See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/336890371

Considerations on the Practical Development of the Geotechnical Baseline

Report (GBR) for the FIDIC Emerald Book and Similar Contract Forms

Preprint · October 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 996

1 author:

Alexandre R.A. Gomes

SMEC (member of the Surbana Jurong Group)
34 PUBLICATIONS   28 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Metro Bangkok View project

Snowy 2.0 Pump Storage Scheme View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alexandre R.A. Gomes on 27 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress, WTC2020 and 46th General Assembly Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Malaysia 15-21 May 2020

Considerations on the Practical Development of the Geotechnical Baseline Report

(GBR) for the FIDIC Emerald Book and Similar Contract Forms
A. R.A. Gomes1
1
Chief Technical Principal Tunnels and Underground, SMEC Australia Pty. Ltd., Sydney, Australia
E-mail: Alexandre.Gomes@Smec.com

ABSTRACT: In the framework of the FIDIC Emerald Book, the Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) plays a pivotal role in the
management and contractual allocation of geotechnical risks between the Parties. A major distinction of the GBR concept proposed in the
Emerald Book with respect to traditional GBR formats consists in the incorporation of a baseline of excavation, support and lining works,
which are applied during construction in accordance with the actual encountered subsurface conditions and used with the purpose of
remeasurement and adjustment of contractual construction time and cost. This paper presents a brief discussion on relevant concepts and
elements associated with the proposed GBR concept, including suggestions for its practical implementation under the Emerald Book and
similar contract forms.

KEYWORDS: Contracts for Underground Works, Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR), FIDIC Emerald Book, Geotech. Risk-Allocation.

1. INTRODUCTION
The first edition of the FIDIC Emerald Book Conditions of Contract
for Underground Works (2018), jointly prepared by FIDIC and the
International Tunnelling and Underground Space Association (ITA-
AITES), filled an important gap in the tunnelling industry by
introducing the first international contract form specifically tailored
for underground works and with specific focus on the inherent
geotechnical risks associated with this type of construction.
The Emerald Book is essentially a modified FIDIC Yellow
Book contract form drafted to combine the Design-Built approach
with a balanced allocation of geotechnical risks between the Parties.
It is based on the premise that risks must be allocated to the Party
that is best positioned to manage them, implying in broader terms,
that ground-related risks are allocated to the Employer and risks
associated with construction prices and production rates are assigned
to the Contractor.
The Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) is a key contractual
document of the Emerald Book that defines the geotechnical
baselines agreed by the Parties and stipulates the contractual risk
allocation mechanisms. A major distinction of the GBR concept
proposed in the Emerald Book with respect to traditional GBR
formats consists in the incorporation of a baseline of excavation,
support and lining works, which are applied during construction
with the purpose of remeasurement and adjustment of contractual
construction time and cost.
A brief discussion on relevant concepts and elements
associated with the new proposed GBR concept is presented in the
following, including suggestions for its practical implementation
under the Emerald Book and similar contract forms.
Table 1: GBR’s structure and scope acc. to FIDIC guidelines (2018)
Sections Description of Scope
Part A Informative only and shall include general project
information, such as layout and descriptions of works
with typologies and associated construction methods;
typical geotechnical conditions; a discussion on project
challenges and identification of natural and man-made
risks and constraints.
Part B Corresponds to the actual contractual baselines of
physical and behavioural subsurface conditions,
together with the baseline of “Excavation” (excavation
and initial support) and “Lining” works for each
relevant work type and section. (see note below)
Appen- Shall include relevant supporting drawings (e.g. project
dices layout, geotechnical and methodological longitudinal
profiles and sections, details of the various
excavation/support and lining classes) and the Ground
Classification System (GCS).
Note: According to the Emerald Book, “Excavation” includes all
works and activities associated with the excavation and initial
support of the openings, whereas “Lining” works correspond to the
final/permanent support and associated waterproofing, contact
grouting and backfill (as applicable).
An example of a practical classification of the contractual
geotechnical baselines is suggested by the author in Table 2, where
items of work have been differentiated between Systematic and
Non-Systematic conditions. Further details are provided in section 4.

2. THE SCOPE OF THE GBR Table 2: E.g. Practical classification of the geotechnical baselines
The guideline for the preparation of the GBR included in the GBR Baselines Description (see also Section 5)
Emerald Book (2018) recommends the sub-division of the GBR into 1) Physical Baseline of Geotechnically Homogeneous
two parts and respective appendices. The first Part A shall be Subsurface Units (GHUs), groundwater and in-situ
informative only, whereas the actual contractual geotechnical Conditions stress conditions, natural and made
baselines shall be contained in Part B, as described in Table 1. geohazards and constraints.
The GBR’s basic structure can be understood as successive 2) Behavioural Baseline of ground behaviour types (GBs)
layers of information (baselines) which are derived from, and tacitly Conditions and acceptable impacts on the
reflects, the typical steps of the underground works’ geotechnical environment and adjacent infrastructure.
engineering design. These steps comprise the characterization of the 3) Systematic Baseline of typical project-specific
physical subsurface conditions, the assessment of ground behaviours
Conditions Tunnelling Classes (TCs) relative to the
and the design of sets of construction solutions and auxiliary
“Excavation” and “Lining” works (see
measures required to deal with the anticipated subsurface also TCs examples provided in Table 6).
conditions. In the GBR, the hierarchical relationship between the
4) Non- Baseline of construction measures and
baseline layers and elements is defined by the inclusion of a Ground
Systematic activities (NCs) required to deal with non-
Classification System (GCS), which stipulates how the items of
Conditions systematic geohazards, or other
work are assigned to anticipated subsurface conditions when they
hindrances not covered by the TCs.
are encountered during construction.
 ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress, WTC2020 and 46th General Assembly Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Malaysia 15-21 May 2020
Conditions outside the scope of the baselines, here defined as
systematic and non-systematic conditions, are regulated in the
Emerald Book by a specific clause for “Contractual Unforeseeable
Physical Conditions” (UPCs).
The level of uncertainty implicitly associated with each
baselined element and how risks are distributed across the
Systematic (TCs), Non-systematic (NCs) and Unforeseeable
physical conditions (UPCs) represent the Employer’s preferred risk
profile. It is worth noting that unbalanced risks concealed within the
scope of baselined elements may have a direct impact on the project
cost and overall risk profile, as Tenderers may be led to either price-
in hidden risks or assume a disproportionate amount of risk (“dice-
rolling” approach).
The GBR’s risk allocation structure in accordance with the
terminology proposed in Table 2 is illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Illustration of the GBR’s risk-allocation structure
3. PREPARATION OF THE GBR
The quality of tender documents is key for the success of any project
with a significant amount of underground works. Studies with
enough depth shall be carried out to ensure that risks have been
properly identified and managed and that a feasible construction
solution has been developed to cover the full spectra of baselined
conditions, as requested by the Emerald Book.
The GBR is a pivotal component of the Emerald Book’s
contractual framework, being closely linked to the other contractual
documents, such as the Schedule of Baselines (quantities and
measurement of works), the Completion Schedule, the Employer’s
technical requirements, the supporting drawings and the Risk
Management Plans, among others.
The preparation of the GBR requires therefore an integrated
effort across several technical disciplines, including the contractual,
commercial and legal areas. It is noticeable that the process of
preparing the GBR is often beneficial for the project, as it generates
a platform for interdisciplinary team collaboration both within each
Party’s organization and across the Parties, enabling a deeper
understanding of the project’s technical challenges and risks ahead
of the bid and the construction phase.
The Emerald Book seems to assume that the GBR shall be fully
developed and owned by the Employer, except in the cases of
alternative proposals, where Tenderers shall produce similar
supporting documents, particularly a GBR. An optional approach
consists of adopting a three‐step GBR development process, as
suggested by the ASCE Guidelines (Essex R., 2007). This approach
has the advantage that it promotes stronger engagement and a
shared-ownership of the GBR by the Parties.
In the staged GBR development approach, the Employer shall
prepare an initial GBR (called GBR-A, for Tender), which is
reviewed and amended by Tenderers and submitted as the GBR-B
version (for Bid) together with their respective bids. The definitive
contractual document (called GBR-C, for the Contract) shall include
the final Employer’s revision and any modifications that may result
from agreements met between the Parties during the contract
negotiation stage. It is important to mention that, when this approach
is applied, the Employer should clearly specify to Tenderers the
applicable GBR’s methodology and criteria to maintain
comparability between tender proposals and avoid undesirable shifts
of the Employer’s preferred risk profile.
Table 3 shows a summary of key GBR-related deliverables for
the case of a three-stage GBR preparation.
Table 3: Example of staged GBR preparation
Project
Key Deliverables / Activities
Stage
Employer’s − GBR-A and associated Schedule of Baselines /
Tender Completion schedule.
documents − Supporting reference design, Technical
Requirements and Particular Conditions.
Preparation − GBR-B and associated Schedule of Baselines /
of Completion Schedule and required returnable
Tenderers’ documents.
proposals − Bid design
Contract − GBR-C and associated Schedule of Baselines /
negotiation Completion Schedule (to be agreed between the
and award Employer and the awarded Contractor).
Construction − Remeasurement and Adjustment of construction
phase cost and time-based on the conditions specified
in the GBR-C.
In the Emerald Book, the Contractor is responsible for the design of
the underground works to the extent specified in the Employer’s
Requirements and, where applicable, in accordance with the GBR.
As mentioned, it is expected that Tenderers submit reference-design
compliant proposals and, in the case of alternative proposals, a fully-
developed set of supporting tender documents, including the
associated GBR, Schedule of Baselines and the Completion
Schedule.
Notwithstanding that the GBR approach discussed in this paper
is oriented towards the Design-Build contract form of the Emerald
Book, it can also be adapted to other types of contracts (e.g.
Construct-only or EPC/Turn-key) provided that suitable particular
conditions and provisions are built into the contractual framework to
regulate the risk-sharing mechanisms.
4. GEOTECHNICAL BASELINE FRAMEWORK
As already mentioned, the contractual geotechnical baselines are
essentially derived from the geotechnical design of the underground
works. Both processes should therefore follow a comprehensive and
traceable methodology, which shall be set out by the Employer in
the tender documents. The next sections examine and discuss key
aspects involved in the development of the contractual geotechnical
baselines and the elaboration of the respective Ground Classification
System (GCS).
4.1 Baseline of Physical Conditions
The Employer is the Party who owns the risk associated with the
ground conditions and is therefore the Party that should be more
interested in carrying out investigations and studies with enough
detail and to a depth which is commensurate with the nature, size
and level of complexity of the project.
The definition of a comprehensive baseline of physical
subsurface conditions is an important step of the GBR, as it provides
the basic building blocks upon which the subsequent geotechnical
baselines are developed to be used for remeasurement purposes.
One of the principles introduced by the Emerald Book is the
complete disclosure by Employers of all information obtained from
the geotechnical studies and any other relevant geological and
 ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress, WTC2020 and 46th General Assembly Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Malaysia 15-21 May 2020
geotechnical information available (e.g. from data obtained from
previous projects carried out in the same area). This information
shall be consolidated in a Geotechnical Data Report (GDR), which
is part of the “other documents” section and has the lowest possible
contractual priority. Indeed, the GBR can and often will deviate
from the GDR, as the geotechnical baselines are contractual
baselines and not necessarily a geotechnical fact (Essex, 2007).
A practical method to characterise the baseline of subsurface
physical conditions considers the definition of “Geotechnically
Homogeneous Units” (GHUs) along the project alignment, which
correspond to relevant ground volumes at the scale of the
underground works with similar geotechnical properties and
characteristics concerning structural characteristics and key
parameters and properties required for design and construction
purposes.
The description of GHUs typically includes but is not limited to
ground lithologies, mechanical and physical properties, structural
geology, geomechanical classification indices and groundwater
conditions. Furthermore, the GHUs shall be defined not only in
terms of design parameters but also specify the conditions and
parameters that are specifically relevant to assess constructability
requirements and production rates. For example, whilst ground
permeability is required for design, anticipated and allowable water
inflows should also be baselined as they are critical factors for the
assessment of required construction measures.
Other key aspects that must be addressed in the baseline are the
magnitude and orientation of in-situ ground stresses and the
presence of non-systematic conditions (NCs), such as high water-
inflow, high rock abrasivity and natural or man-made constraints,
among other factors. The baselined characteristics shall be specified
in terms of ranges and/or statistical distributions with clear
indications with respect to the effective ranges that shall be used for
design purposes. For example, if the in-situ k-ratio is found to
predominantly in the range of 0.7 to 1.5 but measurements indicate
some potential outliers up to 2.5, the baseline should clearly specify
which max/min or sensitivity values shall be considered for design
purposes.
In summary, the baseline of physical subsurface conditions
shall set out the anticipated GHUs, groundwater conditions, non-
systematic conditions (NCs) and any other identified
geohazards/constraints at each relevant work section, including their
estimated percentual distribution along the alignment.
4.2 Baseline of Behavioural Conditions
The excavation of underground works affects the primary
equilibrium conditions of the rock mass, causing the re-distribution
of stresses around the excavation, creating new rock blocks’
kinematic degrees of freedom and modifications of the surrounding
rock mass groundwater pore pressure, conductivity and flow
conditions as well as changes in the thermal and chemical settings.
How the ground will respond to a specific construction method
applied for excavation and support, under particular physical and
boundary conditions corresponds to the so-called “Ground
Behaviour”.
The Emerald Book considers the description of both the
physical conditions and the ground behaviour as essential
components of the description of the subsurface conditions.
Furthermore, it recommends that parameters contained in the GBR
shall focus majorly on ground behaviour and/or ground response
rather than geologically oriented parameters.
The Austrian Geomechanical Society Design Guideline (2011),
for example, suggests general categories describing similar Ground
Behaviours with respect to failure modes and displacement
characteristics, which are denominated “Ground Behaviour Types”
(GBs). GBs shall be assessed and described with consideration of
all relevant influencing factors, including but not limited to: ground
conditions (GHUs), geohazards, in-situ stress conditions, shape and
size of the underground works, construction methodology, location
with respect to surface or existing infrastructure, relative orientation
with respect to rock mass structures, groundwater, seepage and
hydraulic head and time-associated mechanisms, among others
project-specific boundary conditions.
Table 4 provides a summary of some common high-level
ground behaviour types. These mechanisms often occur
concurrently in various levels of intensity and predominance and
detailed assessments and characterisation are required for each
project-specific conditions and work section.
Table 4: Common high-level ground behaviour types
Failure Description of controlling ground behaviour
Mechanisms
Gravity and The ground is predominantly in the elastic domain
Structurally with failure controlled by discontinuities, including
Controlled overbreak, fall of wedges or blocks, friable ground,
Failure ravelling ground and progressive chimney failure.
Ground Shear and/or spalling failure caused by stresses
Failure due to exceeding the ground capacity.
Overstress
Effect of Deterioration and instability due to groundwater
Ground-water seepage or pressure (e.g. loosening of blocks,
wash-out of fines, flowing ground,
slaking/swelling phenomena).
Effect of Failure due to the presence of swelling/slaking
Minerals minerals either in the rock matrix or seams.
Design approaches used for the assessment of ground failure
mechanisms and overall ground response consist typically of a
combination of empirical, analytical and numerical analysis
methods, depending on the project specific requirements.
Experience and sound-engineering judgement are always
indispensable for the attainment of realistic assessments.
Since the ground response cannot be precisely defined ahead of
construction, the definition of control parameters that can be
observed/measured on-site during construction (e.g. failure modes
and displacement characteristics) to verify and calibrate design
assumptions is always recommended.
As for the physical baselines, behavioural statements shall
include the anticipated percentual distribution of ground behaviour
types (GBs), geohazards and specific constraints at each relevant
work section, establishing control parameters that can be effectively
used by the Ground Classification System (GCS) to correlate
conditions with required construction measures (See also table 8).
4.3 Baseline of Systematic Conditions - Tunnelling Classes
(TCs)
Systematic excavation, support and lining works must be designed
for each singular work section and associated boundary conditions.
A common approach to deal with this type of works is the definition
of various “Tunnelling Classes” (TCs), where each class
corresponds to a set of construction measures and activities designed
to deal with specific ranges of baselined conditions for any given
work type and methodology.
The design of the TCs implies the assessment of the complete
excavation and support process, including the definition of
acceptable impacts on adjacent facilities and the environment (e.g.
permissible settlements and impact on groundwater table), the
design of the final inner lining (if applicable to the project) and the
verification of compliance with the project’s long term structural
and serviceability requirements.
TCs shall cover the full range of baselined systematic
conditions specified in the GBR for each specific tunnel type, size
and construction methodology. TCs are usually organised in the
form of sets of construction measures with ascending/descending
level of effort in terms of cost and time, which include all activities
or items of work upon which the Contractor commits costs,
 ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress, WTC2020 and 46th General Assembly Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Malaysia 15-21 May 2020

production rates and durations as set out in the schedule of transport and disposal conditions, TBM entrapment, need to
baselines, for remeasurement purposes during construction. reprofile section, etc. Examples of compensation items for NCs are
Table 5 provides some examples of relevant factors that affect listed in Table 7.
the cost and time of underground works, which should be Table 7: Examples of compensation items for NCs
considered for the definition of the project-specific TCs.
Non-Systematic Conditions (NCs) – E.g. Compensation Items
Table 5: Example of factors affecting the definition of TCs Care of water Specific for heading zones and rear zones and
compensated for an excess of n l/s (for selected
Item D&B TBM / Roadheader inflow ranges).
Excava- Round lengths Stroke length, cutter head penetration Abrasivity classes Use of Cerchar Abrasivity Index (CAI), with
tion and heading rates, tool wear and maintenance (ACs) compensation for values above certain pre-
works method (i.e. requirements, type of machine (e.g. defined ranges of abrasivity not covered by the
full-face or face pressure requirement, Boreability Classes.
partial drifts) gripper/single/double shield), etc. Geological Based on pre-defined criteria, such as those
Support Support type, D&B conditions apply for Gripper overbreak specified by SIA 198 or ÖNORM B 2203.
works quality, amount TBM and Roadheader. For Shield Ground treatment In accordance with different types of material
and location of TBM, a one-pass segmental lining (cement-based or chemical, scope and required
installation solution is typical (support with both methodologies).
(working or rear temporary and permanent character). Contaminated Special H&S, mucking and disposal
zone) ground requirements
Lining Inner lining D&B conditions apply for Gripper
works type, grouting, TBM and Roadheader. For Shield 4.5 Ground Classification System (GCS)
waterproofing. TBM, one-pass solution is typical.
Note: Other general factors include excavation size and layout, The GCS sets out the hierarchical correlations between the
accessibility conditions (e.g. tunnel gradient, length, etc.), face physical/behavioural baselines and the corresponding attributable
support or ground treatment requirements, mucking and ventilation TCs and NCs, being therefore a central component of the GBR.
requirements, among others. Table 8 presents a simplified example of an individual Ground
Behaviour type (GB) of a hypothetical conventional D&B
Table 6 provides examples of typical types of TCs applied for excavation, where the GCS is implicitly expressed by the cross-
systematic excavation, support and lining works of both references made to the underlying physical baselines and the
conventional and mechanised TBM excavations. attributable TCs and NCs for the respective ground behaviour type
Table 6: Examples of TCs – systematic conditions (e.g. GB9), including references to their respective Schedule of
Baselines and governing clauses.
TCs Description
Excavation Apply for Conventional D&B and Roadheader, with Table 8: Ground Classification – Simplified example of a GB
and Support ESCs catering for the combination of excavation
Classes sequence and support for each individual work. Ground Behaviour GB9 - Deep Shear Failure
(ESCs) Schematic Illustration
Boreability Apply for mechanised TBM excavation. BCs can be
Classes defined with basis on ground-related penetration
(BCs) and rates and cutter wear (e.g. Swiss TBM Field test
Support method, UCS / CAI abrasivity ranges, and models
Classes such as NTNU, RME, Qtbm, RME, CSM, Gehring, GHUs Prevalence GHU7, GHU9
(SCs) / and others). SCs are either standard rock support for Referential 20 ≤ RMR89 ≤ 40
(BCSCs) D&B/Gripper TBM or segmental lining for Shield Geomechanical Indices (acc. to Bieniawski, 1989)
TBM, among others. Orientation of major Sub-vertical to tunnel axis trending in
Lining Apply for D&B in-situ inner concrete lining, structural features E/W direction
Classes including waterproofing, contact grouting, etc. For
(LCs) one-pass solutions (e.g. Shield TBM segmental Deviatoric stress High rock mass overstress. 0.015 <
lining) LCs can be merged with the SC classes. conditions cm/max ≤ 0.05 (as per design values
or updated models based on monitoring
4.4. Baseline of Non-Systematic Conditions (NCs) and back-analysis results)
Groundwater Not relevant seepage expected during
The occurrence of geohazards and hindrances of sporadic and conditions excavation works.
localised nature, here denominated under the acronymic NC is very Ground Behaviour Deep-seated stress-controlled shear
common in underground works. These events may have significant Description failure with yielding and large
impact on the required construction effort and often require specific deformations (Pressure exerting).
positions in the Schedule of Baselines with the purpose of
Displacement Convergences in the range of 2.5-5.0%
measurement and payment.
Characteristics of the tunnel diameter.
Examples of such NCs include but are not limited to: handling
Face Stability Advanced support measures and ground
of water inflow or pressure in excess of pre-defined ranges; the
Conditions treatment may be required, acc. to NCs.
occurrence of extremely abrasive or strong rock; excessive
geological overbreak; ground treatment requirements (e.g. drilling Geotechnical Heavily constrained by geotechnical
and pre-grouting); specific environmental or logistic constraints Hindrances for conditions. Section reprofile may be
(areas with low acceptable ground settlements or stringent allowable Excavation required acc. to schedules of NCs.
water inflow, etc.); swelling ground, fault crossing, squeezing; Applicable ESC6 and ESC7, as per Schedule of TCs
presence of gas contaminated or aggressive ground or groundwater; Tunnelling Classes Baselines and drawings.
karst; rock strain bursts, seismicity; high temperature and hot water Note: the most robust ESC shall be adopted in case of: mixed
(e.g. due to hydrothermal sources); mixed or blocky ground (TBM), face conditions; discrepancy of multi-criteria; and changing
among others. These conditions can lead to various levels of impact ground conditions (install 2 diameters before and after the zone
to the construction, including construction downtime, stricter muck of change).
 ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress, WTC2020 and 46th General Assembly Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Malaysia 15-21 May 2020
Figure 2: Overview of the GBR Framework
An overview of the GBR risk allocation framework is
illustrated in Figure 2. The correlation between the baseline
elements is graphically illustrated by the sub-vertical lines
connecting the box symbols, representing the criteria established by
the GCS.
The GCS can be based on different approaches, spanning from
empirical rock classification systems, through to semi-empirical
approaches and observational-methods or a combination of one or
more methods. Independently of the selected approach, it important
to ensure that the GCS criteria are effectively applicable to the
project-specific subsurface conditions and construction methods and
that it is properly implemented on-site and that both Parties have a
good technical understanding of the inevitable and inherent
theoretical and practical limitations associated with the selected
GCS criteria.
The adoption of multi-criteria approaches for the GCS with a
definition of hierarchal precedence, for example, can be a good
strategy to offset these limitations and generate redundancy around
risks of bias, especially if decision criteria can be combined with
parameters/properties that can be observed and/or measured on-site
(observational method). In all cases, experience shows that a
collaborative approach from both Parties and the application of
sound technical criteria on-site always results in better project
outcomes, as oppose to adopting formalistic and legalistic positions,
which often lead to poor engineering decisions, claims and disputes
5. REMEASUREMENT OF COST AND TIME
In the Emerald Book, both cost and time are based on the
contractual baselines defined in the Geotechnical Baseline Report,
which are remeasured during construction for adjustment of the
Contract Price and the Time for Completion. It implies that the time
for completion and costs can either increase or reduce, depending if
the actual conditions are more or less onerous than anticipated.
In terms of payment, the Emerald Book distinguishes between
those parts of the Works that are subject to the risk related to the
sub-surface physical conditions, and those parts that are not
(Neuenschwander and Marulanda, 2019). Works subject to risks
related to the subsurface physical conditions, such as the TCs and
NCs shall be regularly remeasured with basis on the quantity- and
time-related rate items included in the schedule of baselines for the
specific items of work.
On the other hand, works not affected by subsurface risks, such
as for example the contractor’s mobilisation, shall be remunerated
through lump sum components (fixed-rate prices) of the Contract
Price.
In the case, of UPCs, adjustments and compensation shall be
based on the measurement of additionally executed excavation and
lining works and comparison with the benchmark production rates
and costs indicated in the initial GBR baselines.
6. GBR IMPLEMENTATION DURING CONSTRUCTION
The GBR is a multi-stage, multi-step procedure which starts at the
project’s initial planning stage and is only completed once
construction is finished. Whilst the design shall ensure that risks
have been properly identified and that a feasible construction
solution has been developed to cover the full spectra of expected
physical conditions, the actual management and implementation of
the GBR on-site, during the construction, is crucial for the success
of the procurement model and for the overall project outcome.
Relevant geotechnical parameters and properties must be
collected, recorded, and evaluated on-site at each excavation cycle,
excavation round or construction stage, as required for ground
classification purposes, verification of design assumptions and
safety reserves. Typical geotechnical information collected during
construction generally include but is not be limited to:
− Visual characterization of the ground (face mapping for
conventional/Gripper TBM excavation);
− Results of probe drilling / coring / sample testing;
− Geophysical measurements;
− Groundwater measurements;
− Monitoring of stress, strain and displacements;
 ITA-AITES World Tunnel Congress, WTC2020 and 46th General Assembly Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre, Malaysia 15-21 May 2020
− TBM data, such as face pressure, thrust and penetration rates
(field-test, if applicable); and
− Verification of design assumptions regarding in-situ and
deviatoric stress conditions, etc.
The collected and interpreted geotechnical data form the basis
for the implementation of the Ground Classification System and the
definition of the actions to be taken for the tunnelling work ahead,
including attribution of suitable TCs, NCs and any required
additional construction measures. Conditions at the rear zones of
excavated sections and at adjacent infrastructure must also be
continuously assessed and observed to identify any abnormal
behaviour, presence of geohazards (e.g. water inflow) and define the
opportunity for the installation of the final/inner lining. Considering
the strong focus of the Emerald Book in the management of risks,
all relevant geohazards must be included in the risk register and
treated in the geotechnical risk management plans prepared as part
of the overall construction risk management plan.
In view of the relevance of the GBR management during
construction, the Emerald Book foresees an important role for the
Engineer, who has a duty of supervising the implementation of the
works on site (Maclure, 2018). The decision on what measures to
implement shall be made by the Contractor, as the Party responsible
for the safety, however the Engineer shall assess to what extent it
complies with the GCS and the contract, and if the Contractor's
measurement should be accepted. This position requires a high
degree of impartiality as the Engineer plays a central role in the
resolution of day-to-day disputes between the Parties.
When an agreement cannot be reached, the Engineer makes a
fair determination and the Contractor then decide whether to claim
or not. Following a Notice of Dissatisfaction (NOD) from one of the
Parties, the matter is then referred to the Dispute Avoidance /
Adjudication Board (DAAB), which is appointed for the whole
project duration. Only after these two avenues are exhausted, the
dispute will proceed to an external arbitration or litigation.
Due to the significance of the GBR implementation, the
presence of a robust technical and commercial management on site,
by both the Employer and the Contractor, cannot be overstated, as it
enables Parties to deal more proactively and reasonably with
potential divergences and with the treatment of sensible changes and
adjustments that may be required due to the actually encountered
subsurface conditions.
7. CONCLUSION
The paper discussed key concepts and elements associated with the
preparation of the Geotechnical Baseline Report (GBR) under the
framework of the FIDIC Emerald Book and similar contract forms
and included practical suggestions on how to implement it.
Emphasis was given to the Emerald’s Book expanded GBR
scope and concepts, which differs from traditional GBR formats by
the incorporation of a risk-sharing mechanism based on the re-
measurement of executed constructions solutions (excavation,
support and lining works) depending on the effectively encountered
geotechnical conditions during construction.
As explained in the paper, The GBR is a multi-stage, multi-step
process which commences in the early project stages, extends
through to the reference design and tender period and is only
concluded once the contract is finished. This involves not only the
preparation of comprehensive contractual documents but also proper
management and implementation on-site during construction. Past
experiences have shown that cost overruns, delays and claims
derived from poorly management of the GBR during construction
greatly exceed costs associated with the provision of a robust
technical and contractual organization by both Parties during the
construction stage.
Several principles considered in the expanded GBR concept of
the Emerald Book have been around in the industry for several
decades, being particularly expressed in the contractual practices for
underground works that have been developed and applied since the
70s in various European countries, such as Austria, Switzerland,
View publication stats
Norway, among others (mostly based on the re-measurement of unit
rates, as in the FIDIC Red book) and promoted by various ITA-
AITES position papers in the last decades.
Nevertheless, the Emerald Book form of contract is the first
international contractual form for underground works, which
explicitly seeks a transparent and equitable allocation of ground
related risks.
It is a fact that there is no “one size fits all” regarding
construction contracts. The local industry context, laws and
regulations may require important amendments to contractual forms
and financing/insurance constraints may be determining in the
selection of procurement models. However, it is fair to say that the
publication of the first version of the Emerald Book has been a
major contribution to the landscape of contract forms for
underground works, by offering a functional initial contractual
template for Employers seeking to incorporate a balanced allocation
of subsurface risks, more competitive Tenders and lower outturn
costs of the works.
Similarly, the GBR concepts put forward by the Emerald Book
also provide on their own a reasonable risk-allocation template,
which can be applied either directly under the Emerald Book or
adapted to suit other types of contracts, provided that Particular
Conditions are built into the contract to stipulate the contractual
risk-allocation mechanisms that will govern the project’s
underground works.
8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to acknowledge the substantive work carried
out by all members of the Task force 10 of ITA/FIDIC in the
preparation of the Emerald Book and their seminal contribution to
the underground construction industry.
The author also would like to express its gratitude to Andreas
Neumaier, Ben Chapman, Francisco Cortes, Luke Drowley and
Nick Chapman, from SMEC, for their meaningful discussions,
assistance and support in the preparation of this paper.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this paper are
those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position
of FIDIC and ITA.
9. REFERENCES
Austrian Society for Geomechanics (2010). Guideline for the
geotechnical design of underground structures with
conventional excavation.
Ericson, G. (2019). The Geotechnical Baseline Report in the new
FIDIC Emerald Book – suggested developments.
Ertl, H. (2019). Risk allocation in the FIDIC forms of contract, and
the Emerald Book’s place in the Rainbow Suite.
Essex R., (2007) “Geotechnical Baseline Reports for Construction,
Suggested Guidelines”, UTRC ASCE.
FIDIC Conditions of Contract for Underground Works (2019) –
Emerald Book; first edition.
IMIA International Insurers Group / ITA-AITES (2012) Code of
Practice for Risk Management of Tunnel Works.
ITA-AITES (2013) Guidelines on Contractual Aspects of
Conventional Tunnelling, WG-19 (and previous position
papers).
Maclure, J. (2019). The role of the Engineer in the Emerald Book.
Marulanda, A & Neuenschwander, M. (2019). Contractual time for
completion adjustment in the FIDIC Emerald Book.
Nairac, C. (2019). The claims, dispute avoidance and dispute
resolution procedure in the new FIDIC Emerald Book.
Neuenschwander, M & Marulanda, A. (2019). Measuring the
excavation and lining in the Emerald Book.
ÖNORM B 2203-1/2 (2001) - Austrian Standards, Underground
Works - Contract Form.
Swiss Standard SIA 507 198 (2007) – General Conditions for
Underground Construction.