following week.
Uh, so that's one of them.
The other one is on equipmentownership.
So it's assumed that alaboratory is this is the kind
of strange thing that will soundstrange to some people, is you
(16:35):
would just assume that alaboratory is like, okay, it's a
business, they employ engineersand technicians, and they own
equipment and they use thatequipment.
But people are always trying toinvent ways to make money
without doing work.
So it's really you have toaccount for all of these
(16:55):
scenarios where a a middlemansituation is created, and and if
that situation exists, how doesthat get resolved in the context
of a laboratory or a testingfirm maintaining accreditation?
(17:16):
So we try to define these thingsand like okay, can I rent all
the equipment?
Do I have to own it?
Do I have to have a building?
Do I have to actually do thetesting?
Those are things that youwouldn't think rationally you'd
have to worry about.
But those scenarios do presentthemselves in real life.
So we so we do have to addressthem.
(17:37):
So the the second document is onequipment ownership and what
needs to be owned and what canbe rented and what where could
it be maintained or how can itbe maintained and who can
maintain it.
It gets very messy, as you canimagine.
SPEAKER_01 (17:56):
I can I can imagine that getting very complicated
when people are not doing thingsmaybe the traditional way or
what has historically happened.
Um, yeah, I can see that beingvery challenging.
So thank you for describing andtalking about what's about to
come out, those two new policyand guidance documents, but also
(18:18):
talking about the differencebetween the policy um and
guidance documents and theprocedures manual.
So let's dive into some of thechanges in the procedures
manual.
That was a lot of groundwork toget to the meat of this uh
episode.
SPEAKER_00 (18:36):
It is, yeah, that was a big, big preamble.
Uh but but but yeah, let's getinto the people should be used
to that by now if they listen toour podcast.
SPEAKER_01 (18:46):
If this is not your first episode, I'm generally
used to it.
SPEAKER_00 (18:49):
Yeah, I'm I'm generally like uh 40% build up
to what I'm gonna talk about inany episode.
Okay, so if you're looking atthe app procedures manual, the
first thing I want to draw yourattention to is that if you open
up the tabs on the side, you cannavigate to all the different
sections very easily.
Uh but the but like I alreadysaid kind of how it's laid out,
(19:13):
but in the introduction, it kindof tells you about the CFR,
which is the requirement thatspecified ashtode accreditation
in the first place.
Uh, we take you through theapplication process, scope, and
limitations of the program.
So under scope, it expands intookay, well, what standards are
relevant to ASHTO accreditation?
(19:34):
Uh, what type of facilities areappropriate for ASHTO
accreditation?
What personnel or equipment areinvolved in the assessment for
ASHTO accreditation?
Um, and then what, and then itgoes into a deep dive into those
personnel uh qualifications.
So that's where we get into thisoffshoot that is going to be
(19:58):
this other policy and guidancedocument about okay, who needs
to work there or whatarrangements can exist.
Um right now, the only uh theonly person it says has to be a
full-time uh employee of thelaboratory is the technical
director or manager.
But the the typical scenario isthat all the people that work
there actually work there.
(20:19):
Uh, but but you'll get into moredetails.
And and it this will require uhbefore I said no changes take
place without going through someapproval process.
I am going to have to link tothat new policy and guidance
document.
So a change like that, I'm notgonna run through anybody uh
because all it is is connectingthe dots between these two
(20:40):
documents, and I'm consideringthat to be an editorial change.
But but now we're gonna get intosomething that got really
specific.
SPEAKER_01 (20:47):
Okay, good.
SPEAKER_00 (20:48):
And this this was in the spirit, completely in the
spirit of transparency.
And I know some people are gonnasay, okay, that makes sense.
And some people are gonna belike, this is outrageous.
How how dare you, how dare youtell me what I can and can't do?
Uh, but but keep in mind this isfor Ashto accreditation.
This is not saying that everycompany in the world has to
operate this way.
(21:08):
This is just saying if you'regonna get accredited through us,
this applies to you.
Okay, so a lot of times peoplehave multi-site personnel.
Uh and those situations have tobe reviewed and approved for
Ashto accreditation to be uhmaintained.
Uh now, one thing we run intosometimes is that uh I'm not
(21:29):
gonna say it's a shortage of PEsbecause I don't think it's truly
a shortage of PEs out there, butit is a shortage of people
wanting to employ PEs asfull-time managers at different
locations.
Uh so often you will have uh aPE technical director that is a
PE is a professional engineer uhthat is overseeing or directing
(21:52):
uh more than one facility.
Okay.
Uh, and we do have a form, wemake them fill out and it gets
evaluated, and we figure outokay, is this is this plausible
that they could provideeffective technical direction
being spread this thin?
Um what we've learned over timeis there are certainly limits to
(22:13):
how many facilities one personcan manage without things
falling apart.
And what we've done is we'veidentified uh no more than five
facilities in the astralaccreditation program.
Uh, five is even a lot.
I think that's kind of pushingit.
Uh, but we have found situationswith small scope laboratories
(22:34):
where that's doable.
Um if you're a large scopelaboratory, you're probably not
going to be very effective uh intrying to maintain or manage
that many facilities with oneperson.
So I would not recommend it.
And uh there is a everything,well, everything is kind of
based on it, does it work ornot?
(22:55):
So there is a limit, but then itsays that uh, you know, these
situations are all based on howeffective this situation is.
And if it's found to be noteffective, then the approval can
be removed.
SPEAKER_01 (23:10):
And just for if those following along, this is
in uh section 4.9.2 is wherethis is specifically in in the
Ash Ashto accreditationprocedures manual.
Um, so the off-site andmulti-site personnel is section
4.9, but 4.9.2 gets into what uhwe're talking about right now.
SPEAKER_00 (23:35):
Right.
Thank you.
And the other one on there in492 that is different is it it's
a supervising supervisory andtesting personnel may be
approved to perform testing inmultiple accredited laboratory
locations if those laboratoriesare less than 100 miles apart.
Now, is 100 miles arbitrary?
(23:55):
Somewhat.
I'm not gonna lie.
There had to be, we're trying tofigure out what's a reasonable
distance for somebody to travelto work.
Uh, and I know that there areexceptions for certain
situations.
I know that the country is verybig and situations can be
different.
So if you are in a situationthat is different than that, you
(24:17):
would have to uh send us anexplanation and we'd have to
review it.
But this is saying, okay, thesesituations may be approved.
Um, it also says, though, thisis a very important caveat
testing personnel shall notperform the same practice or
test method during an on-siteassessment for more than one
location of an accreditedlaboratory during the same
(24:38):
assessment tour.
So, what that says is we can'thave one person go around the
like, let's say you have thisgreat technician, and you're
gonna say, well, we don't wantour real technicians running the
test there because they're notas good as this technician.
So we're gonna have thistechnician go around all the
sites and get them all approved,and then we're gonna go back to
business as usual.
(24:59):
So we don't allow that tohappen.
SPEAKER_01 (25:02):
So you can't have a ringer of sorts.
SPEAKER_00 (25:04):
I cannot have a ringer.
That's right.
Gotcha.
SPEAKER_01 (25:06):
Now, what if they actually do work at multiple
laboratories, though?
SPEAKER_00 (25:09):
We do have that situation.
So uh this is very common in theworld of hot mix asphalt plants,
where they'll have multipleplants in the in a in a region,
and they'll have the same crewkind of go uh to from plant to
plant and run tests wheneverthere's a project active and
that plant's firing up to beoperating.
(25:32):
Uh, so what we do in thosesituations is we'll say, okay,
that that's that's what you'vegot going on.
Uh just mix it up during theonset assessment.
So have this technician runthese tests, have the this
technician run these othertests, and just don't have them
do the same ones during a tour.
That that's worked out reallywell.
Uh so that that has that hasproven to be a uh possibility.
SPEAKER_01 (25:56):
So it's running the same exact test.
Yeah, not that general.
Okay, okay.
That makes sense.
SPEAKER_00 (26:02):
And it's really to avoid a ringer situation.
SPEAKER_01 (26:04):
So if you only have one one person, one technician,
that's your laboratory.
And that one position goes.
Is that a thing?
Why am I making this morecomplicated?
SPEAKER_00 (26:12):
This is how this is why it's hard to write a policy.
It is because you have to thinkabout all these different
scenarios.
And really, if there is not it,let's say we run into that
situation, yeah, uh, then we'llhave to update our policy and
guidance document and address itbased on whatever the decision
is from the ATG.
But you know, we we have um wewe also have to address
(26:37):
situations like seasonallaboratories uh that certainly
exist in places like Alaska andthe the more northern climates
where you don't really have aconstruction season in the
winter.
Uh so in the policy and guidancedocument on personnel, we try to
address that.
SPEAKER_01 (26:53):
But the changes currently made currently that
have been made, are there anycurrently accredited or
astro-accredited laboratoriesthat are not following the
change, like they're notfollowing the changes and that
they are gonna lose theiraccreditation because of these
changes, or is it justincorporating what's already
into practice and providingclarity and transparency around
(27:16):
that?
SPEAKER_00 (27:16):
Uh the latter is is what the intent is.
So I'm not gonna say, I can'tsay with 100% certainty that
there is not a laboratory outthere that is violating these
things, these requirements,without our recognition of that
deviation from the policy aswritten.
So as we run into thosescenarios, we will have to
(27:39):
address them.
So the way we'll address them isone of two ways, right?
Uh we'll present the situationto the ATG.
If the ATG says, well, thatshould have never been approved,
then we'll say, okay, well,guess what?
Uh, you're gonna have to changethe way you're operating if you
want to stay accredited.
Uh, however, if the situation ispresented to the ATG and they
(28:02):
say, Oh, yeah, that's that'sfine, that should be approved,
then we'll have to address thatin our policy and guidance
document to make it stated sothat that is permissible.
SPEAKER_01 (28:13):
So there's is there ever, I guess, just a one-off
exception that it is just forone specific laboratory and it
will never be applied toanywhere else, that you don't
necessarily need to make achange.
Or once you make it for onelaboratory, then that has to be
available to all laboratories.
SPEAKER_00 (28:31):
That you know, that's the spirit of of
transparency is to not haveone-offs anymore, right?
SPEAKER_02 (28:38):
Okay.
SPEAKER_00 (28:39):
Is like what our objective is in being this
transparent is to say, hey, thissituation was approved in this
case.
If your situation is similar, itcan be approved in your case
too.
Um, but without presenting that,so like I I think as we as we uh
(28:59):
develop these policy andguidance documents to describe
all these scenarios, uh, they'regonna get pretty specific,
right?
Because not not all situationsare going to be exactly the
same, even if the basicrequirements or the let's say
the basic uh arrangement withoutasking too many questions appear
(29:24):
to be the same.
But then you find out, oh, well,in this scenario, this specific
scenario, this is reasonable,but in this other specific
scenario, that is notreasonable.
So, like the I think that thepolicy and guidance document is
going to be very long in a yearcompared to what it is now,
(29:46):
because once we start uhencountering scenarios that we
didn't define, uh our intentionis to define them.
A lot of times people Are verynervous, not just because it's
hard to do, but then they feellike, oh, now I'm on the hook
for all these arguments thatpeople are going to make about,
(30:09):
well, why not this and why notthis?
And and is it a pain?
Yes, it is a pain, but I thinkthe fairness is more important
than the hassle that that youget from adjudicating all these
different scenarios.
At least that's that's ourintention with this.
So I don't know.
(30:30):
We'll we'll see how it goes.
Uh whoever, whoever comes afterme may say, this guy is an
idiot.
Why did he get this specificabout everything?
We need to peel it back.
SPEAKER_01 (30:43):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (30:44):
And go back to just general requirements and then
just have a bunch of uhexceptions to the rules, which I
I'm not a big fan of exceptionsto rules.
And yeah, and I'm not a fan ofgrandfathering.
You know, you were asking aboutthat question earlier.
I am a very uh I am very muchopposed to the concept of
grandfathering.
When you when you make a policychange, uh you should assume
(31:09):
that people can adjust towhatever that change is, uh,
because these are not things,these are not uh uh these
testing firms are not monuments.
And and and really our programis not a monument either.
Like we can we can change withthe times and we can make
adjustments with the times.
Uh and and it's I think it'sjust really important to do that
(31:31):
and to be able to adjust uh uhwith the with the change in the
the operational climate thatyou're in.
We're not doing this to savetime because it's not gonna save
time.
Um, but I I think it's justhelpful for everybody to know
what the rules are going in uhand to have them be clear and
unambiguous, at least as much aspossible.
(31:51):
I mean, there's always gonna beweird scenarios out there that
we haven't accounted for, but umwe we tried.
I guess that's that's all Icould say is we tried we tried
our best, yeah.
We tried our best, and and ifit's not good enough, we'll
we'll try to make someadjustments.
Um okay, so the lastcomplication with this is
(32:13):
terminology.
So when I balloted the um thepersonnel uh policy and guidance
document, there are all kinds ofterms like contractor,
subcontractor, consultant.
Uh some people considereverybody, like if you talk to
(32:34):
DOT people, a lot of times likeeverybody who's not them is a
consultant.
Whether they're on a contract orthey're a subcontractor or
they're an actual consultant,they're all put in the
consultant bucket.
But I differentiate those.
So I think what I'm gonna haveto do is put a terminology
(32:54):
section to define those terms sothat we can even have more
clarity.
SPEAKER_01 (32:58):
Yeah, I think that that is definitely an option uh
improvement opportunity becauseit I yeah, I can see that
getting really muddled andpeople not using and not even
using the right term, justconsistently using the terms
when talking about thosedifferent situations in regards
to Ashto accreditation.
(33:19):
Right.
So is that right or wrong, justconsistently labeling them?
I think it will be helpful.
SPEAKER_00 (33:24):
Yeah, and and just for those of you who are out
there who who may not like whatI'm saying, just just know that
we are very reasonable over hereand we're always up for making
changes and improvements to toimprove things.
So uh or to to be more clear oruh be more transparent or be
more fair or um whatever,whatever you're looking for, let
(33:49):
us know, and we can tell you ifit's uh reasonable and can be
considered to be acceptable ornot.
Next thing I want to talk aboutis laboratory identification and
ownership.
Uh this this has been expandedover the years, and uh a lot of
it is because there's been somuch consolidation going on with
a lot of the materials testingfirms.
(34:10):
Uh so we've learned a lot aboutownership and and naming
conventions.
So we tried to explain those inmore detail.
Uh, and we have a lengthy policyand guidance document that's
linked in there as well.
One, oh, you know what I forgotto talk about?
SPEAKER_01 (34:27):
What?
SPEAKER_00 (34:28):
This is another big thing.
So I know a lot of times whenwhen there are changes made,
people think, oh God, what areyou gonna do to us now?
What what new requirements areyou levying on our laboratories?
Well, I have good news for you.
Sometimes we actually removerequirements.
Yeah, and this is one of thosesituations.
So years ago, uh there was arequirement for room temperature
(34:54):
added to the app proceduresmanual, and this requirement had
been uh met with either cheersor boos, depending on where you
live and uh what kind offacility you have.
Uh, but we were pretty strictabout the requirements, and now
(35:19):
the wording is a littledifferent and it allows more uh
consideration for differentlaboratory situations.
So uh what it says now is thatthe laboratory temperature is to
(35:39):
be maintained at a uh consistenttemperature that allows for
proper performance of testing uhbased on all the standards that
you're accredited for.
Uh and and that temperaturerange is still uh 60 to 85
Fahrenheit.
(36:00):
Uh but it it's written in such away that it it tells you that
the evaluation or judgment ofconformance is based on how much
it impacts the testing.
And that can be indicated quitea few different ways, like
(36:22):
sometimes during the assessment.
Uh, but sometimes it's throughuh poor results on proficiency
samples, or maybe it's fromcomplaints, or it it could be it
could be a number of ways thatwe find out that there are
problems at that facility.
But there is, I guess, a littlebit more allowance for different
(36:45):
types of facilities.
Uh, there is even a veryspecific allowance for deviation
for uh sulfur capping stations,which a lot of people have kind
of moved away from.
But when they do have to cap,they put it on a cart and
they'll put it in an uh outsidearea.
Uh uh sometimes large mechanicalshakers and LA abrasion
(37:09):
machines, uh, which are veryloud, uh, are put in uh
containers outside of the normallaboratory operating area
because of the noise problemsand the dust that they create.
Uh so there are specificallowances for deviations for
those as well.
SPEAKER_01 (37:29):
And what section is that in if people are following
along?
SPEAKER_00 (37:33):
You will find that in section 3.4.5.
Now, the one question I knowwe're gonna get is so does that
mean that we don't have to careabout that anymore?
Um, that it is not what thatmeans.
Uh, you really should beoperating within these uh these
parameters as a testinglaboratory because you are gonna
(37:56):
run into problems withmaintaining bath temperatures,
oven temperatures, uh competencyof your technicians operating in
extreme cold or extreme heat.
Uh and really it is based on uhtheir the quality of testing.
This is not a uh Ashto trying todip their toes into OSHA space.
(38:18):
Uh and I know that's that's beenan accusation that that we've
gotten with this requirement.
It's just assumed that you're anormal uh business that has a
operating temperature thatfacilitates the proper
performance of these tests.
Uh that's that's really whatwhat we're after with those
(38:38):
requirements.
But you can read uh section3.4.5 and see how that impacts
your laboratory.
SPEAKER_01 (38:47):
All right.
Thank you for being specific onthat because I was trying to
skim very quickly and couldn'tfind it.
So when I was looking at thedocument.
SPEAKER_00 (38:56):
I skipped over that one earlier, and and that it is
an important one to payattention to because I know some
laboratories have reallystruggled with that.
Uh there are some laboratoriesthat really are not even trying,
though, and and I think it'sit'll it'll be revealing in
their their test results.
So I I don't I don't think it issmart to just ignore that
(39:20):
completely.
Uh other other things, uh, weget into proficiency testing
requirements.
I talked before about not havinga ringer for laboratory
assessments.
You also can't have a ringer forproficiency samples.
So we specifically have thatwritten into the requirements
that you cannot have the sameperson uh performing proficiency
(39:43):
samples and and reporting theresults for multiple locations.
So uh that that would be anotherone, you know, you asked about
potentially, okay, well, what ifthere's only one person?
Well, we'll have to we'll haveto cross that bridge when we get
to it.
I'm not sure if we have any ofthose situations currently in
the program.
I know years ago we did.
I'm not sure if they exist, butif they do exist, they'll have
(40:06):
to uh reach out to us and andwe'll have to get that reviewed.
But that is one of those reallytricky ones where if I were to
put that in the policy andguidance document, it'll have to
be very specific about why thatwas allowed.
Um, because if we just say, ohyeah, yeah, it's no problem,
then we're gonna have uh, youknow, one company with 50
(40:27):
locations submitting one roundof PSP data for the entire
organization, which would not beallowed.
Other things we get intocorrective actions for
proficiency samples,assessments, accreditation
decisions.
SPEAKER_01 (40:39):
Those were all in there before, though, right?
SPEAKER_00 (40:41):
They were all in there before.
It's just laid out in a morelogical order now.
It talks about you knowsuspension, revocation,
temporary facilities, mobilelaboratories, confidentiality,
um, refusal of service, and howdo you advertise your
accreditation?
What's a certificate look like?
(41:02):
Where's a you know a link to thedirectory, which is a nice thing
to have?
Uh so that so that that's prettymuch it.
That's that takes you throughthe whole manual.
SPEAKER_01 (41:12):
The whole manual.
Now, did anybody specify orlocal government this something
say section?
You have like reference the oldnumbering system of the
procedures manual where theywill then have to update it
based on the new one.
Or is that not a thing?
SPEAKER_00 (41:32):
No, that's probably a thing.
That's probably a thing.
Okay.
Uh that is that is probablysomething that people will be
doing.
SPEAKER_02 (41:38):
Okay.
SPEAKER_00 (41:39):
Is if they're referring specifically to
sections, they will have toupdate those references.
Now, I'm not really aware of toomuch of that.
SPEAKER_02 (41:47):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (41:48):
Uh, however, for R18, that definitely is a thing.
SPEAKER_02 (41:51):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (41:52):
So, like people have designed their entire quality
management systems around thenumbering in R18.
So that was that was anotherthing that was difficult.
I was trying very hard not tochange the sections too
drastically because I know howmuch heartache that will bring
to people who have to deal withthe changes on the back end.
SPEAKER_01 (42:13):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_00 (42:15):
So we do think about those things when we when we
ballot.
Trying to be somewhatthoughtful.
SPEAKER_01 (42:21):
So if your organization did reference the
old app procedures manual priorto September 17th, 2025, um, any
numbers or sections in that willbe need to be update updated in
whatever format is needed.
I'm just gonna throw that outthere then.
(42:42):
Uh is there anything else thatwas new for this that's like
brand new and not just thereorganization?
SPEAKER_00 (42:48):
There's a really great diagram that I made that
shows what Ashto resource doesand what CCRL does.
I've presented I've presentedwith this diagram before, and I
see all these uh acknowledgmentsin the audience, like, oh now I
get it.
(43:08):
And so I I said, okay, thisneeds to go in the procedures
manual because it seems to itseems to make sense to people.
And that's figure one in the uhprocedures manual.
SPEAKER_01 (43:19):
Before we go, and uh I want to let everybody know uh
that we are have recorded andthis will be published this
episode in October.
So that means that if you'relistening to it when it first
comes out, you have time toregister for the virtual
technical exchange happening uhNovember 5th and 6th.
(43:40):
And if you go toashtoresource.org slash events
and you will have informationthere.
Also, there's information aboutthe 2026 Ashto Resource
Technical Exchange in person,and that will be March 9th
through 12th in Louisville,Kentucky.
Thanks for listening to AshtoResource QA.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
(44:01):
an email at podcast at ashtoresource.org.
Or call Brian at two four zerofour three six four eight two
oh.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out Ashto
Resources' social media accountsor go to Ashto Resource dot org.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.