Introduction. The reform of the technical regulation system in Ukraine's road construction industry and the transition to the European model of declaring performance—in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 and Law No. 850-IX—require market participants to fundamentally rethink their approaches to generating supporting documentation and the allocation of responsibility.
Problem Statement. The practical application of new norms has revealed a series of systemic conflicts at the intersection of national legislation, European standards, and European Commission mandates. A significant gap has been identified between regulatory theory and market practice regarding the implementation of Declarations of Performance (DoP).
Objective. To analyze the legal and technical discrepancies in declaring the performance of road construction products and to investigate their impact on the validity and legal force of such declarations.
Methods. Systems analysis was employed to structure the Assessment and Verification of Constancy of Performance (AVCP) systems. Hierarchical analysis was used to study the transformation of essential characteristics into physical and technical properties, alongside an empirical analysis of open data from the Unified State Electronic System in the Construction Sector.
Results. The study demonstrates the pivotal role of Mandate M/124 in selecting AVCP systems and establishes a transition from linear to systemic dependence of characteristics for bituminous mixtures. Analysis of the Declaration of Performance registry revealed widespread imitation of conformity assessment procedures: specifically, the declaration of bituminous mixtures under System 2+ without the involvement of a notified body and in the absence of a factory production control certificate. Furthermore, "categorization chaos" was identified—the erroneous registration of precast concrete elements (curbs, paving blocks) as road construction products.
Conclusions. The lack of objective involvement of notified bodies de facto transforms the declared System 2+ into a self-declaration system (System 4), which is legally illegitimate for infrastructure projects with high safety requirements. Without rigorous state market surveillance, the Declaration of Performance instrument risks becoming a mere formality.
