Geotechnical Baseline Reports—A State of the Practice Review

INTRODUCTION In June of 2004, at the North American Tunneling Conference in Atlanta, an all-day workshop was conducted to review the application of Geotechnical Baseline Reports (GBRs) for underground construction. The moderator for the program was Bart Bartholomew, former President of Fruin Colnon Construction Company. The program involved commentary by a panel of engineers, owners, contractors, and legal representatives within the North American tunneling industry, as well as an extended audience discussion. The panelists were: Peter Douglass, President, Peter Douglass, Inc. Randall Essex, Executive Vice President, Hatch Mott MacDonald Joseph Gildner, Deputy Director for Technical Services, Sound Transit Randall Hafer, Esq., Kilpatrick Stockton Robert Fitzgerald Esq., Watt, Tieder, Hoffer, & Fitzgerald Kirk Samuelson, Senior Vice President, Kiewit Construction Group DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAM FORMAT The focus of the program was to assess the state of the practice in the preparation of GBRs, and to discuss improvements that could and should be made with regard to their preparation, interpretation, and application. The approach used to achieve this focus in the broadest possible way was unique, in that it involved the panelists’ preparation of the workshop format and materials months before the presentation of the workshop. First, each of the six panelists was selected by the moderator based on their reputation and involvement in their respective fields of expertise, taking care to maintain balance and contrast within the collective pool of talent assembled. Following selection and agreement to serve on the panel, each panelist was asked to independently submit to the moderator a list of the six most pressing issues involving GBRs that they each frequently encountered in their individual professional experience. Each was asked to rank their issues in descending order of perceived importance. This process resulting in a pool of thirty-six potential or “candidate” issues for use in the workshop program. Contrary to the moderator’s expectations, there was surprisingly little duplication among the thirty-six issues submitted.