It appears that in recent years the Geotechnical Reference Report (GBR) has perhaps become the key document for construction. The GBR not only allocates much of the risk associated with the work, it also serves as the basis for preparing bids and is widely used to resolve disputes during construction. The use of GBRs to contractually define anticipated ground conditions has become a widely accepted practice in the construction industry. The importance and significance of these reports have brought the requests for information they receive to unprecedented levels. The basic principle of a contractual GBR has been well developed and corresponds to the industry. Despite the acceptance of GBRs, there are still opportunities for improvement. Engineers and geologists find it difficult to develop specific numerical baselines from a large number of geotechnical properties. This is particularly true where geological environments are very inconsistent. Entrepreneurs are frustrated because they feel like they don't consistently have the baseline they need. Owners feel taken advantage of when references are used to validate their complaints in a way that was not intended or when references are not valued in the dispute resolution process. It appears that there are four domains or categories in the GBRs. This could result in a better and more useful product. These are (1) Establishing Baselines (2) Soil Behavior/Performance Assessments (3) Construction Considerations (4) Using GBR during construction to establish baselines. There are two considerable challenges. This would involve determining the state of the soil which must be defined as a basis and how to quantify them. The purpose of a GBR is to convert what geotechnical engineers have found into an easy-to-read product for...... middle of paper ...... osal. Some contractors hire a geologist or geotechnical engineer to help them evaluate the GBR when preparing their proposal. Others only examine the GBR well into construction and then enlist the help of geological engineering or geotechnical engineering when they want to follow up on a DSC claim. This may be due to the limited time allowed to prepare the offer. Whatever the reason, the latter approach is counterproductive and not consistent with the purpose of the GBR. In a relatively short time, GBRs have become an established practice within the industry. It is therefore essential to make these reports as effective as possible. Logical baselines must be included in the GBR. Stay away from unnecessary or redundant baselines. Additionally, conservative baselines or efforts to place unnecessary risk on the contractor may not be successful...