COMMITTEE CHAIR MARY NODINE, P.E. Subsurface Characterization for Deep Foundations Committee DFI’s Subsurface Characterization for Deep Foundations Committee has a mission to educate stakeholders on the benefits of effectively managing ground risk, to promote the value improved subsurface charac- terization can bring to projects, and to promote innovative technology in the field. The committee’s focus is on the end users of subsurface characterization data, aiming to educate and improve their experience. We have been busy networking with other groups and coordinating events and presentations. Here is an update on our exciting activities: ITS Money Webinar and USACE Partnership: The com- mittee presented a segment in the Testing and Evaluation Committee’s popular ITS Money webinar series on April 1, on the subject of “Saving Money with Enhanced Subsurface Charac- terization.” In the presentation, we provided case histories and data to illustrate the ways that enhanced subsurface characterization programs truly can save money, dividing the mechanisms into three categories: direct cost savings, reduced design uncertainty and reduced construction risk. We also explained the challenge of demonstrating the value of subsurface characterization to owners and other stakeholders because often the cost savings are not direct, success stories are not publicized, and failures are not well documented and are often not approved for disclosure. We presented data from the excellent NCHRP Synthesis 484: “Investigation and Subsurface Conditions on Claims, Change Orders and Overruns” (2016), which includes a chart (modified with USACE data at right) illustrating the relationship between investment in site investigations and project cost escalations. USACE’s Georgette Hlepas, Ph.D., P.E., has been gathering data to create a risk register that aims to identify and address cost and schedule risk associated with subsurface characterization. Creation of the risk register includes collection of data on project cost overruns and associated geotechnical investigation costs. USACE generously shared this data with the committee, and the effort is ongoing. The committee plans to partner with USACE on another ITS Money webinar in August to highlight this USACE risk register and a case history that illustrates a construction project that resulted in a claim. The webinar will suggest how the problem could have been avoided with a greater investment in subsurface characterization. Geotechnical Baseline Report Panel Discussion: A geotechnical baseline report (GBR) is a concise source document developed by a design team and the project owner as part of contract documents. A GBR is intended to provide contractual representation of the anticipated underground conditions for a project and fairly allocate the risk from subsurface uncertainties between the owner and the contractor. GBRs are developed based on geotechnical data reports (GDR), previous experience and engineering judgement. Using GBRs for any underground project appears to be a common sense, reasonable approach to prevent or resolve possible disputes that put unnecessary pressure on the 72 • DEEP FOUNDATIONS • MAY/JUNE 2020 involved parties and the project. However, in our current state of practice, use of GBRs is mostly limited to tunneling and underground structures. The committee is organizing a panel discussion series in which geotechnical and legal experts will provide insight into the meaning, benefits and challenges of foundation design for projects with GBRs. The first panel discussion is scheduled to take place at SuperPile ’20. Randall Essex of Mott MacDonald and principal author of ASCE’s “Geotechnical Baseline Reports for Construction – Suggested Guidelines” (2007), which is considered a fundamental document for GBRs in the industry, is the lead panelist. Jim Morrison, P.E., of Impact of site investigations on project costs COWI North America is the moderator. Panelists include Victor Donald of Terracon representing the consultants’ perspective; Conrad Felice, Ph.D., P.E., P.Eng., D.GE., of C.W. Felice, rep- resenting the owner’s perspective; Jeramy Decker, Ph.D., of Kiewit Infrastructure representing the contractor’s perspective; and Rick Kalson of Benesch Law representing the legal perspective. The panel will focus on basics such as defining a GBR, and discussing its history, purpose, development and benefits to various construction project stakeholders. Follow-up panel discussions are proposed at DFI’s Annual Conference in October 2020 and at International Foundations Congress and Equipment Exposition (IFCEE) in 2021. Geophysics Panel Discussion: Over the past few decades, many geophysical methods have steadily become familiar tools used for subsurface characterization as part of geotechnical investi- gations. Given the appropriate geologic setting and project objectives paired with the correct geophysical method(s), such investigations can add significant value using the broad range of data acquisition afforded by robust geophysical methods. However, geophysical programs are often poorly conceived and implemented, resulting in technical observations that are unsuccessfully interpreted or presented in such a way as to not provide high value, and to their relegation in a report appendix to be forgotten. The committee is coordinating a geophysics panel discussion to be presented at DFI’s Annual Conference in October 2020. In this panel, geophysical and geotechnical experts (including consultants and owners) will explore sound investigation planning and presentation strategies that promote positive advancements in
