John De Rosa Receives UKSTT Lifetime Achievement Award
First of all, congratulations on being presented with the UKSTT Lifetime Achievement Award.
1. What does it feel like to be recognised for what, for those of us that know you, has been a significant part of your working life?
Well, I would have to say that I was absolutely stunned when Ian contacted me to tell me that I had been nominated for this Award, it was probably the last thing I had expected as it was entirely “out of the blue”!
My second reaction was that I felt extremely honoured and at the same time equally humbled that the UKSTT should consider me worthy of this accolade, as I felt I had only ever flitted around the outer reaches of the Society whilst focused on fulfilling my technical role in Subterra during the 23 years up to retirement at the end of 2017. To have this recognition from the Society is indeed a signal honour, and one that I will cherish. But, as they say at the Oscars ceremony, there’s a whole army of folks out there who helped me get here, and it’s as much to their credit as mine.
2. What does the Award mean to you personally (and/or to your family)?
On reflection, the UKSTT Lifetime Achievement Award effectively crowns all of the several others that I 
received during my tenure at Subterra. Most of all it provides an unexpected, but nevertheless much valued, tangible recognition of the value placed on my efforts to rise to the many opportunities and challenges we faced in pushing forward our particular branches of trenchless technology, both technically and commercially.
As to my family, I can only hope my wife, Sue, and children, Angela and Robert who were just 11 and 8 when I entered the trenchless sector, will consider the award at least some partial recompense for the long periods that the work took me away from home, and the correspondingly short periods when I used to reappear on my travels around the country and overseas. Those who know Sue will be aware that she held down highly demanding consultancy roles in the water sector in her own right. When I started with Subterra and was living away, she selflessly took on the day-to-day running of the household, as well as the raising of two children we can be justly proud of. Sue is the rock on which our family has been built, and is the backbone to the successes I’ve achieved. She has more than a little claim to the Award herself! At least it might help disabuse the family of any perception that I was always down the pub while I was away! Well, sometimes, maybe…
3. What was your background/experience and what brought you into the trenchless industry?
I graduated in Metallurgy and then took a higher degree in a subject related to corrosion (Hydrometallurgy, anyone?). 
My first job in 1977 was as a Research Scientist at the long-since closed Tube Investments Research Laboratory, where I worked for a short period on consumer
product corrosion issues, before being assigned to research the gaseous hydrogen embrittlement of the steels used to manufacture high pressure gas transportation cylinders.
My introduction to the utilities pipeline industry was a result of successfully applying for a post at the Water Research Centre in Swindon in 1981, which at the time was recruiting for its materials group. I was initially assigned to work on the corrosion of ductile iron pipe, which was a hot topic at that time, but was soon volunteered to lead, and be one of the principal authors of, what became the first edition WRc’s Pipe Materials Selection Manual (1988). This aimed to draw together the various strands of the Materials Group’s research into a user-friendly compendium of information and the pros and cons of the different pressure pipe options then in use in the water industry. Following completion of the Manual, I managed WRc’s Plastics and Quality Assurance team until the privatisation of the UK water industry resulted in retrenchment at WRc. During all this time I became increasingly involved in the water industry’s technical committee structure, and also began to represent the industry on various National and European Standards pipe and pipeline systems projects.
My entry into the trenchless technology sector in 1995 was, as likely may be the case for lots of folk who wind up accidentally in what turns out to be the job of their dreams, both unplanned and entirely unexpected. An ex-WRc colleague, Ian Warren, was at that time headhunting for Subterra, who was looking for a technical manager to support their product development team, and kindly put my name forward. The prospect of me switching out from what was basically a research environment into a much more commercially oriented one was, I have to admit, something that I approached with not just a little apprehension at the time. But, for some reason, they seemed to think I would fit, and I liked them. The rest, as they say, is history (and 23 years of it!).
I was indeed blessed. Subterra was the doyen of the pipeline rehabilitation industry, with a long history of innovation in pipeline renovation through its development arm, and the practical means to implement promising technologies through its extensive contracting arm (…. hmm, isn’t that phrase a bit of an oxymoron…?!). At that time, Subterra’s business, I think probably uniquely, encompassed virtually the entire scope of in-situ pipeline renovation technology, from resin spray lining, through PE close-fit Lining Techniques to CIPP lining, both full length and local repair, using a wide range of patented and exclusive products. Through the then parent company 
Thames Water’s associated subsidiaries, there was also very close contact with leading-edge CCTV inspection and robotics development.
For me, the benefit was to be educated and understand how these different renovation technologies fitted properly into the jigsaw of different clients’ problems, and to then be able to select and offer these confidently as technically valid solutions from Subterra’s broad business portfolio. The ability to “read across” from one branch of renovation technology to another I think gave me a particular technical perspective and advantage compared with similar positions in other Companies. In the early years I also benefitted from Subterra’s then close links with Thames Water’s energetic and innovating Research & Development team. This led to the exploration of a number of really “out there” ideas of promise which were taken variously to prototype and demonstrator stages in conjunction with Subterra’s workshop and fabrication facilities.
4. What has been your most challenging trenchless experience over those years (project/product development)?
How long have you got?!
Taken in overview, I think I would have to say that the most challenging issue was attempting to achieve drinking water contact approvals for new resins for spray lining applications, particularly in respect of fast-setting resins, which came to the fore not long after I joined Subterra.
This involved the (very!) iterative process of identifying and trialling initial formulations and submitting these for preliminary water contact screening tests to weed out clear non-starters (often associated with a lot of the boss’ fingers drumming on his desk when I reported the latest failure!). Then, as if trying to peer through a 
glass darkly, painfully slowly uncovering the issues that had led to the early failures and inconsistences, and consequently abandoning some of the blinder alleys and setting off on a new course (more finger drumming…) until we finally had something at benchtop scale that looked like it would get over the first hurdle. Then the fun began. How first to upscale the proposed product formulation, (more blind alleys, more finger drumming …); another brick wall, another change of direction, another possibility that showed promise in the water contact screening test, and then on to pilot scale batches that would be needed for simulated full-scale application in the formal approval test if we were to avoid the risks associated with poor mixing by hand earlier identified. So then it was more iterations (more finger drumming …) to get the balance of viscosities right for pumping in conventional spray lining rigs then available, and to get the reaction speed into the narrow window that would ensure the product both met the cure speed criteria that had been established for qualifying such resins as fast-setting, whilst at the same time not reacting so quickly that the two parts would go off prematurely in the static mixer (where the two components first meet up before hitting the application head). And of course, then to keep that process going for at least the time taken to line a typical pipeline section, which could be anything up to an hour. The hair you see me with is actually a wig.
Above all was the absolute necessity of meeting the various different national industry drinking water contact approvals schemes. These of course are rightly in place in order to protect the health of the citizens for which the respective National authorities are responsible. When I set out on my trenchless career, I think it’s true to say that these approvals schemes for spray-applied resins were in their infancy, or at least early adolescence, having had to begin building on existing approvals that were more geared around acute toxicological effects (e.g. BS 6920, as was), in order to address the potential chronic toxicological effects that could arise due to the much longer-term exposure to public drinking water supplies passing through municipal networks.
Different National authorities have, and continue to develop, different contact approval requirements, and an approval obtained in one jurisdiction may not necessarily be accepted in others. This is particularly the case for Europe and North America, which therefore necessitated multiple approval applications, with no guarantee that an approval obtained in one jurisdiction would ensure success in any other. Simultaneously, changes to these National approvals schemes were also partly driven by ongoing improvements in analytical chemistry, which meant that, as time went on, Regulators were able to identify compounds in leachates at ever lower concentrations. This in turn inevitably led to the re-appraisal of existing approvals schemes and of approvals previously granted. Most times it felt like trying to run up a down escalator!
5. What do you see as being your own greatest personal achievement in the trenchless industry?
I guess I’d have to say that was to help close-fit thin-walled PE lining technology for pressure pipeline systems to become a mainstream pipeline renovation solution, and for supporting the development of the associated design protocols and the introduction of this new class of pipeline renovation into National and International Standards.
The genesis of PE thin-walled lining systems emerged out of WRc in the late ‘80s, if memory serves me rightly, from Jon Boon. The idea was a result of the observation that many existing drinking water pipelines are basically structurally competent, and would be expected to remain so well beyond the normal design horizon for a new pressure pipeline installation, but may be suffering from local escapes at joints and/or corrosion perforations. 
Up to that point, the conventional renovation solution would have been to slipline the existing main with a standard (undersized) PE pressure pipe, or perhaps to install a fully-structural PE liner pipe by means of one of the close-fit lining technologies. However it was thought that significant savings in material costs could be achieved by reducing the PE liner pipe wall thickness so that, whilst it would not be able to contain the pipeline design pressure in its own right, it would be capable of working in conjunction with the host pipe to seal reliably over existing and forecast leakage holes over the required design life of the pipeline.
Several seedcorn research projects on thin-walled PE liners were initially commissioned by WRc at the Universities of Ulster and Bradford. These were followed up by a larger, Consortium-supported programme involving SERC, several of the Water Companies, Stewart & Lloyds Plastics and Subterra. By the time I joined Subterra in ‘95, the concept had been developed into a working prototype that had already been the subject of a full-scale demonstrator project, and which subsequently became familiar as Subline.
My role quickly became to establish a rigorous basis for the design of such liners that non-specialist practitioners could use; to validate and publish the proposed design method; to help progress the associated (and all-important) liner termination and branch connection technologies; and to help introduce and promote this new lining system option into the marketplace. Originally referred to as semi-structural liners, these were subsequently re-designated as interactive liners as they became adopted and integrated into the Standards arena. Given the passage of time and space since, it has been rewarding to say the least to have helped set the foundations in place for such an innovative technology, and which subsequently begat some pretty spectacular and innovative pipe lining projects whilst I was at Subterra. But they’re another story!
6. Have you any now or when you started in trenchless did you have any role models in the industry? Who? Why?
Just how long have you got?!
There are literally dozens and dozens of people who helped me on my way through my years in the trenchless industry, and to whom I owe an enormous debt of gratitude. Whilst I would like to namecheck all of them, I just hope they will forgive me if, just for once, I stick to the question in hand and try to focus on role models!
I guess it began whilst I was still working at WRc that I had the greatest of good fortune to work with and be taken under the wing of the since-departed and much-missed Derek Lackington of Severn Trent Water. Although this was at the time when I was working on new pipeline installations, I think I can properly justify his inclusion of the basis of his key role in STW’s Cement Mortar Lining programme, and how this linked into the development of standards for ductile iron pipe. Indeed, he chaired one of the Industry/Manufacturer’s product liaison groups which were then part of the Water Industry’s technical committee structure, and I was nominated as the groups’s technical secretary. That gave me privileged access to Derek’s long experience in the water industry and wide technical knowledge of the pressure side of the business. This was a huge boost when it came to my own efforts at authorship of the Pipe Materials Selection Manual. But what stood out to me was his unrelenting energy, and his insistence on data before decisions. Whilst on the subject of the Pipe Materials Selection Manual, I must also mention Gerald Jones for his encouragement in helping me through to the finishing line; Mark Hoffman, the late Trevor Richards (seconded from Rural Water Commission of Victoria) and the late Jonathon Olliff (Watson Hawkesley) for their unstinting support and examples of focus, energy and wisdom in their respective contributions; and to the members of the PMSM Liaison Group, including Roger Smith of Bristol Water, David Burgess of Yorkshire Water, David Pearson of North West Water and Mike Shepherd of Thames Water for freely sharing their knowledge and experience with me. Julia Trew who worked alongside me also made a huge and energetic contribution to progressing a number of innovative product standards at the time.
When I subsequently joined Subterra, I was a complete ingenue when it came to working in a commercially-focussed environment. I was lucky in the kindness shown to me as I found my legs, particularly by the late Alex Whiteside who was MD of the business and also effectively the Technical Director, given his sharp and wide-ranging intellect which was always a great stimulation, sometimes uncomfortably so!! I also mustn’t forget Ray Weaver, whose technical knowledge and experience he freely shared, and, although he may not be strictly on the technical path, I must mention the late Pearse O’Connell, who was Subterra’s Financial Director and also head of the Developments Division. Pearse catapulted me forward in the use of spreadsheets and data analysis, and also gave me an opportunity to learn the rudiments of contract legalities and IP protection. Then of course also were the guys on the Contracting side of the business who helped me develop a clearer appreciation of the financial and programming aspects of delivering Subterra’s systems, and an enduring admiration of their abilities, including the likes of Tony Bryan, Paul Houston, Nigel Wardle and Kevin Mussell.
I had already started to travel overseas for work with WRc, and this only increased once at Subterra in support of their International marketing effort and the servicing of licensees. This took me to Europe, North America and the Far East. On my travels I was fortunate to meet a whole galaxy of people outside the UK engaged in the pipe renovation industry, many of whom went on to play an important role in implementing and promoting Subterra’s technologies. Of the many worthy of mention, the two stand-outs who helped me to push the boundaries of our systems, and in turn inspired me, are Bob Torielli (President, PIM Corporation, New Jersey), who was an early adopter of Rolldown before I joined Subterra, and Ane Jutte (formerly Director of BAM-Nelis in Holland), both of whom in particular masterminded some innovative and stunningly effective applications of Subterra’s Subline close-fit interactive PE lining technology. There is also a particular place for Borje Persson who, as Technical Manager of Inpipe, introduced Subterra (and me) to UV-cured CIPP lining, way, way before that technology became the commonplace solution it is today. Borje also memorably partnered me in successfully creating a demonstrator UV-cured 2m long CIPP local liner system under the EU LIFE II programme. I’ve watched with admiration as he’s gone on from there to develop what is now a thriving trenchless business of his own.
And, whilst the question I’m addressing here typically invites one to consider as role models those further up the ladder of success, I could not leave this without mentioning Tony Pipe, who was my steadfast and invaluable technical support for some 20-odd years at Subterra, and whose combination of practical expertise, dedication, diligence and probity were in my opinion second to none of any in the same role, and without whom I could not have achieved a fraction of what I actually did.
However, the sine qua non in this category has to be Norman Howell, who shouldn’t need any introduction to the alumni of the UKSTT, given the major contributions he’s made to this and other learned societies in this field throughout his career. We began working together when he joined Subterra in ’02 and this continued fruitfully through his tenure as head of business under the various different ownerships until he decided to go off and plough his own furrow for a few years after ’13. His commitment to Subterra’s success was absolute and relentless, and he led from the front per ardua ad astra. Although an established trenchless technical expert in his own right, he most generously encouraged me continually to reinforce my image as the technical face of Subterra’s business. He was an inspiring boss and I’m proud to be numbered as a friend.
Again, apologies to the other cast of thousands who richly deserve a mention but cannot be so feted due to lack of space!
7. What do you currently see as the UK’s and the industry’s most urgent challenges and where do you hope to see the trenchless industry in the next 10 to 20 years?
Now, this is a difficult question for me. My perception had always been that, when I was employed at Subterra, I had been orbiting out on the periphery of the Society’s activities in my own small universe. Added to that, I’ve now been out of mainstream trenchless activities for some 7 years (although I do flip through Trenchless Works and Trenchless Buzz every month!). So, despite the signal honour being bestowed on me, I feel uniquely unqualified to speculate on matters of such import that continue constantly to exercise the minds of the leaders of the industry.
One area close to my heart and experience is standards. In the UK, OFWAT’s imposition of strict time limits on water supply service outages is clearly laudable from the general consumer’s perspective in holding water companies to account for maintaining supply continuity and sufficient resources for responding to unplanned emergency repairs. However, it surely cannot be the case that the intention was to impede the use of trenchless methods for planned system upgrades, with all their associated benefits of reduced carbon footprint and reduced disruption to communities and businesses that accrue, which unfortunately seems to have come to pass. Another example of the ineluctable Law of Unintended Consequences?! As I understand it, in the UK, many of the benefits of resin spray lining for upgrading old networks have been forfeited as a result over the past decade, despite the earlier efforts that had been made to ensure same day treatment and return to service when adopting this technique. I’ve not been closely involved in this area for some time now, but it must be the case that, if representations are being made to the regulator to reconsider this issue, that the UKSTT rightly should be playing a central role in providing objective operational and environmental data in support of any proposal to review these limits.
In a similar vein, there has been much said and written about the increasing difficulties in attempting to obtain approval for the use of new materials and products in the public water supply network. Personally I’m a fan of the UK approval system, as it’s based on a well-informed combination of strict testing and expert toxicological assessment. The formal acceptance of novel formulations and products is a highly responsible undertaking, one that would not particularly suit me as I prefer to sleep at night! But it seems that lately the system in the UK has foundered due to the lack of laboratories authorised to undertake the necessary analytical work to the requisite standard, which I suspect has arisen due to commercial pressures of maintaining such highly sophisticated facilities for what can be a very variable and intermittent workload. Although this is probably outside the remit of the UKSTT, there should at least be a backstop qualified laboratory resource permanently available within the Government’s ambit. That said, the pressures on the public purse probably preclude maintaining such expensive facilities on standby at times of low demand.
Product standards are also an area of some challenge, and I know that UKSTT are actively engaged in this arena, currently through Richard Swan. Whilst at WRc I was introduced to the idea of performance-based standards, and during my work there and ever since I have endeavoured to adopt that approach when developing standards. A sort of “black box”, if you like, that you can put the product in at one end and see whether it makes it though to the other end, having met all of the desired performance criteria. One of the key objectives of the “black box” has to be testing for endurance. The development and availability of meaningful tests that address this issue consistently in product and system standards is essential if new materials and systems are to be introduced with confidence. And, as those who know me will expect me to say, whilst the performance of the liner material itself is of course important, the key to the success of any lining system is the performance of the liner end terminations and other connections, which equally need to be addressed adequately in such standards.
A further challenge is for the UKSTT to maintain its momentum in raising awareness of trenchless methods generally, especially as, in the present climate of concern over global warming, such techniques are characterised by much smaller carbon footprints than conventional open-cut solutions, and are potentially much less disruptive to the public and commerce. More specifically the UKSTT ought to continue in its quest to incorporate trenchless technology studies into the curricula of courses for prospective professional engineer and technician entrants into the infrastructure sector, so that these techniques may be given their due consideration when adding to, replacing or renovating buried networks. Maybe it’s already been addressed, but perhaps something like a specialist 1-year MSc course on the subject might be worth considering?
Whilst on this, it took Norman to remind me that I was actually a member of UKSTT by proxy from 1995 to 2017 by virtue of Subterra’s corporate membership, and that as part of this I had, over the years, made direct contributions to disseminating the trenchless message, most notably through the presentation of UKSTT Masterclasses on both resin spray lining and PE lining technology. In addition, I had participated in UKSTT’s University Outreach Programme by co-presenting several of its annual Pipeline Engineering Day lectures and workshops with Sandra Rolfe-Dickinson and Peter Crouch at the Civil Engineering Departments of the Universities of Brunel and Warwick. Those that know Sandra will know who the real authority and educator was in those sessions!
As to where the industry might be in 10 to 20 years time, you’re asking someone whose whole working life has involved drifting from one thing to another without any discernible overarching plan or ambition, other than to survive the course! But to be serious, my hope would be that the UKSTT will go from strength to strength, and will continue to drive trenchless technology as a mainstream solution in the marketplace, to help ensure that the opportunities and associated benefits to the environment, economy and community can be maximised.