Ground Reports

8/3/2019 Ground Reports

1/58

Management of Risk

Associated with the

Preparation of Ground

Reports

Guidelines for thePreparation of the Ground

Report


2/58

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.


3/58

Management of Risk

Associated with the

Preparation of Ground

Reports


4/58


5/58

Management of Risk Associated with the Preparation of Ground Reports 5

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 7

1.1 Objective ................................................................................................. 7

1.2 Background to the Guide ........................................................................ 7

1.3 Contents of the Guide ............................................................................. 7

2.0 THE GROUND REPORT ...................................................................... 8

2.1 The Definition of a Ground Report ........................................................

2.2 The Ground Report as the Project Deliverable ...................................... 8

2.3 Authors of Ground Reports .................................................................... 8

3.0 THE RISKS AN OVERVIEW ............................................................ 10

3.1 Damages suffered by the Client under the Contract .............................. 10

3.2 Damages suffered by the Client and Third Parties caused

by the geospecialists negligence .......................................................... 10

3.3 Losses Suffered by the Geospecialist ..................................................... 10

3.4 The Liability of the Employee Within the Company ............................. 11

4.0 THE CONTRACT TO PREPARE A GROUND REPORT ................... 12

4.1 The Basic Framework of the Contract ................................................... 12

4.2 The Allocation of Risk ........................................................................... 13

4.3 The Contract as the Primary Risk Management Tool ............................ 13

4.4 Contract Terms Worth Avoiding ............................................................. 13

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 ............................................................................. 164.5.2 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

Contents


6/58

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

5.0 IMPORTANT SECTIONS OF A GROUND REPORT ......................... 20

5.1 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 The Introduction ..................................................................................... 21

5.3 Contents of a Report ............................................................................... 21

5.4 Accurate Use of Words and Terms ......................................................... 22

5.5 Caveats ................................................................................................... 22

6.0 ERRORS ................................................................................................. 24

6.1 Types of Errors ....................................................................................... 24

6.2 Failure to Appreciate the Requirements and Extent of the Brief ........... 24

6.3 Lack of Attention During the Data Gathering Phase ............................. 24

6.4 Calculation errors ................................................................................... 24

6.5 Drawing Wrong or Inadequate Conclusions from the Information ....... 25

6.6 Typographical errors ............................................................................... 25

6.7 Collation errors ....................................................................................... 25

6.8 Measures to Control the Occurrence of Errors ...................................... 25

7.0 RISK CONTROL STRATEGY .............................................................. 27

7.1 Why Have a Risk Control Strategy? ...................................................... 27

7.2 Elements of Risk Control ....................................................................... 27

7.2.1 The contract ............................................................................................ 277.2.2 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


7/58


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 acontract 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.

1.2 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 eightyears 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.

1.0

Introduction


8/58


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 ormisunderstood.

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

2.0

The

Ground

Report


9/58


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 AGSmembers 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.


10/58


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 beenhad 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 Partiescaused 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 geospecialistpractising 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

3.0

The Risks

an Overview


11/58


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 firmby 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.


12/58


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 expressterms 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 firms 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 unexpectedresults.

The contract will normally state the following:

The geospecialist s 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 geospecialist s liability is to be limited or

excluded.

4.0

The Contract

to Prepare

a Ground

Report


13/58


4.2 The Allocation of Risk

Effective risk management requires that the risks be identified 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 partiesto 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 geospecialist s financial risk. A range of clauses are set

out in the Association of Consulting Engineers Terms of Appointment.

Some of the different types are briefly 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 geospecialist s liability

is limited to whatever insurance protection he has

in place to meet that liability. However, such

clauses may not limit the geospecialist s overall

liability and so should be used carefully.

c. Equitable contribution clause. The geospecialist s

liability is limited to such sum as would be just

and equitable to pay assuming all other parties whohave 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 geospecialist s 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


14/58


4.4.2 Contract terms to exceed the professionalstandard 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 fitness 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 fitness for purpose are given below.

To promise to produce a design that provides a definite 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 ashealth 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 specific date, avoid any reference in the contract indicating

that time is of the essence in the provision of the Report. Where time isof 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 consultant s breach of contract. Where time is not of

the essence the client s 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


15/58


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 geospecialist s 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 ofthe 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 istherefore 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 specified 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


16/58


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 geospecialist s client

then the overall interests of the parties are aligned. The risk to the

geospecialist is greater where the third party derives no benefit from

approving the geospecialists work, or the proposed works create a risk

to the third partys own business operations. In these situations the thirdparty has little incentive to approve the geospecialists work, and may

reasonably request a high degree of detail and assessment to give him

confidence 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 confidence in a tribunal that

is qualified technically in the subject area of the dispute. However:

ensure that the named arbitrator or appointing body isindeed 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 geospecialist s 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 geospecialist s 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


17/58


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 butalso a larger financial 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 inflating their claim. Fewer claims will result in lower

insurance premiums and less overhead expense, and thus a moreprofitable 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 benefit, 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


18/58


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, benefits 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 benefit 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 anyright 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 themselvesto 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


19/58


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 fitness 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 todetermine the financial 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.


20/58


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 haspreviously 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.

5.0

Important

Sections of

a Ground

Report


21/58


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 setout 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.


22/58


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 exampledo 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


23/58


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 decisionson 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.


24/58


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 ofknowledge 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 Extentof 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 theclient. 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 studycan 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.

6.0

Errors


25/58


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 fromthe 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 statementno 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 accordancewith 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


26/58


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 thataccountability 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


27/58


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 isextremely difficult to have an ongoing commercial relationship with a

client who is in the process of suing you.

7.2 Elements of Risk Control

7.2.1 The 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.

7.2.2 The 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.

7.2.3 Quality 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.

7.0

Risk Control

Strategy


28/58


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 informedwhenever 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.


29/58


AGS (1996) Guide to the Model Document Report - Geoenvironmental

Site Assessments. AGS, Beckenham, Kent

AGS (1999) Code of Conduct for Site Investigation Version 2. AGS,

Beckenham, Kent

AGS (2000) Guidelines for Combined Geoenvironmental andGeotechnical Investigations. AGS, Beckenham, Kent

AGS (2003a) Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report. AGS,

Beckenham, Kent

AGS (2003b) Guide to Collateral Warranties. AGS, Beckenham, Kent

AGS 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)

AGS Loss Prevention Alerts (Written by the AGS Loss

Prevention Working Group to provide guidance on new

issues affecting the trading environment of AGS members)

ICE (1993) Site Investigation in Construction. Site Investigation

Steering Group, Thomas Telford.

References


30/58


31/58

Guidelines for the

Preparation of the Ground

Report


32/58


33/58

AGS: Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report 33

Foreword .................................................................................................34

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................35

2.0 DESK STUDY .......................................................................................37

3.0 FACTUAL REPORT .............................................................................. 38

3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................38

3.2 Object and scope ....................................................................................38

3.3 Presentation ............................................................................................38

3.4 Site location ............................................................................................38

3.5 Site description .......................................................................................38

3.6 Fieldwork procedure ............................................................................... 38

3.7 In-situ testing ..........................................................................................39

3.8 Laboratory testing ...................................................................................39

3.9 Electronic format ....................................................................................39

4.0 INTERPRETATIVE REPORT ............................................................... 41

4.1 Structure .................................................................................................41

4.2 Geological interpretation the detailed Ground Model ........................ 41

4.3 Ground parameter ...................................................................................42

4.4 Engineering interpretation ...................................................................... 43

4.5 Geoenvironmental impacts ..................................................................... 45

5.0 DESIGN REPORT ................................................................................. 46

6.0 VALIDATION REPORT ........................................................................ 48

7.0 REPORTING RESPONSIBILITIES ...................................................... 50

Fig 1

The Ground Report ............................................................................................51

Appendix A

Checklists .......................................................................................................... 53

Appendix B

Description of Geotechnical Reports as used in North America.......................57

Contents


34/58

34 AGS: Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report

The need for a guidance document on the preparation of geotechnical reports

was first 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 Knill s

work had involved provision of expert witness services, through which he

saw a significant number of interpretative reports. Some of these caused him

concern, primarily on grounds of lack of completeness. He therefore sought the

Association s help in producing and publicising guidance on the scope of issueswhich 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

beneficial to young geospecialists and to those who train them.

Keith R Gabriel

Chairman

Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists

Foreword


35/58


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 finish and should contain all the

technical facts, good or bad, without reference to any personal administrative

difficulties. 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 first, 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

finish that this document has been prepared, since interpretation of geotechnical

data is not simply confined 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 identifies three project categories (their use

is not mandatory) which reflect 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, retainingwalls 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 difficult ground

or loading conditions. Structures in Category 2 require quantitative geotechnical

data and analysis to ensure that the fundamental requirements will be satisfied;

routine procedures for field and laboratory testing and for design and execution

may be used.

Geotechnical Category 3 includes very large or unusual structures, structuresinvolving abnormal risks, or unusual or exceptionally difficult 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 significance 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 forGround 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)


36/58

36 AGS: Guidelines for the Preparation of the Ground Report

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 inAppendix 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 beencountered in international usage.

The definitions described in the SISG Publication 28 apply to the terms

Geotechnical Specialist or Geotechnical Adviser where they are adopted in these

guidelines, namely:

Geotechnical Specialist a Chartered Engineer or Chartered

Geologist with a postgraduate

qualification 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 five years Chartered

practice in Geotechnics.

Geotechnical Adviser - a Chartered Engineer or a Chartered

Geologist with five years practice as a

Geotechnical Specialist.

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.


37/58


The first 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 AnnexA 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 th

Documents

Ground Reports