Ground Reports

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report
Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists, 2005. All rights reserved First published 2005 ISBN 0-9539846-3-X No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists. This Guide aims to provide an overview of the risks associated with the preparation of Ground Reports and to make the reader aware of the matters that need to be considered and managed to minimise risks to both those preparing the Report and the users of the Report. The Guide is not intended to be exhaustive. The Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists (AGS) has attempted to consider relevant UK practices, the statutory framework (as it relates to English Law) and reasonably ascertainable information in producing this Guide. Organisations and individuals must keep abreast of developments and must apply their own judgement as to the appropriate content and format of any Ground Report they prepare. Although every effort has been made to check the accuracy of the information and validity of the guidance given in this Guide, neither the members of the Working Party nor the AGS shall be held liable for any loss, damage or claim of any kind sustained by any person or organisation as a result of reliance upon its contents. All brand names, trademarks, and registered trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Acknowledgements
The Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists (AGS) wishes to acknowledge the contributions of the members of its Loss Prevention Working Group in the development of this Guide, Management of Risks Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports.
Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports
1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 7 Objective................................................................................................. 7 Background to the Guide........................................................................ 7 Contents of the Guide ............................................................................. 7 THE GROUND REPORT ...................................................................... 8 The Definition of a Ground Report ........................................................ The Ground Report as the Project Deliverable ...................................... 8 Authors of Ground Reports .................................................................... 8 THE RISKS AN OVERVIEW ............................................................ 10 Damages suffered by the Client under the Contract .............................. 10 Damages suffered by the Client and Third Parties caused by the geospecialists negligence .......................................................... 10 Losses Suffered by the Geospecialist ..................................................... 10 The Liability of the Employee Within the Company ............................. 11 THE CONTRACT TO PREPARE A GROUND REPORT ................... 12 The Basic Framework of the Contract ................................................... 12 The Allocation of Risk ........................................................................... 13 The Contract as the Primary Risk Management Tool ............................ 13 Contract Terms Worth Avoiding ............................................................. 13
Contents
4.4.1 Contracts to be executed as a deed ........................................................ 13 4.4.2 Contract terms to exceed the professional standard of care................... 14 4.4.3 Time is of the essence and liquidated damages ..................................... 14 4.4.4 Insurance terms ....................................................................................... 14 4.4.5 Unfair contract terms .............................................................................. 15 4.4.6 Indemnity clauses ................................................................................... 15 4.4.7 Excessive administration ........................................................................ 15 4.4.8 Third party review .................................................................................. 15 4.4.9 Arbitration and appointment of arbitrators ............................................ 16 4.5 Contact Terms to be Considered for Inclusion....................................... 16 4.5.1 Limitation of liability ............................................................................. 16 4.5.2 Clients provision of documents ............................................................. 17 4.5.3 Permission to access the site .................................................................. 17 4.6 Ground Reports and Third Parties.......................................................... 18 4.6.1 Agreement to prepare report for third parties ........................................ 18 4.6.2 The Contact (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 .................................... 18 4.6.3 Collateral warranties ............................................................................... 18 4.7 Other Issues during Contract Negotiation .............................................. 19
5.0 5.1
IMPORTANT SECTIONS OF A GROUND REPORT ......................... 20 Limitation Statement .............................................................................. 20
5.1.1 Effect ...................................................................................................... 20 5.1.2 Types of limitation clauses ..................................................................... 20 5.1.3 How disclaimers should be incorporated ............................................... 21 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 7.0 7.1 7.2 The Introduction ..................................................................................... 21 Contents of a Report ............................................................................... 21 Accurate Use of Words and Terms ......................................................... 22 Caveats ................................................................................................... 22 ERRORS................................................................................................. 24 Types of Errors ....................................................................................... 24 Failure to Appreciate the Requirements and Extent of the Brief ........... 24 Lack of Attention During the Data Gathering Phase ............................. 24 Calculation errors ................................................................................... 24 Drawing Wrong or Inadequate Conclusions from the Information ....... 25 Typographical errors ............................................................................... 25 Collation errors ....................................................................................... 25 Measures to Control the Occurrence of Errors ...................................... 25 RISK CONTROL STRATEGY .............................................................. 27 Why Have a Risk Control Strategy? ...................................................... 27 Elements of Risk Control ....................................................................... 27
7.2.1 The contract ............................................................................................ 27 7.2.2 The report contents ................................................................................. 27 7.2.3 Quality assurance procedures ................................................................. 27 7.2.4 Recognise the signs of a possible claim ................................................. 28 7.3 Maintain Standards and Professionalism ............................................... 28
REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 29
AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports
1.1
Objective
This Guide to Management of Risks Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports has been prepared by the Loss Prevention Working Group of the Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists (AGS). Its objective is to inform AGS members and their employees of the potential risks to their businesses when entering a contract for the provision of a Ground Report, and to give guidance on how those risks can be minimised. It is hoped that this will not only enable AGS members business risks to be reduced, but also those of their clients.
1.0 Introduction
1.2
Background to the Guide

The need for this Guide has arisen from the use of the AGS publication Guide to the Model Document Report - Geoenvironmental Site Assessments (AGS(1996)). It became apparent that rather than being used as a model format for Ground Reports it was being used as a source of guidance notes and advice. Consequently, and after eight years of use, the Loss Prevention Working Group decided to prepare a document containing updated guidance on risk management for those AGS members and their staff involved in the preparation of Ground Reports.
1.3
Contents of the Guide

This Guide presents good practice for minimising and managing the business risks associated with the preparation of Ground Reports. Nevertheless, much of the guidance could equally apply to other types of report. The definition of a Ground Report is given in Section 2.1 below. In Chapter 3, the Guide describes some of the risks to the parties involved in the development of a Ground Report in order to highlight the need for businesses and individual practitioners, whether employed or self-employed, to proactively manage those risks. The starting point is the contract for the preparation of the Report. Contract terms are discussed in Chapter 4, with guidance given on terms to be included and to be avoided. The text of the Ground Report itself has a role to play in the management of the risks. How this is achieved is described in Chapter 5 where limitation (disclaimer) statements, the report introduction, and terminology are discussed, and in Chapter 6 where drafting and compilation errors are reviewed. Finally, in Chapter 7, the contents of the Guide are summarised in a risk management strategy. This Guide does not aim to provide a method for carrying out the various phases of geotechnical or geoenvironmental work itself, nor a methodology for providing a documented record of how the work is undertaken. Also, it does not give any guidance nor comment on methods of site appraisal nor on geotechnical and geoenvironmental design. These must remain the choice and interpretation of the geospecialist. However, attention is drawn to the AGS Code of Conduct for Site Investigation (AGS (1999)) and Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations (AGS (2000)) that address these issues.
2.0 The Ground Report
2.1 Definition of a Ground Report

The AGS guidance document, Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report (2003a), considers the Ground Report to comprise the following five sequential parts which may be combined or extended to suit the particular project. The recommended contents of each part are described in that Guide. Desk Study (which may include a preliminary appraisal of the site) Factual Report (describing the results of a ground investigation) Interpretative Report Design Report Validation Report
This report structure suits both geotechnical and geoenvironmental projects.
2.2 The Ground Report as the Project Deliverable

In geotechnical and geoenvironmental practice the Ground Report is often the only tangible deliverable to the client at the end of a series of operations. For example, it may contain the results of a ground investigation of which on completion of the field and laboratory work there is no physical evidence remaining of the work undertaken. Therefore Ground Reports and their contents assume a high level of importance to clients, as not only do they provide clients with the facts, interpretation and advice or design they require, but they may be the only tangible product of the clients expenditure. Ground Reports are prepared for a variety of purposes, and are commissioned by a wide range of clients. Every commission and site is different and each Report needs to be drafted according to the circumstances. Care needs to be taken when adapting a standard or previous document. The relevance and comprehensiveness of the Report contents must be checked. Bear in mind that Reports are usually easily reproducible and can be distributed to many parties, other than the client, who may use and interpret their contents differently. As part of the checking procedure it is worthwhile considering each Report from the viewpoint of anyone who might refer to it; considering how they might use the Report, and considering whether it can be reasonably misinterpreted or misunderstood.
2.3 Authors of Ground Reports

A large number of people may be involved in the preparation of a Ground Report. Inevitably they will have different levels of skills and experience, different opinions, and they may not all be geospecialists. (Geospecialist is the term used in this Guide to describe geotechnical and geoenvironmental scientists, engineers and technicians.) It is therefore essential that all Ground Reports are prepared in accordance with formal quality assurance procedures. Each organisation should determine the
qualifications, skill and experience levels it requires of the authors, checkers and approvers of its Ground Reports. Guidance on current industry standards regarding the qualification, skill and experience of different grades of geotechnical personnel may be obtained from the ICE document Site Investigation in Construction ICE (1993) prepared by the Site Investigation Steering Group. These standards are evolving and also are not necessarily applicable to all areas of work covered by AGS members and their employees. The quality assurance procedures should clearly indicate what is expected of each contributor to the Ground Report. AGS members should recognise that they have legal and professional responsibilities to use reasonable skill, care and diligence, either as employees or as employers of appropriately qualified and suitably experienced staff, in the preparation of Ground Reports and in the implementation of appropriate management procedures for the preparation of Ground Reports.
3.0 The Risks an Overview
3.1 Damages suffered by the Client under the Contract

A contract is no more than a promise or a collection of promises enforceable by the courts. Where a promise has not been kept the innocent party is entitled to claim damages from the party who has broken his promise. The measure of damages is the sum of money required to put the innocent party into the position he would have been had the breach not occurred. Some breaches are regarded as being so serious that, as well as entitling the innocent party to damages, they also entitle him to treat the contract as no longer being binding on him. The courts may also make an award of specific performance, which is an order that the party in breach do what he has agreed to do.
3.2 Damages suffered by the Client and Third Parties caused by the geospecialists negligence
A ground report can lead to financial claims against the firm or company producing it where: there is an error in the report that error amounts to negligence a person relies on the error and suffers loss as a result of the negligence the person committing the error ought fairly and reasonably to have anticipated that the person relying on the report would so rely on it
Not every error is negligence. The law recognises that there is a band of reasonable conclusions that professionals might arrive at on a given set of facts. An error by a geospecialist is actionable only where his conduct falls below that expected of the reasonably competent geospecialist practising in that area. The law also limits the number of people who might be able to succeed in a negligence claim for errors set out in the Report. This is an important qualification. Once the geospecialist has delivered the Report he has no control over its distribution. A Report that is copied and shown to a number of different parties (each of whom might also copy and distribute the Report, and so on) can create indeterminate liability, to an indeterminate class of people for an indeterminate time. But the legal rules for establishing which parties can bring negligence claims are difficult to apply and are still evolving. This is an uncertain area of law. Further guidance is given in the AGS Tool Kit paper on Tort.
3.3 Losses suffered by the geospecialist

If the client sues the geospecialist for damages in contract or in tort for negligence, and the court makes an award in favour of the client, then the geospecialist will suffer financially. Even if the case is dropped, there will be lawyers fees to pay, which, although may be paid by the insurer, may lead to increased insurance premiums. Where insurance cover is in place the whole or part of the claim may fall within the uninsured policy excess. Even if the geospecialist is only partly to blame, unless a specific provision is made in the contract, he is jointly and severally liable for the entire financial loss suffered by the client irrespective of the size of the
10
fee. And even if the geospecialists advice has not been taken he may still be involved in subsequent litigation. (Even when the geospecialist has no involvement in the work he may still be taken to court - in one case a moonlighting employee used company drawing paper for his own work, and the company was, for a short time, third party to a court action!) Receiving payment for services is not always straightforward. It may be that the client ceases trading before payment, or is just reticent to pay. It is important that the geospecialist makes clear the basis upon which he is providing the professional services. Without written evidence for the basis of payment it may be alleged by the client that the services were being provided on a speculative basis, and that payment for the services would not be made unless the development proceeded. In some cases the geospecialist may be criminally liable for the advice he gives in his Report. For example in the field of waste management if advice is given to the effect that a licence is not required when in fact it is, then the geospecialist may be held to have aided, abetted, counselled or procured the offence committed by his developer client. More discussion is given in the AGS Loss Prevention Alert No 24, Advising Clients Applying for Regulatory Licences Under Environmental Law or Planning Control. If poor advice leads to a risk to health and safety the geospecialist can be prosecuted under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Other indirect losses include loss of business from the client, loss of reputation, and even loss of the industrys reputation with clients as a whole. A substantial amount of irrecoverable time may be spent by management and senior technical staff in dealing with unsuccessful as well as successful claims.
3.4 The liability of the employee within a company

It should be remembered that in certain situations the person suffering the loss can sue the individual employee as well as the firm that he works for. It is unlikely that a junior person in a large firm would be held personally to owe the client a duty of care. However, where there is a proximate relationship between the client and a particular employee then such a duty may be held to apply. For example under the Reservoirs Act 1975 it is the individual who is authorised to do certain work rather than the firm. If a person has moved companies and has taken his clients with him then he may be considered to owe those clients a duty of care. A similar situation may arise where a person has attracted clients to the firm by his good name and reputation. If the firm no longer exists, or there is no or insufficient insurance then the individual may become an attractive target for litigation. The personal duty of care may be reduced by making it clear in the appointment documents that no contractual or tortuous duty of care is owed by an individual. When signing a Report add signed for and on behalf of (name of firm) or similar. Further details on this difficult area of law are given in the AGS Tool Kit Document LIAB/04, Liability of the Individual within the Contracting or Consulting Firm.
11
4.0 The Contract to Prepare a Ground Report
4.1
The Basic Framework of the Contract

A contract is usually a formal written agreement containing the details of what is to be provided by the geospecialist and the details of the payments that the client will make to the geospecialist. Where there was an intention to create a legal relationship between the parties, but not all the terms necessary to make the contract workable are explicitly stated, then the courts will hold that certain terms have been implied. These terms might not be what the parties actually intended. The following terms are some of those which are usually implied in a contract for geospecialist services if they are not otherwise explicitly stated. a. The geospecialist will use reasonable skill, care and diligence. b. The geospecialist should be paid a reasonable fee. c. The geospecialist should complete work in a reasonable time. Express terms will however overrule implied terms (unless those express terms are unfair see later). More information about implied terms can be found in in the AGS Tool Kit Document CON/01, The Bare Agreement. Some companies or rms may have their own standard terms and conditions of contract or the geospecialist may use some industry-wide standard contract forms such as the Association of Consulting Engineers Conditions of Engagement. Industry wide standard documents should be used with as little amendment as possible to minimise the risks inherent with adding to or altering the existing content. A comparison of industry wide standard forms is given in the AGS Tool Kit Document CON/04, A Comparison of Industry Wide Standard Forms for the Appointment of Consultants and Bespoke Client Contracts. A contract can be made up of a number of documents including the geospecialists covering letter and proposal, and the clients tender documents and letter of acceptance. It can be oral. It can even be inferred from the conduct of the parties without any direct communication between them. It is not unusual for the contract to comprise a series of correspondence between the parties discussing and trying to agree the terms sometimes called the battle of the forms. The later letters usually overrule the earlier correspondence, but this is an unsatisfactory way to form the contract conditions. The actual contract terms may not be clear to the parties in any dispute, and require a decision of the court to determine them, sometimes with unexpected results. The contract will normally state the following: The geospecialists precise brief. What is to be done and by when. The standard to which the geospecialist is to work. What insurance is required. How much is to be paid and when is payment due. How the geospecialists liability is to be limited or excluded.
12
4.2
The Allocation of Risk

Effective risk management requires that the risks be identied and allocated to the party best suited to accept and manage that risk. Often this will be based on economics. The client may pay more to one of its advisors to take on board a particular risk, or the client may decide to take on the risk himself. It is unfortunately common for the parties to use the contract to try and pass as much risk as they can to the other party. A more enlightened course would be a collaborative approach to risk reduction for the project as a whole.
4.3
The Contract as the Primary Risk Management Tool

A geospecialist cannot derogate from the service he has agreed to provide by the terms of the contract through any limitation stated subsequently in the Report or elsewhere unless agreed to by the other party to the contract. Therefore it is of fundamental importance that the contract adequately expresses the intentions of the parties with respect to what is to be provided, the sharing of risks and the level of any limitations. Limitation of liability contract clauses are the most effective way of managing the geospecialists nancial risk. A range of clauses are set out in the Association of Consulting Engineers Terms of Appointment. Some of the different types are briey described below, with more details presented in the AGS Tool Kit Document LIAB/01, Limiting and Excluding Professional Liability. Limitation of liability is also discussed in Subsection 4.5.1. of this Guide. a. A stated limit of liability. This may be set too low, and therefore be considered unreasonable (see Subsection 4.4.5), or too high and be of no use. Often the level is set with reference to the fee, say 10 times the geospecialists fee for the work. b. Evaporation clauses. The geospecialists liability is limited to whatever insurance protection he has in place to meet that liability. However, such clauses may not limit the geospecialists overall liability and so should be used carefully. c. Equitable contribution clause. The geospecialists liability is limited to such sum as would be just and equitable to pay assuming all other parties who have contributed to the clients loss have been sued for judgement and have paid compensation.
4.4
Contract Terms Worth Avoiding
4.4.1 Contracts to be executed as a deed

Contracts executed as deeds have an extended limitation period of twelve years rather than the normal six. The potential period of liability will be extended and so it will rarely be in the geospecialists interest to execute the agreement as a deed. Variations to deeds also have to be executed as deeds, potentially giving rise to inconvenience and delay
13
4.4.2 Contract terms to exceed the professional standard of care

In no circumstances should a contract term be agreed that requires the geospecialist to give an absolute commitment to achieve something, or to agree to a term that could be construed to be a tness for purpose covenant, as these impose a higher standard of work than the usual professional standard, namely to use reasonable care, skill and diligence. Some examples of tness for purpose are given below. To promise to produce a design that provides a denite result. To warrant or guarantee that the Ground Report accurately describes the geoenvironmental or geotechnical condition of the site. To warrant that the geospecialist has complied with the employers safety policy, or to comply with various codes and guidance documents. To promise to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, such as health and safety and environment laws. Under the Water Resources Act 1991 it is a strict liability offence to pollute a watercourse, ie an offence even if the consultant used reasonable care, skill and diligence to try and avoid the pollution.
4.4.3 Time is of the essence and liquidated damages

If the contract does not state the date by which the Report must be completed and delivered then there is an implied term that the work will be done in a reasonable time. Where, as is normally the case, the client insists on a specic date, avoid any reference in the contract indicating that time is of the essence in the provision of the Report. Where time is of the essence, and the Report is delivered late, not only will the client be entitled to damages, but he will also be entitled to treat the contract as terminated by the consultants breach of contract. Where time is not of the essence the clients only entitlement will be to damages. Where the contract is silent on the point it is assumed that time is not of the essence. Liquidated damages are a fair estimate at the time of signing the contract of the losses that would be suffered by the client if the geospecialist were not to perform some part of the agreement. This makes it easier for the client to recover money to help cover his loses as he doesnt have to prove what his damages actually are. Therefore, if possible, the contract should avoid any reference to liquidated damages. In that case, where the Report is delivered late the client will only be able to claim damages if he can prove that he has suffered an actual loss. Note that liquidated damages cannot be for a punitive sum. If they are then that contract term will be void.
4.4.4 Insurance terms

No geospecialist should agree to a term which requires him to maintain insurance at a certain level in future years. Changes in the insurance market over the years, and in the circumstances of the geospecialist, can lead to certain types of insurance not being available to the geospecialist in the future. An acceptable term would be that the consultant warrants
14
to maintain insurance provided that it is available on reasonable commercial terms. The agreement, or collateral warranties, may be silent on the obligation to maintain professional indemnity cover. If there is not an express agreement to maintain cover then the geospecialist should resist any call to maintain cover he cannot afford. Clients may ask detailed questions about the geospecialists insurance, and if there is any doubt about the terms used or what is required then the geospecialist should check with his broker or lawyer. It may be a condition of the geospecialists insurance that he does not reveal the insurance terms to third parties without the insurers permission.
4.4.5 Unfair contract terms

There are certain terms which under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 may be considered to be unfair, and therefore will be excluded from the contract. If a term is introduced which purports to reduce the liability of the consultant but which is considered to be unfair, then the consultant could end up with less protection than if a less onerous exclusion term had been used. Under the Act a person cannot exclude or restrict liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence. Also a person cannot exclude or restrict liability for other loss or damage except in so far as it is reasonable to do so.
4.4.6 Indemnity clauses

An indemnity may provide simply that one party should indemnify the other against breaches of contract. This is more onerous than a mere entitlement to damages for breach of contract. The right to sue is therefore effectively unlimited in time. Also, depending on the drafting of the indemnity, the rules concerning remoteness and foreseeability may not apply to limit the loss to one which the parties could have reasonably contemplated at the time the contract was entered into.
4.4.7 Excessive administration

Contracts will often contain clauses that require the geospecialist to respond to requests from the client within a certain time, or to make certain specied personnel available when requested, and in principle there is no objection to these clauses. The client may also be required to respond to requests from the geospecialist within given times. However, contracts with excessive administration should be avoided. They will not only increase administration costs, but will also increase the risk of a breach of contract. It may indicate that the client does not trust the geospecialist to act professionally. Contracts with excessive administration requirements need careful management.
4.4.8 Third party review

Contracts which require the work of the geospecialist to be reviewed by a third party are subject to the risk that work cannot be completed within usual timescales and allocation of resources because of a difference of opinion by the third party. It is unwise to accept a contract term
15
that requires approval be obtained from the third party within a certain time unless there is some control over the action of the third party. For example if the third party is engaged directly by geospecialists client then the overall interests of the parties are aligned. The risk to the geospecialist is greater where the third party derives no benet from approving the geospecialists work, or the proposed works create a risk to the third partys own business operations. In these situations the third party has little incentive to approve the geospecialists work, and may reasonably request a high degree of detail and assessment to give him condence that the risk he is being asked to accept is low or negligible.
4.4.9 Arbitration and appointment of Arbitrators

Contracts can provide that, rather than disputes between the parties being decided by the courts, they can be decided by arbitrators appointed by the parties. Often the parties will have more condence in a tribunal that is qualied technically in the subject area of the dispute. However: ensure that the named arbitrator or appointing body is indeed technically competent; be aware that arbitration can be expensive as the parties will need to pay the arbitrator; appreciate that arbitration by non lawyers can sometimes produce unjust, even shocking, results when the dispute turns around points of law; and bear in mind that nearly all engineering disputes are now referred to the Technology and Construction Court where the judges have considerable technical knowledge.
It is often thought that arbitrators are unwilling to take a harsh line with weak cases. This can work against geospecialists where disingenuous bogus negligence claims are raised against a geospecialists claim for unpaid fees.
4.5
Contract Terms to be Considered for Inclusion
4.5.1 Limitation of liability

In Section 4.3 it was recommended that the contract include a limitation of liability clause; but why should a client accept a limitation of liability? In fact there is already a limitation, namely the insurance cover in place at the time of the claim (which may have been reduced by earlier claims or changes to the market or in the geospecialists circumstances) plus the companys assets, and possibly plus the assets of particular individual geospecialists involved in the preparation of the Ground Report. The limit in the contract should be much less than the geospecialists insurance limits because the insurance not only has to cover liability to the client, but also to any party that could foreseeably be injured or damaged by the geospecialists professional work. The latter is likely to be a bigger risk because of the wide class of people and organisations represented, and the geospecialist does not have the opportunity that he has with the client to work together to implement quality management procedures to reduce the risks. Also limited liability companies are able to dissolve, leaving the remaining companies which are jointly and
16
severally liable to be sued for a greater portion of the damage than their share of the blame. Clients can realise cost savings by accepting a limitation of liability. The greater the risk accepted by the geospecialist the greater should his fees be. Insurance companies charge greater premiums for greater risks. The additional fee is required to fund not only the higher premiums but also a larger nancial reserve and other measures to minimise risk such as preparing even more robust quality systems and staff training. The greater the risk to the geospecialist the more he will apply defensive design techniques to lower the risk of claims, even though this may increase the project cost. This is self-preservation. If the geospecialists livelihood is not on the line, and with a reasonable approach to risk management by his client, there is more opportunity and incentive for innovation and implementing a more cost-effective design. The presence of a limitation clause will reduce the risk of any party to the contract inating their claim. Fewer claims will result in lower insurance premiums and less overhead expense, and thus a more protable business, and better value for the client. At the very least discussing the level of the limitation of liability with the client will allow both parties to appreciate the others attitude to allocation and management of risk. The discussion on risk management may even lead to opportunities for the geospecialist to employ his risk management expertise to the clients benet, resulting in an expansion of the geospecialists services which, if giving him more involvement, could lower his overall risk. If the discussion is recorded in the contract then the agreed level of limitation is less likely to be considered an unfair contract term by the courts, particularly if it can be demonstrated that the client is gaining a consideration for the limitation in the form of paying a lower fee. Care is required when dealing with subconsultants requests for limitations of liability. Should a limit be agreed in the subcontract and a claim arises as a result of the subconsultants negligence, the principal consultants insurer may not be able to pursue the subconsultant for the full amount as the claim cannot be subrogated to the insurer. This may leave the principal liable for the balance, which being a contractual liability may not be covered by his insurance. Advice should be sought from the broker or insurer.
4.5.2 Clients provision of documents

Consideration should be given to incorporating a term which requires the client to provide the geospecialist with technical information or documents relevant to the commission in their possession when requested by the geospecialist. These may be provided on the condition that the geospecialist must use his own professional judgement to determine the weight he will give to the information.
4.5.3 Permission to access the site

A term ought to be incorporated to require the client to obtain permission from the site owner for the geospecialist to visit the site, and if
17
appropriate, for the geospecialist to carry out work on the site. Not only is obtaining permission to enter a risk best left with the client, but such a term will help to clarify what limits the client will place on the activities of the geospecialist in sensitive situations.
4.6
Ground Reports and Third Parties
4.6.1 Agreement to prepare report for third parties

The geospecialist has no control over the distribution of the Ground Report once it has been issued to the client. However, any third party relying on the contents of the Report will not usually be in the same position as the client with respect to the recovery from the geospecialist of any loss resulting from any errors in the Report. See also Subsection 3.2 above. The geospecialist should check the contract terms to ensure that he has not agreed to prepare the report jointly for the client and others, for example the clients bankers, unless that is the geospecialists intention.
4.6.2 The Contact (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

This Act affords third parties, in certain circumstances, benets under contracts to which they are not a party. The third party is able to enforce a contract term if the contract expressly gives him the right to do so, or if the contract purports to confer a benet on the third party. Contracts should be checked thoroughly for third party rights. It is possible to expressly exclude, or modify, third party rights by the inclusion of an appropriate contract clause, and it is recommended that where possible this be done. Such a clause is notwithstanding any other provisions of the contract, nothing in this contract confers or purports to confer any right to enforce any of its terms on any person who is not a party to it. Further details are given in the AGS Tool Kit Document CON/03, The Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act. .
4.6.3 Collateral warranties

Collateral warranties are terms and conditions collateral to the main contract which create, in effect, a contractual relationship between the parties to the warranty, in this case the geospecialist and parties selected by the client. The geospecialist will then owe the 3rd party a contractual obligation to use reasonable care, skill and diligence. When a party enters into a collateral warranty they are therefore opening themselves to a potentially wider liability. An example of this would be where the geospecialist, having been instructed by a land owner, is induced to enter into a collateral warranty in favour of a potential purchaser of the land giving him the right to rely on the results of the geospecialists survey. Collateral warranties often take the form of deeds and so the period of liability will expire twelve years from the date of breach of the warranty rather than the usual six years for simple contracts. As a general rule, collateral warranties should not be given unless absolutely necessary. If given, they should not extend liability beyond that which exists under the original contract with the client. If asked to execute collateral warranties after the main agreement has been effected
18
then the geospecialist will be taking on additional risk. This is because of the increased number of parties being contracted with, some of which may use the advice in an inappropriate manner, and thus increase the risk of being sued, even if there is no case to answer. Consultants may reasonably expect extra payment for taking this additional risk. The AGS Guide to Collateral Warranties AGS (2003b) gives useful guidance on the use of collateral warranties. There are particular dangers with a term at the request of the client ...... the consultant shall .... execute a (collateral) warranty .... with such amendments as the client may reasonably require...... It may be held reasonable for the client to require the inclusion of a tness for purpose obligation. More discussion on this is given in AGS Loss Prevention Alert No 25, Onerous terms in the English Partnerships collateral warranties.
4.7
Other Issues during Contract Negotiation

While negotiating the contract the geospecialist should attempt to determine the nancial stability of any new or current client. Does the client usually pay on time? Sometimes it is better to walk away from a client who always queries an invoice to delay payment, or at least the geospecialist should add something to account for servicing the debt.
19
5.0 Important Sections of a Ground Report
5.1 Limitation Statement 5.1.1 Effect

Limitations or disclaimers cannot have a contractual effect (unless explicitly agreed by the contracting parties). One that states Note that the geospecialists liability is limited to the cost of remediating the site ...or rectifying inadequate design will have no legal effect unless that limitation is also set out in the contract. Nevertheless they have a role insofar as their effect is to limit certain types of reliance by the client or by third parties. A long list of disclaimers can be quite off-putting, and may make the client query the confidence or competence of those he has instructed. General disclaimers should not be used as a substitute for accurate report writing. Care must be taken to ensure that the disclaimer does not have the effect of preventing the client from using the report in the manner clearly contemplated at the time of entering into the contract.
5.1.2 Types of limitation clauses

a. Excluding third party reliance - A limitation which says third parties should not rely on the facts matters or opinions set out in the report without first speaking to the geospecialist, or the report is prepared solely for the internal use and reliance of the client (and any parties agreed previously with the client), is generally valid. If the third party reads the Report without the geospecialists permission he will then be aware that he relies on the Report at his peril and the consultant owes him no duty of care. (However, do not suggest or imply that the Report is written to comply with a third partys needs.) The disclaimer would not be valid if the client has previously agreed with the geospecialist that the Report is being jointly prepared for the clients bankers or other stated parties and these parties may all rely on it without reference to the geospecialist. b. Clients to seek independent legal advice - A limitation which states please note that the geospecialist does not purport to provide specialist legal advice is perfectly proper. The law relating to contaminated land is in a state of flux and it is unwise to attempt any detailed exposition of law in this area. c. All parts of the Report should be read and considered The executive summary of a Report may not describe the limitations on the quality of information the geospecialist has been able to consult, and so a statement discouraging the practice of the readers only reading the executive summary may be incorporated The executive summary contains an overview of the key findings and conclusions. However no reliance should be placed on any part of the executive summary until the whole of the report has been read. Other sections of the report may contain information which puts into context the findings which are summarised in the executive summary.
20
d. Limitation to the coverage of the Report If there was some restriction on the extent of the work carried out, for example it was not possible to access all the site, then this may need to be stated. Although the effect may be obvious to the geospecialist it may not be obvious to the reader.
5.1.3 How disclaimers should be incorporated

It is generally advised that disclaimers should be set out at the beginning of the Report, probably coming before the executive summary. Plain language should be used. They should be carefully chosen and drafted with regard to the contract and the agreed use the Report will be put to. They should not be excessively long.
5.2 The Introduction

The introduction to the Report should always state why and for whom the work has been undertaken, ie the nature and extent of the brief as set out in the contract and any changes to the brief. If there are significant implications resulting from the changes in the brief then these should be stated. It should clarify the responsibilities of the parties. The Report, possibly in the introduction, should alert the client to any inherent uncertainties, such as any areas of the site or the activities that have not been studied or investigated and the reasons why. The proposed form of construction or the proposed future use of the site should be described so as to indicate why the work reported was approached in a certain way, which may not be appropriate for other proposals.
5.3 Contents of a Report

The language used in the Report and the layout of its contents should be clear and unambiguous to prevent misunderstanding or misinterpretation. (Indeed work has been held as negligent where the recommendations were not expressed in clear or positive terms.) A logical format for presenting the information will assist greatly. Factual information should be presented in separate sections to the interpretation, discussion and recommendations. This will help avoid giving inconsistent advice and help avoid misinterpretations. A well presented and laid out Report which follows industry practice will not only be less likely to confuse, it will also give confidence to the reader that the appropriate expertise and procedures have been brought to bear on the production of the Report. The client may state in the contract how the Report is to be structured and may also specify the style and presentation of the Report and whether certain matters are included or left out. If these requirements might cause the geospecialist a problem then it is important to reach agreement before the contract is signed. These requirements could be stated in the introduction so as to avoid any later query as to why the Report was written the way it was.
21
Other issues which may be important and thus should be referred to somewhere in the Report include the state of knowledge at any time of the effects of any particular aspect on the site and land adjacent to the site, the extent to which the market is reflecting possible changes in legislation and technology, the previous, existing and proposed use of the site, properties adjoining and in the vicinity of the site, and the financial and commercial implications of the above. The effects of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 may need to be considered, particularly where the Report details a design. Designers must ensure that their designs avoid foreseeable risks to the health and safety of people working on site, combat risks at source, and give priority to measures which will achieve the greatest safety gain. Further advice is given in AGS Loss Prevention Alert No 13, Safety Concerns CDM Compliance. Fitness for purpose statements must not be introduced into the Report. The statement I certify that the rebar was placed in accordance with the plans and specifications might be interpreted as warranting or guaranteeing that the rebar was placed properly, even though the statement was based on site observation and not a rigorous inspection.
5.4 Accurate Use of Words and Terms

It is important to be accurate in the use of terms or individual words throughout the Ground Report. Some words have an industry definition, such as clay, and so should not be used except as defined. Similarly with some sand means a specified percentage of sand, and so should only be used as such. Ensure that the Report uses the right words with the right meaning and in the right way. A clear distinction is drawn between site investigation, which is the overall process of the discovery of information, appraisal of data, assessment and reporting, and ground investigation, which is the more restrictive phase of specialist intrusive investigation on site with the allied monitoring, testing and reporting. In the past, these two terms have frequently been interchanged without the proper understanding and use of the terms. Do not make more of the available data than can be wholly substantiated. For example avoid overstatement. Do not say something is very big when big will suffice; do not say something is essential when in fact it is merely advantageous; do not say a policy is disastrous when what is meant is that it is undesirable. Avoid wishful statements. For example do not say a given option is the only one where really you mean it is the best one. Do not make more out of limited information from exploratory work than can be justified. Avoid making careless statements, in other words make sure what is written is what is meant. Consider whether a word or phase can have another meaning just as reasonable as the one intended.
5.5. Caveats
Caveats are warnings made in the Report, usually relating to the degree of reliance that can be given to specific statements providing
22
interpretation or advice. They will usually be included in the main body of the Report near to the relevant statement. In some investigation and report work, forms of reporting have evolved which are so hedged with caveats that it is difficult to discern any useful meaning. This does not improve the reputation of those who produce such reports and it is not an approach commended by AGS. In any event, Ground Reports need clear, concise conclusions, since the reports have to lead to practical decisions on further steps by way of investigation, assessment, design and/or remediation. Nevertheless there will be areas of uncertainty which must be communicated to the client so that he can have a true appreciation of the risk. For example, the viability of a project may depend on the Environment Agencys interpretation of the waste management laws, and not all officers may interpret the law in the same way. Caveats may indicate that all relevant and correct information may not have been supplied to or was obtainable by the geospecialist, or that ground and groundwater conditions may change with time, or that ground and groundwater conditions may vary between exploratory points or be outside the range of the testing undertaken. A conclusion based on limited access to the site may need a caveat.
23
6.0 Errors
6.1 Types of Errors

Errors in a Ground Report pose a risk to both the geospecialist and to his client. There are a number of categories of errors. Errors can result from a misunderstanding of the requirements of the brief, or from lack of attention during the site investigation work. Errors can be made in the calculations, incorrect or wishful statements may be made through lack of knowledge or experience, typographical errors can be made, errors can be made in compilation of the report document.
6.2 Failure to Appreciate the Requirements and Extent of the Brief

The brief should be read carefully and if it is not clear what is required, or the geospecialist considers the wrong questions are being asked, then it should be discussed with the client. Care should be taken to ensure that the Report satisfies all the requirements of the brief, and does no more, or less, or something other than required. For example the geospecialist may have been asked to report on two sites belonging to the client. Misunderstanding the brief, the geospecialist reports only one site. Without a Report on the other site the client loses the opportunity to sell it to a prospective purchaser, consequently suffering a loss arising from a breach of the contract.
6.3 Lack of Attention During the Data Gathering Phase

Incorrect or incomplete information obtained from existing sources or from site visits can lead to inappropriate recommendations given in the Ground Report. a. Failure to carry out a sufficiently comprehensive desk study can lead to omission of information on the previous land use that is relevant to the appraisal of the site. b. Failure to carry out a sufficiently comprehensive walkover survey of the site and so missing important relevant evidence. This can be a particular problem on large or complex sites, or sites restricted by the clients operations or other physical constraints. c. Failure to notice a relevant fact, either in the desk study (eg a street name Gas Works Lane) or in the walkover survey (eg uneven land indicative of slope instability). d. Failure to appreciate the full significance of a relevant fact. For example, uneven ground may be correctly interpreted as a landfill site, but failure to appreciate that there was a risk of landfill leachate contaminating ground water.
6.4 Calculation Errors

Calculations are used in many aspects of a geospecialists work, and any errors can have a significant affect on the information, recommendations and designs presented in a Ground Report. If not formally laid out, calculations can be difficult to check. The use of computers, either with proprietary software packages or with internally developed spreadsheet programs, has increased the risk of calculations containing errors that go uncorrected. Some types of errors are listed below.
24
a. Misunderstanding data format (e.g. levels presented in Chart Datum being assumed to be Ordnance Datum). b. Basic arithmetic errors (eg 2 + 2 = 5). c. Confusion with units, especially if converting between different systems of units, and when inputting data into a computer program. d. Incorrect material properties, arising from calculation errors in the laboratory or errors in the analysis of the available results. e. Incorrect basis for the calculations. For example, assuming a slope failure to be a slip circle when the failure mechanism is controlled by pre-existing shear surfaces. It recommended that appropriate quality assurance measures be introduced to check and approve calculations. Arithmetic and sense checks should be undertaken by appropriately experienced staff on all calculations that may affect what is written in a Report.
6.5 Drawing Wrong or Inadequate Conclusions from the Information

This is also a significant risk if limited parts of the information are considered in isolation. For example plasticity information from laminated samples or the results of quick undrained triaxial tests should only be considered with caution and in conjunction with other information.
6.6 Typographical Errors

Typographical errors can change the meaning of a statement from that which was intended. For example, omitting the no from the statement no adverse activities have previously been carried out on the site completely changes the meaning of the statement.
6.7 Collation Errors

Missing information and content. Insufficient time is frequently left for the final assembling of the report resulting in poorly copied sheets and missing pages, sections, appendices and figures.
6.8 Measures to Control the Occurrence of Errors

It is recommended that all Ground Reports are prepared in accordance with formal quality assurance procedures. These procedures should clearly indicate what is expected of each contributor to the Ground Report, and how multi-disciplinary reports are checked and approved, and if necessary how they will be subjected to internal or external independent review. The quality assurance procedures should be reasonably implementable, not merely aspirational. Should the geospecialist be shown not to have followed his/her own quality assurance procedures then there would be prima facie evidence that reasonable care, skill and diligence had not been used. The originator, the checker and the approver of the Report should be recorded, and may be named in, and sign, the Report. In some cases
25
there may be more than one author and/or checker. In which case it should be clear who is the lead author/checker and who is responsible for what part of the Report. A particularly difficult issue is the degree of checking expected of the checker(s), eg whether an arithmetic and/ or a sense check, and this should be covered by the quality assurance procedure. The individuals involved in all stages of Report preparation should be appropriately qualified and experienced personnel so that accountability is clearly established. Before any Report is issued the accuracy of all data and information should be re-checked to ensure that as far as possible the Report provides a consistent and appropriate record of the activities, considerations and recommendations. The conclusions and recommendations should be subject to an independent internal or external review. This should verify that the Report is clear, meets the requirements of the brief, and does not draw conclusions or give recommendations that cannot be supported by the evidence presented in the Report
26
7.1 Why Have a Risk Control Strategy?

Even unsuccessful claims are costly. Insurance premiums may rise if the claim remains unsettled at the time of renewal of insurance. Lawyers may need to be instructed. Scarce management resources may be diverted away from the core business to unprofitable activities such as liaising with lawyers and insurers. It is also worth noting that it is extremely difficult to have an ongoing commercial relationship with a client who is in the process of suing you.
7.0 Risk Control Strategy
7.2 Elements of Risk Control 7.2.1The contract

Ensure that the brief with the client is clear and unambiguous and the contract contains no unduly onerous requirements. Ensure that the offer letter in response to the brief covers the required services and is a key element in formulating appropriate contract terms. Ensure that any subsequent changes are fully documented and acted upon. Ensure limitations are as intended and appropriate and have legal effect. These may need to be discussed with the client before the contract is signed. Ensure that all contractual and non-contractual communications with the client are properly recorded. Ensure that all relevant contractual documents are kept for a sufficient length of time to cover the liability period. The time will depend on how the contract was signed, when the project was completed and whether any contracts collateral to the main contract were entered in to. Avoid over-promise. A common problem is to promise to deliver the Report sooner than is realistically possible.
7.2.2The report contents

Include a limitation / disclaimer to bring to the notice of third parties, and in some cases the client, how they may and may not rely on the Report. Be aware of whether factual or interpretative reporting is required and ensure that what is being given is as required and not more than, or different from, what is required by the brief. Write clearly and unambiguously. Ensure that words and terms are used accurately and mean what they are intended to mean. All staff involved in drafting Ground Reports should be appropriately qualified and experienced, and understand their roles and responsibilities.
7.2.3Quality assurance procedures

Put in place adequate quality assurance procedures which set out the requirements for the checking and approval of the Report itself and of all work on which the facts, opinions, recommendations and design are based.
27
Ensure that all technical and contract quality documents are filed and retrievable in the future, including all Reports and other deliverables. Involve a project manager or director who can deal with problems or queries raised by less experienced staff. Allow sufficient time and resources at all stages of the project, including time for completing the Quality Assurance procedures and preparation of the Reports and other deliverables.
7.2.4
Recognise the signs of a possible claim
Be aware of the indications that financial claims are to follow. If a client begins to communicate via his solicitor, copies correspondence to his solicitor, fails to return telephone calls or delays payment of interim invoices then there may be a problem. Ensure that your professional indemnity insurers or brokers are informed whenever a financial claim is made against you or you are aware of circumstances which may give rise to a financial claim. A failure to notify insurers promptly may allow them to argue that they do not cover the claim. Ensure that, in the event of claims, comprehensive and contemporary records are available to prove relevant matters.
7.3 Maintain Standards and Professionalism

A fundamental principle of business is that you should not expect to get what you have not paid for. Work carried out by a geospecialist, as for anyone else, needs to be profitable if he is to continue in business and the financial return and the risk exposure must be acceptable for any project. Remember, however, that the Courts are likely to be unimpressed by an argument that the client ought to expect less than a reasonably professional service because he knew that he was paying less than the market average for the work. Standards must be maintained. If a particular task, including reporting, cannot be professionally and profitably carried out at the fee the client is willing to pay, the geospecialist should decline the work.
28
AGS (1996) AGS (1999) AGS (2000) AGS (2003a) AGS (2003b) AGS
Guide to the Model Document Report - Geoenvironmental Site Assessments. AGS, Beckenham, Kent Code of Conduct for Site Investigation Version 2. AGS, Beckenham, Kent Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations. AGS, Beckenham, Kent Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report. AGS, Beckenham, Kent Guide to Collateral Warranties. AGS, Beckenham, Kent AGS Tool Kit (A collection of papers and notes written and updated from time to time by the AGS Loss Prevention Working Group on particular issues in the management of AGS members work that affect legal liability and exposure to uncontrolled loses) Loss Prevention Alerts (Written by the AGS Loss Prevention Working Group to provide guidance on new issues affecting the trading environment of AGS members) Site Investigation in Construction. Site Investigation Steering Group, Thomas Telford.
References
AGS
ICE (1993)
29
Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report
Foreword................................................................................................. 34 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.0 6.0 7.0 Fig 1 The Ground Report ............................................................................................ 51 Appendix A Checklists .......................................................................................................... 53 Appendix B Description of Geotechnical Reports as used in North America....................... 57 Introduction ............................................................................................ 35 DESK STUDY ....................................................................................... 37 FACTUAL REPORT .............................................................................. 38 Introduction ............................................................................................ 38 Object and scope .................................................................................... 38 Presentation ............................................................................................ 38 Site location ............................................................................................ 38 Site description ....................................................................................... 38 Fieldwork procedure ............................................................................... 38 In-situ testing .......................................................................................... 39 Laboratory testing ................................................................................... 39 Electronic format .................................................................................... 39 INTERPRETATIVE REPORT ............................................................... 41 Structure ................................................................................................. 41 Geological interpretation the detailed Ground Model ........................ 41 Ground parameter ................................................................................... 42 Engineering interpretation ...................................................................... 43 Geoenvironmental impacts ..................................................................... 45 DESIGN REPORT ................................................................................. 46 VALIDATION REPORT ........................................................................ 48 REPORTING RESPONSIBILITIES ...................................................... 50
Contents
AGS: Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report
33
Foreword
The need for a guidance document on the preparation of geotechnical reports was rst raised by the late Sir John Knill when he made a presentation to the AGS Committee in July 2000. For the past few years much of John Knills work had involved provision of expert witness services, through which he saw a signicant number of interpretative reports. Some of these caused him concern, primarily on grounds of lack of completeness. He therefore sought the Associations help in producing and publicising guidance on the scope of issues which should be considered for inclusion in interpretative reports on ground investigations. The original terms of reference for this document were restricted to geotechnical interpretative reports. During the course of preparing these Guidelines it became evident that it would be inappropriate to treat interpretative reports in isolation from the other reports generated as part of the site investigation process. The concept of the Ground Report, as a live document which develops as the project progresses grew from this realisation, as described in more detail in the introduction. Coincidentally, the Highways Agency had also used the term Ground Report for similar reasons when re-drafting their Managing Geotechnical Risk document (HD22, see full reference in footnote 6, page 37). It also became apparent that many of the proposals were equally applicable to some aspects of geoenvironmental projects as to geotechnical ones. The extent of this applicability is explained by notes in the text, as set out in the Introduction. In response to Sir John Knills representations a new Task Group was set up to prepare this document, under the Chairmanship of Roger Epps of Foundation & Exploration Services Ltd (FES). The other members of the group comprised representatives from Bachy Soletanche, Bechtel, BRE Ltd, Geotechnics, Knight Piesold, LBH Wembley and Ove Arup. The Association is grateful to this Group for their hard work in compiling the Guidelines, and to Sir John Knill for providing comments on the penultimate draft. This document is being made available on the AGS website in order to maximise its availability to the industry, as desired by Sir John Knill. It is hoped that it will become the industry standard guide, and that it will be particularly benecial to young geospecialists and to those who train them. Keith R Gabriel Chairman Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists
34
The objective of this document is to summarise the steps and procedures that should be followed in the preparation of reports associated with ground investigations. It is intended that this should complement other guidance documents published by the AGS1 and existing good practice guidance within the industry. D.J. Palmer2 wrote in 1957 on the framework and content of a report: The essentials to remember regarding content are that the report should be an account of the whole job from start to nish and should contain all the technical facts, good or bad, without reference to any personal administrative difculties. Attention should be given to detail, but in such a way as to avoid incomprehensible catalogues, e.g. of strata borehole by borehole already better depicted on the borehole logs. The best approach is to make generalisations about the problem and then work to the particular, illustrating exceptions to the generalizations. Facts should be given rst, theories afterwards. Drawings and sketches often help where words fail. It is in the context of the report as an account of the whole job from start to nish that this document has been prepared, since interpretation of geotechnical data is not simply conned to the interpretative report, but a continuous process encompassing investigation, design, monitoring and construction. Figure 1 represents a schematic description of the process of gathering, interpretation and application of data. On larger projects, the individual reports described in the illustration are often presented as individual volumes. For smaller projects, one or more of the reports described in the illustration may be amalgamated. Eurocode 73 identies three project categories (their use is not mandatory) which reect both geotechnical uncertainty and structural complexity, as follows: Geotechnical Category 1 includes single 1 and 2 storey houses and agricultural buildings using conventional types of spread and piled foundations, retaining walls and excavation supports where the difference in ground levels does not exceed 2 m and small excavations for drainage works, pipe laying, etc. For this Category, geotechnical reports may be as simple as single pages. Geotechnical Category 2 includes conventional types of structures and foundations with no abnormal risks or unusual or exceptionally difcult ground or loading conditions. Structures in Category 2 require quantitative geotechnical data and analysis to ensure that the fundamental requirements will be satised; routine procedures for eld and laboratory testing and for design and execution may be used. Geotechnical Category 3 includes very large or unusual structures, structures involving abnormal risks, or unusual or exceptionally difcult ground or loading conditions and structures in highly seismic areas. For these, a comprehensive, related set of reports will usually be required. Whilst this document at various stages may touch on the signicance of risk assessment and risk management, it is considered to be a separate subject. Nevertheless the report structure should provide for appropriate consideration of ground risk, some guidance on which may be found in a separate AGS publication4, albeit in the context of management of the Consultants, rather than the Clients risks. For more information on this subject, reference should be made to the joint ICE/DETR publication Managing Geotechnical Risk5 and to Volume 4 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges6. The management
1.0 Introduction
1. The Selection of Soil Laboratory Testing. Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations. 2. Writing Reports, D.J. Palmer, published by Soil Mechanics Limited, 1957 3. Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design Part 1. General Rules. DD ENV 1997-1 : 1995. 4. Contractual Risk management for Ground Reports 5. Managing Geotechnical Risk - Improving Productivity in UK Building and Construction. C.R.I. Clayton. The Institution of Civil Engineers and Department of Environment, Transport and The Regions. 2001. 6. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges. Volume 4 Geotechnics and Drainage. Section 1 Earthworks Part 2 HD22/02 Managing Geotechnical Risk (In Preparation)
35
of geotechnical risk also forms the basis of similar guidance published in North America7, where geotechnical reports are sometimes used as a benchmark for establishing baseline conditions for tendering and contractual purposes. The following sections of the document describe in outline the key requirements of each stage in the process of data collection, interpretation and application in design, with a simple checklist to be used as an aide memoire presented in Appendix A. The design process and data collection procedures outlined here are equally applicable to Geoenvironmental projects and a brief comment is given in each section on the application of this process to Geoenvironmental issues. It is beyond the scope of this document to give detailed guidance on reporting Geoenvironmental information as this is already covered in other good practice guidance documents. However, the term the Ground Report has been adopted in the title of this document in recognition of the different disciplines now involved in the process of report preparation. The Ground Report may be considered as consisting of following 5 sequential parts which may be combined or extended to suit the project, which are listed below. Desk Study Factual Report Interpretative Report Design Report Validation Report
The Ground Report will be prepared before construction starts. Further ground related reports will also be prepared during and after construction. Guidance documents published in North America identify the Geotechnical Report as comprising four components: Geotechnical Data Report (GDR - Factual); Geotechnical Interpretative Report (GIR); Geotechnical Design Summary Report (GDSR); and Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR). A brief description of these is presented in Appendix B, as these terms may be encountered in international usage. The denitions described in the SISG Publication 28 apply to the terms Geotechnical Specialist or Geotechnical Adviser where they are adopted in these guidelines, namely:
7. Geotechnical Baseline Reports for Underground Construction Guidelines and Practices, prepared by the Technical Committee of the Underground Technology Council (ASCE, 1997), edited by Randall J. Essex. Subsurface Investigations and Geotechnical Report Preparation. Gary S. Brierley. pp 49 128 in Subsurface Conditions Risk management for Design and Construction Management Professionals. Edited by David J. Hatem, John Wiley, 1998. 8. Site Investigation in Construction. Planning, procurement and quality management. Site Investigation Steering Group. Thomas Telford, London, 1993.
Geotechnical Specialist
a Chartered Engineer or Chartered Geologist with a postgraduate qualication in geotechnical engineering or engineering geology , equivalent to at least an MSc and with three years of Chartered practice in Geotechnics. or a Chartered Engineer or Chartered Geologist with ve years Chartered practice in Geotechnics.
Geotechnical Adviser -
a Chartered Engineer or a Chartered Geologist with ve years practice as a Geotechnical Specialist.
36
The rst stage of a properly structured site investigation process is a desk study and site reconnaissance which is considered to be an essential requirement. The AGS Code of Conduct for Site Investigation requires all practitioners to promote to Clients the need for a proper desk study. The Desk Study is used as a basis for subsequent investigation design and planning. The basic requirements for a desk study are described in Clause 6.2 and Annex A of BS5930. The desk study report shall draw together all relevant, accessible information as detailed in Appendix A. At the time of the reconnaissance, visits to local archives should also be made. Where possible contact with the Local Authority and Environment Authority should also be established to obtain local, often unpublished, information concerning the ground and groundwater conditions in the area. The principal components of a Desk Study Report are described in Annex F to BS 59309, Section 6.2 of BS 1017510 and Chapter 3 of the AGS Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations11. Geoenvironmental reports shall also include, as appropriate: an evaluation of the historical development of the site and surrounding area to identify potential on-site and off-site sources of contamination; information on groundwater vulnerability; proximity of any surface water bodies; and results of consultations with local authorities, the Environment Agency and any databases in the public domain. The results of the desk study are used to design the subsequent investigation, in such a way that costs can be estimated, the programme can be established and all parties involved understand their responsibilities and the activities that they are expected to undertake.
2.0 Desk Study
9. British Standards Institution. BS 5930 : 1999. Code of Practice for Site Investigations. 10. British Standards Institution. BS 10175 : 2001. Investigation of potentially contaminated sites. 11. Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations, Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists, 2000.
37
3.0 Factual Report
The factual report, which is referred to as the descriptive report in BS5930 : 1999 should contain the information identied in Appendix A in the sections outlined below:
3.1
Introduction
This should state briey the nature of the project for which the investigation was undertaken, the company undertaking it, the name of the client for whom the work was done and the name of any consultant who commissioned or directed the work on the clients behalf.
3.2
Object and Scope

The purpose of the investigation should be explained briey and the brief for the work referred to, preferably including it as an appendix. The section should also make clear whether the report contains only the factual data or is combined (or should be read in conjunction) with the other geotechnical reports such as those dealing with specialist testing or geophysics. The arrangements for QA of data and auditing should be explained. The responsibility for the interpretative assignment of lithostratigraphical names in borehole logs, etc. should be dened.
3.3
Presentation
This should explain the structure of the report, where the descriptive sections and factual data are to be found and should draw attention to any general notes which accompany the report.
3.4
Site Location
This should clearly describe the location of the site relative to larger features such as a town centre, a feature of note within a city or its proximity to centres of population. The Ordnance Survey National Grid reference at the centre or extremities of a site should be given to the nearest 100m and a Site Location Plan, typically to a scale of 1:50,000, included in an Appendix to the report. (This latter feature will require a proportionate fee payable to the Ordnance Survey).
3.5
Site Description
This should describe the size and shape of a site and its location relative to any roads and access. It should go on to describe its topography and the form and locations of any buildings or other features (actual presence or any evidence of) on the site or adjacent ground, which may affect the subsequent development.
3.6
Fieldwork Procedure
This section should describe the procedures followed in undertaking the work including commissioning, and the Codes of Practice and any other procedural guidelines under which the work was undertaken. It should be followed by an identication of each of the techniques of eldwork used, the locations (as grid reference) and elevations at which each was used, the range of depths to which each was taken and the dates over
38
which this work was done. Any supplementary references which dene procedures for each investigation technique and references appropriate to interpretation should be given. Notes on any constraints on access and the limitations which these may impose on the techniques used should be given together with any limitations on penetration which each technique may have experienced. The sampling strategy should be stated, the types of samples taken identied and their transport and storage described. A description of any instrumentation which may have been installed and its purpose should also be given in this section. Groundwater conditions encountered during the investigation should also be presented. Any monitoring records should be presented and their location in the report identied. Detailed records of the eldwork should be presented in an appendix, together with a site plan showing the position of each investigation point.
3.7
In-Situ Testing
Where in-situ tests are undertaken an outline description of each test procedure should be given, with reference to relevant standards or published methods. Reference should be made to the relevant location in the report where the test results are listed, (eg on the borehole records where relevant and in summary tables).
3.8
Laboratory Testing
This section should explain who devised the schedule of laboratory tests on the samples taken and to what standard the testing was undertaken. Typically in the UK this would be BS 1377 : 1990 Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes and the UKAS accreditation status of each test performed by the laboratory should be declared, where this is required. The type of test, the numbers undertaken and the relevant test reference number together with the location in the report in which the results can be found should be given. Test results should be presented, together with tabulations of the results of all tests of the same type and if appropriate the results of different test types on the same material. Where chemical or microbiological testing to determine the presence and scale of any contaminants has been undertaken this should be similarly reported. The test results should be reported in an appropriate tabular form, supported by a brief statement of the method detection limit, the accuracy of the test and an identication of the test procedure.
3.9
Electronic Format
The Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists (AGS) has established a standard format for the exchange and storage of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental data by electronic means. The protocol allows producers to continue to use their own proprietary software packages but facilitates transfer into a format which can be
39
readily absorbed and analysed by other software used by the Client or his advisors, without the interface of the printed report. The printed report remains the denitive document however. It should be stated whether the data has been presented in this format and the data should be checked to ensure that it complies with the format.
40
4.1
Structure
The interpretative report as dened in BS 5930 : 1999 comprises three parts: an interpretation of the detailed site geology; a summary of the geotechnical properties of the ground; and an engineering interpretation of the implications of the ground conditions on the development project. It is in the preparation of the interpretative report that any gaps or deciencies in the investigation can be identied and their signicance evaluated. It will normally be the case that the interpretative report will commence with a description of the proposed development and as much relevant information as is necessary for the subsequent recommendations to be presented in context. It is particularly important that the writer presents sufcient detail for the nature of the proposals at that time to be understood, which will enable the reader to identify situations where the proposals may have altered to the extent that a re-evaluation is required. Such details may, for example, include: Nature of proposed development in broad terms e.g. ofce, residential etc Scale of proposed development, e.g. number of storeys, length of road, depth of cut, diameter of tunnel etc Any signicant features, e.g. basements, surcharging, sensitivity of adjacent structures Details of loads, tolerances, column spacings etc. The interpretative report should be sufciently explicit to dene the ground conditions for use by those requiring assistance in their design who may not be geotechnical specialists.
4.0 Interpretative Report
4.2
Geological Interpretation The Detailed Ground Model

The factual information, together with the desk study, should, if the investigation is sufcient, be enough to develop a detailed ground model, based on an evaluation of the geological, hydrogeological and geotechnical data. The factual report, interpretative report and derivation of basic design decisions are frequently presented in one volume, but there can be additional, more focused derivative reports, as described below. The interpretative report should bring together the data from the desk study and the results of the site investigation to formulate or rene the ground model on which the subsequent geotechnical evaluation will be based. The type and details of the proposed development and the Employers requirements will have signicantly inuenced the form and scale of the investigation and testing undertaken but the interpretation of ground conditions and properties should be an independent process. The ground model creates a three dimensional picture of the site and its components where structures will be built, of the relative location and thickness of the types of strata encountered, of their properties and of groundwater conditions encountered and maintained. The published geology and hydrogeology of the area will assist in the classication of
41
the materials encountered and indicate their likely extent both over the site and at depth. This allows correlation with the strata encountered and hence an identication of their probable geological association. Since this work involves interpretation it is considered inappropriate to the Factual Report. However, during any audit of the draft borehole logs the stratigraphical position of specic layers should be agreed between the site investigation contractor and consultant and recorded on the log in accordance with BS BS 5930 : 1999 Since extensive description of the strata sequences can be both difcult to write and to understand and hence can obscure rather than assist interpretation, the use of cross sections to illustrate this model is often of value both in preparing the report and in clarifying the model to the reader. Contour plans of boundaries (e.g. bedrock) and strata thicknesses, cross sections and isometric views also serve to assist in the identication of features such as buried channels and any sharp changes in thickness or dip of strata. Such diagrams also highlight deciencies in the spatial coverage of the investigation. In preparation of cross sections care should be taken to highlight the degree of uncertainty when interpolating between investigation positions. As stated in the introduction to this document, the best approach is to describe the general aspects of the ground model and then highlight exceptions, discontinuities and interpreted features.
4.3
Ground Parameters
On the basis of this ground model, characteristics derived from the insitu and laboratory testing and groundwater monitoring can be assessed for each stratum. As an aid to this, plots of the results can be used so that for example, vertical and lateral trends in properties can be assessed and characteristic values applied for use subsequently in design. Tables can often be useful in this respect. This process of ordering of the data can also be seen as a means of reviewing the results of the investigation and of highlighting apparent anomalies. This may stimulate further checking or investigation or identify extreme characteristics which the design will have to accommodate. In deriving the characteristic values of strata depth and properties, as well as groundwater conditions, the various assumptions or simplications should be explained. Such derivations may include consideration of published data which may be related to the test results. The key assumptions are: Assumed continuity of strata between investigation points Lateral changes in strata characteristics Seasonal variation in groundwater conditions That the results obtained fully dene the ground properties. Judgement based on knowledge and experience is clearly important in this respect but may be difcult to quantify. When linked to the Design Report this reduces the risks of misinterpretation by others.
42
The evaluation of the geotechnical data should include a review of the derived values of geotechnical parameters, giving the range of values, median values and mean values and where relevant: tabulation and graphical presentation of the results of the eld and laboratory work in relation to the requirements of the project and, if deemed necessary, histograms illustrating the range of values of the most relevant data and their distribution; depth of the groundwater table and its seasonal uctuations; subsurface prole(s) showing the differentiation of the various formations; detailed description of all formations including their physical properties and their deformation and strength characteristics; comments on irregularities such as depressions, boulders, pockets and cavities; the range and any grouping of derived values of the geotechnical data for each stratum. In all instances the derivation of ground parameters for design must consider the range of actions that the ground may be subjected to. As such it is necessary to take into account the likely stress range and direction of loading that have been assumed when deriving the design parameter.
4.4
Engineering Interpretation
The Interpretative Report should assess the signicance of the interpreted ground conditions and any geological or other hazards identied by the investigation in relation to the proposed development. A brief review of the available options should be presented before any design parameters are recommended. This review should show a clear relationship between the ground model and the available options for the construction or support of the structure. Thus, for example, the available foundation options will be presented, the need for earthworks or retaining structures may be discussed, particular difculties such as compressible soils or a high groundwater table will be highlighted and so on. It is likely to include a discussion on the type of foundations, the need for ground treatment or piling, likely settlements, groundwater control and expedients necessary to deal with the site problems. Any change in proposals should stimulate re-evaluation but not re-interpretation of baseline ground and groundwater conditions. Signicant changes in proposals such as relocation of a building or the introduction of a basement or retaining structures, however, may require further investigation to obtain appropriate data to supplement the original work and hence to add to the interpretation of the ground model and evaluation of its signicance. The types of recommendation will depend on the nature of the development and the extent to which design proposals have been nalised. It is not possible to be exhaustive but, as an example, a section on spread foundations may include recommended bearing pressures for various depths and foundation sizes, the associated likely
43
settlements, and any precautions that may be required with respect to tree roots, dissolution features, other buried features such as sewers and tunnels, the effects of loading on adjacent structures and the need for groundwater control. In relation to embankment design and construction the report should include an assessment of both short and long term stability, recommendations for side slopes, a review of staged construction and other measures such as vertical drainage and an estimate of likely settlements. A discussion of cutting slopes would include drainage measures, consideration of the effect of weathering and recommended stabilisation measures. Similarly, for tunnels and underground works, the report should describe the anticipated geology and give an evaluation of the ease of excavation and suitability of differing tunnelling methods, the need for face support and methods of groundwater control, together with comments on anticipated ground movements in urban areas. Dependent on the type of project under consideration, other issues to be addressed could include pavement design, protection of buried concrete, retaining walls and ground improvement. This list is necessarily incomplete, as a comprehensive review of these matters falls outside the terms of a general guidance document. It is, however, intended to highlight the nature of the topics covered by the interpretative report. The interpretation should include a review of the eld and laboratory work and of the completeness of the ground and groundwater model. Any limitations in the data (e.g. defective, irrelevant, insufcient or inaccurate data) should be pointed out and commented upon. Any particularly adverse test results, perhaps as a result of sample disturbance or sample handling techniques, should be considered carefully in order to determine if they are misleading or represent a real phenomenon that must be accounted for in the design. The sufciency of the results should be evaluated, particularly with reference to those hazards identied during the desk study and any new hazards identied by the investigation. The implications of any gaps in the available data or deciencies in the investigation on any design solutions should be brought to the readers attention at this point. Similarly, any specic features or hazards newly recognized by the investigation should be highlighted and the risk and consequences of their occurrence should be assessed. Remedial measures or additional investigation works necessary for a complete design solution should also be identied Any recommendations for additional eld and laboratory work should include proposals, with comments justifying the need for the extra investigation. Such proposals should be accompanied by a detailed programme for the extra investigations to be carried out with specic reference to the questions that have to be answered. Any recommendations for additional investigation works should identify whether this must be carried out prior to the start of the main contract, or whether it can wait until the construction commences. It may also be necessary, dependent on the complexity of the project for additional, Derivative Reports to be prepared. These may address such specialist subjects as seismicity, groundwater control (including pump test interpretation or contaminant transport modelling), or denition of ground reference conditions for tunnelling contracts. Reports in
44
the latter category may be regarded as equivalent to the Geotechnical Baseline Reports described in Appendix B.
4.5
Geoenvironmental Aspects
The interpretative report should also include a review of the results of the chemical and microbiological tests, on soil samples, on leachates prepared from soil samples where appropriate, on water samples and on any gas samples recovered from site. The review should also include results of eld measurements and should evaluate the ranges of concentrations measured and their spatial distribution, identifying any gaps in the data and setting out any proposals for additional investigation work. The appraisal of the contamination data should also identify any hazards arising from the investigation and evaluate the sufciency of the data to address such hazards. The report will also assess the signicance of the Geoenvironmental test data in the context of the proposed development and identify whether or not there is a risk posed to specied receptors arising from the chemical or microbiological contamination and the pathways between the source and the receptor. The report should then set out whether measures are necessary to mitigate such risks to an acceptable level. It should be borne in mind that certain foundation proposals and engineering works need consideration as part of such a risk assessment. An obvious example of this is construction of piles through contaminated ground into a Major Aquifer.
45
5.0 Design Report
The processes of gathering geological, geomorphological and geotechnical information and interpreting it in the context of the project culminate in the compilation of the Design Report (DR). The level of detail of DRs will vary greatly depending on the type of project. For simple projects, a single sheet may be sufcient. The DR should normally include some or all of the following information, depending on the Geotechnical Category (nature, scale, usage and location) of the project: Assumptions The assumptions, data and method of verifying the safety and serviceability of the geotechnical construction (e.g. method of calculation). Making reference to the Desk Study, Factual and Interpretative Reports, any Derivative Reports and any other contractual documents relating to the projects: A description of the site and its surroundings. A description of the ground conditions. A description of the proposed construction, including anticipated loading and any imposed deformations. Design values of soil and rock properties, including any necessary explanation for their selection. Statements on any codes, design guides and standards used. Statements on the suitability of the site for the proposed construction and the level of risk assumed in the assessment. Geotechnical design calculations and drawing. Foundation design recommendations. A note of any items to be checked during construction or required maintenance or monitoring during the life of the structure. The DR may include a plan of supervision and monitoring depending on the type of project. Wherever monitoring is required it is necessary to provide thresholds for the parameter that is being modelled together with proposed actions to be taken when the threshold is approached or exceeded.
Description
Design Values
Calculations Monitoring
The DR should include a plan of supervision and monitoring as appropriate for the type of project. Items which require checking during construction or which require maintenance after construction should be clearly identied. The DR should state: The purpose of each set of observations or measurements. The parts of the structure which are to be monitored and the locations at which observations are to be made. The frequency with which readings are to be taken. The ways in which the results are to be evaluated. 46 AGS: Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report
The range of values within which the results are to be considered. The period of time for which monitoring is to continue after construction is complete. The parties responsible for making measurements and observations, for interpreting the results obtained and for monitoring and maintaining the instruments. The DR may give the sequence of construction operations envisaged in the design. Alternatively, the DR may state that the sequence of construction is to be decided by the contractor subject to approval or comment by the designer. The supervision plan should state acceptable limits for the results to be obtained by the construction monitoring. The plan should also specify the type, quality and frequency of supervision, which should be commensurate with: The degree of uncertainty in the design assumptions. The complexity of the ground and loading conditions. The potential risk of failure during construction. The feasibility of implementing design modications or corrective measures during construction. An extract of the DR containing the supervision, monitoring and maintenance requirements for the completed structure should be provided to the client.
Geoenvironmental Considerations
The DR report will include the results of formal assessments made of the risk to receptors of concern arising from the site contamination or as a result of the site development, as identied in the Interpretative Report. Where remedial measures are required to reduce such risks to an acceptable level, the DR will include a strategy detailing method statements of the works to be undertaken, the desired target concentrations for soils and where appropriate, receptors such as groundwater or surface water. The strategy must be agreed by relevant regulatory bodies prior to development work proceeding. Detailed method statements presenting the level of monitoring and supervision to be undertaken and including appropriate sampling and testing regimes are then prepared.
47
6.0 Validation Report
EC7-1 Section 4 sets out the basic requirements for supervision of construction, monitoring and maintenance. This is a worthwhile starting place. It does not extend to advice for planning for the reuse of foundations or other element of an existing structure but otherwise provides a sound starting place for implementation of a validation report. The Validation Report can meet a number of objectives. Firstly, it is essential that the validation is undertaken in order to ensure that the original design criteria have been met and that no design changes are needed. Preparation of a Validation Report also provides a record of the works carried out and records any changes from the original assumed conditions. This may then provide the basis for the Main Contractor or his sub-contractors to submit a claim and the Engineer to evaluate such claims. Preparation of the geotechnical Validation Report should form an integral part of the construction, paid for by the client and the report can be used to demonstrate that money spent in this manner has real value for future development. The Validation Report describes the geotechnical construction works undertaken as part of the project. It is usually incorporated into the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Manual which, under CDM regulations, forms an essential part of the project documentation (this is actually part of the Health & Safety File which is required for all projects). The information presented within the Validation Report can be considered under the following headings: Construction As-built records of both permanent and temporary works left in place, including drawings, schedules and registers. These should probably include only the geotechnical drawings with reference to the rest of the civil engineering drawings, otherwise there could be serious and confusing duplication. Information provided by the contractor, such as concrete mixes, reinforcement bar details should be included. Where appropriate records of preliminary prototype scale testing should also be included (anchors, piles etc.). This should also identify the design assumptions (these should be in the Geotechnical Design Report), particular specication and the construction records for the structure. This information can be used in any design which involves reuse of the structure or even an academic review of performance. Records of ground conditions encountered with particular reference to changes from the conceptual ground model. Cross reference to a good methodology for geological mapping. Test records relating to additional geotechnical testing, materials testing and proof load testing, in particular piles and anchors. Any Non Compliance Reports or similar raised
Changes to the design
Monitoring records
48
during the course of the project with details of any remedial actions Monitoring records on the effect of the works on adjacent properties etc. Where monitoring data are to be presented these should be compared with original predictions. Where the Observational Method was used for temporary or permanent works this should be fully recorded. Records of temporary works, particularly where these are left in-situ or may affect future developments. Maintenance requirements Details of inspection regime including scope and frequency. Proposed measures to be taken during the lifetime of the facility for maintenance of drainage and corrosion protection. Long term settlement records, water levels, piezometers, etc. Scour protection for maritime structures. Critical elements of the structural system which may affect the methods and sequencing of demolition works should be identied, e.g. ground water, tensioned anchors, propped walls etc. The information contained in the Validation Report should allow re-use of the foundations or construction materials if this is feasible. Structures should be placed in such a manner that they can either be reused or can be sensibly removed to make way for the next phase of construction. For example, for underream piles good records of construction, material and design could prove invaluable to the next development as they can form a signicant obstruction to redevelopment, or indeed an opportunity to take advantage of their presence. There may be locations where top quality records have real value. The example of under-ream piles is one, others could be in areas of archaeological interest where preservation in-situ is the objective of planning authorities (the records in this case add real value to the site and this should be a positive selling point)
Decommissioning
Re-use
Detail of records
49
7.0 Reporting Responsibilities
A common form of investigation contract is that where the consulting engineer with in-house geotechnical expertise commissions a site investigation contractor to carry out the ground investigation and prepare the factual report. Under this arrangement, the responsibility for the desk study and the design of the investigation rests with the consultant. A well written specication for the ground investigation contract will ensure that the consultants requirements for the factual report are met by the investigation. The consulting engineer will then prepare the subsequent interpretative and design reports, although where the project is let on a design and build basis, the responsibility passes to the successful contractor for the construction project, and where appropriate, his advisers. It is often the case, particularly for smaller scale development projects where site investigations are commissioned by a structural engineer who has no any in-house Geotechnical or Geoenvironmental expertise, that the desk study, factual report and interpretative reports are prepared by the specialist site investigation contractor. Such reports, particularly those dealing with foundations, are then provided with the tender documents for specialist piling or ground improvement contractors to tender on a design and build basis. The validation report will normally be prepared by the consulting engineer. Whatever approach is adopted, the responsibility for both design and report preparation should be clearly dened within each report. It is not the intention of this document to be prescriptive on these matters. However, the whole process should be subject to full quality assurance procedures, with each stage being subject to internal peer review by someone of suitable qualications and experience.
50
Figure 1.0
Inception/ Planning
Factual Report
The Ground 1.0 Report Heading Goes Here
Desk study conceptual ground model
Interpretation and review of data
Interpretative Report detailed ground model, ground parameters and engineering implications
Ground investigation, eldwork and laboratory testing
Design recommendations
Design Report
Construction, monitoring, maintenance & decommissioning

References: BS5930:1999 Code of Practice for Site Investigations
Validation Report Geotechnical Structures Manual
Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental and Geotechnical Investigations, AGS, 2000 Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design Part 1. General Rules. DD ENV 1 footnote goes here 1997-1 : 1995
51
Appendix A Check lists for: Desk Study Report Factual Report Interpretative Report Design Report Validation Report
Activity / Contents Description of work undertaken and terms of reference Sources of information. Description of the site and surrounding area based on an inspection and walkover survey of the site. Regional and site geology and any features of the geology and known material properties which will impact on the project. Groundwater conditions and hydrogeology. Records of previous investigations undertaken at or close to the site, if any. Site history and past uses of the site and adjacent sites (maps, photos, etc.). Site characteristics. Records of mining, quarrying, landll, bomb impacts, etc. Records of services and underground structures. The occurrence or possibility of occurrence of radon. Field reconnaissance of the general area of the project noting particularly: evidence of groundwater; location of surface waters and evidence of ooding. behaviour of of any existing structures on the site or of neighbouring structures; exposures in quarries and borrow areas; areas of instability; history of the site; geology of the site, including faulting; information from available aerial photographs; anecdotal evidence of historical activities/site use; information about the seismicity of the area; types of eld equipment used; description of frost susceptibility of soils. Clear conclusions regarding the conceptual ground model. Overall strategy and objectives for subsequent intrusive investigation AGS: Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report
1 footnote goes here
1.0 Heading Goes Here

Completed (T/E)
Reporting Stage Desk Study Report
53
Appendix A (continued)
1.0 Reporting Stage Factual Report Heading Goes Here
Activity / Contents Purpose and scope of the investigation. Names of all consultants and sub-contractors used. Dates between which eld and laboratory work was performed. A factual account of all eld and laboratory work. Exploratory hole records (boreholes, trial pits, window sample holes), including grid co-ordinates and ground elevation. In-situ test results Laboratory test results including any contamination test results. Results of groundwater level monitoring and any Geoenvironmental monitoring Specialist sub-contract test results, (static or dynamic cone penetration test, geophysics, etc.) Site plan showing locations of exploratory holes. The provision of data in electronic format
Completed (T/E)
Interpretative Report
A review of the eld and laboratory work. Detailed description of all formations including their geological context, physical properties and their deformation and strength characteristics. Comments on irregularities such as pockets, depressions, cavities and boulders. Sub-surface prole(s) showing the differentiation of the various formations. Identication of geological, geotechnical or other hazards. Depth of the groundwater table and its seasonal uctuations. The range and grouping of any derived values of the geotechnical data for each stratum. Summary tables for chemical contamination data with listings of selected assessment criteria. Tabulation and graphical presentation of the results of the eld and laboratory work in relation to the requirements of the project and if deemed necessary histograms illustrating the range of values of the most relevant data and their distribution.
footnote goes here
54
Reporting Stage Interpretative Report (continued)
Activity / Contents
1.0 A review and summary of the derived values of geotechnicalHeading Goes parameters. Here Any proposals for further eld and laboratory work, with
Completed (T/E) comments justifying the need for this extra work and a detailed programme for the extra investigations to be carried out.
Design Report
The assumptions, data and method of verifying the safety and serviceability of the geotechnical construction (e.g. method of calculation), including: A description of the site and its surroundings. A description of the ground conditions. A description of the proposed construction, including anticipated loading and any imposed deformations. Design values of soil and rock properties, including any necessary explanation for their selection. Statements on any codes and standards used Statements on the suitability of the site for the proposed construction and the level of risk assumed in the assessment. Geotechnical design calculations and drawings. Design recommendations. A note of any items to be checked during construction or required maintenance or monitoring. A statement of the sequence of construction operations envisaged in the design. Alternatively, the DR may state that the sequence of construction is to be decided by the contractor. A plan of supervision and monitoring as appropriate for the type of project., stating acceptable limits for the results to be obtained by the supervision and specifying the type, quality and frequency of supervision.
Validation Report
As-built records of both permanent and temporary works left in place. Where appropriate records of preliminary prototype scale testing . Records of ground conditions encountered. Test records relating to additional geotechnical testing,
55
1.0 Reporting Stage Validation Report Heading Goes (continued) Here
Activity / Contents materials testing and proof load testing, in particular piles and anchors. Any Non Compliance Records or similar raised during the course of the project. Monitoring records on the effect of the works on adjacent properties etc. Where the observational method was used this shall be fully recorded. Records of temporary works, particularly where these are left in-situ or may affect future developments. Details of inspection regime including scope and frequency. Proposed measures to be taken during the lifetime of the facility for maintenance of drainage, corrosion protection. Long term settlement records, water levels, piezometers, etc. Scour protection for maritime structures. Identication of critical elements of the structural system which may affect the methods and sequencing of demolition works .
Completed (T/E)
footnote goes here
56
Appendix B
Geotechnical Data Report

The Geotechnical Data Report corresponds to the Factual Report in U.K. usage. It is a collection of facts, about what work was undertaken, how it was done and the results of such activities. It is intended for use by all actual or possible participants in a project, including planners, designers and contractors, and, possibly, adjacent third parties or members of the legal profession. The three most important guiding principles for Geotechnical Data Reports are that they are thorough, accurate, and free from interpretation.
Description1.0 of Heading Goes Geotechnical Reports as Here used in North America
Geotechnical Interpretative Report

The Geotechnical Interpretative Report is written by the geotechnical engineer for use primarily by the project designer and should full three important objectives: the description of all relevant sub-surface soil, rock and groundwater conditions at the subject site; the recommendation of the best technically feasible and most cost effective design criteria for each subsurface project element; and the identication of and recommendations for dealing with and/or mitigating construction considerations and impacts on third parties.
Geotechnical Design Summary Report

The Geotechnical Design Summary Report has been adopted by a number of clients in the United States where they have a need to assume greater control over the construction means and methods to be employed on a project. The underlying approach to a GDSR is to: openly share available information about the geology and about sub-surface conditions as derived from the subsurface investigation; explain the geotechnical basis for the design and the underlying approach used for the contract specication and drawings; provide a level geotechnical playing eld for the preparation of bids by avoiding overly optimistic assumptions about ground conditions and by openly discussing the advantages and disadvantages of various methods of construction for evaluation by prospective contractors; and provide a package of both factual sub-surface information and the interpretations derived from that information that can be used to help evaluate the validity of claims of differing site conditions during construction.
The GDSR represents a collaborative writing effort by the geotechnical engineer, the project designer and representatives of the project owner, working together to produce a document that is intended for use by the project contractor. The GDSR is a contract document that is mandated for use by the contractor.
57
Appendix B (continued)
1.0 Heading Goes Here
Geotechnical Baseline Report

The intention of the Geotechnical Baseline Report is that it should have the status of a contract specication and that it would be used to establish denitive baselines of information about certain sub-surface conditions to be expected at a site. Using these baseline conditions, the contractor would then be able to bid the project without having to provide an independent interpretation of sub-surface information and with a higher degree of condence that claims for differing site conditions would be more easily resolved by comparison between the encountered conditions and what was said in the baseline statement regarding these conditions
footnote goes here
58

Ground Reports

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ground Reports

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ground Reports

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

IMPORTANT SECTIONS OF A GROUND REPORT ......................... 20 Limitation Statement .............................................................................. 20

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

Background to the Guide

Contents of the Guide

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

2.0 The Ground Report

2.1 Definition of a Ground Report

This report structure suits both geotechnical and geoenvironmental projects.

2.2 The Ground Report as the Project Deliverable

2.3 Authors of Ground Reports

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

3.0 The Risks an Overview

3.1 Damages suffered by the Client under the Contract

3.3 Losses suffered by the geospecialist

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

3.4 The liability of the employee within a company

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

4.0 The Contract to Prepare a Ground Report

The Basic Framework of the Contract

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

The Allocation of Risk

The Contract as the Primary Risk Management Tool

Contract Terms Worth Avoiding

4.4.1 Contracts to be executed as a deed

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

4.4.2 Contract terms to exceed the professional standard of care

4.4.3 Time is of the essence and liquidated damages

4.4.4 Insurance terms

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

4.4.5 Unfair contract terms

4.4.6 Indemnity clauses

4.4.7 Excessive administration

4.4.8 Third party review

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

4.4.9 Arbitration and appointment of Arbitrators

Contract Terms to be Considered for Inclusion

4.5.1 Limitation of liability

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

4.5.2 Clients provision of documents

4.5.3 Permission to access the site

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

Ground Reports and Third Parties

4.6.1 Agreement to prepare report for third parties

4.6.2 The Contact (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

4.6.3 Collateral warranties

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

Other Issues during Contract Negotiation

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

5.0 Important Sections of a Ground Report

5.1 Limitation Statement 5.1.1 Effect

5.1.2 Types of limitation clauses

AGS: Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports

5.1.3 How disclaimers should be incorporated

5.2 The Introduction

5.3 Contents of a Report

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports