July 2026Federico Baker6 min read
Pennsylvania’s Ground Risk Is Repricing Geotechnical Talent
Pennsylvania has always been a difficult state to build in. Ageing infrastructure, abandoned mine networks, mine subsidence, karst terrain, sinkhole activity, slope instability, seepage, and groundwater challenges pose persistent risks across transportation, heavy civil, water, energy, and public infrastructure projects.
Subsurface uncertainty is no longer being viewed as a purely technical problem to be addressed in a report. Instead, it has become a commercial and delivery issue. It affects schedules, change orders, claims exposure, procurement strategy, stakeholder confidence, and ultimately whether projects move forward as planned.
That shift is changing what companies want from senior geotechnical professionals.
Technical ability still matters, and it always will. But firms are increasingly looking for engineers who can read risk early, explain it clearly, support project strategy, and make sound decisions when conditions change.
Federico Baker, Associate Vice President at LVI Associates, says the shift is especially noticeable in Pennsylvania, where long-standing ground risks are now carrying greater commercial consequences:
Pennsylvania’s ground risk has always been there. What has changed is the cost of getting it wrong. Firms are no longer just asking whether someone is technically strong. They want to know whether that person can help the project team understand the risk early enough to do something about it.
Pennsylvania’s ground conditions are already a project delivery issue. The geotechnical risks are not theoretical. They show up on real projects, with real cost and delivery consequences.
These issues are significant enough to be recognised at an institutional level. Pennsylvania DEP’s Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation administers the state’s Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program and addresses hazards including mine fires, mine subsidence, dangerous highwalls, open shafts and portals, and mining-impacted water supplies.
Mine subsidence also remains a real enough risk to justify a dedicated insurance program. Pennsylvania DEP states that mine subsidence insurance covers losses from earth movement and damage caused by the collapse of underground coal and clay mines, and notes that millions of structures in Pennsylvania are located over old abandoned underground coal and clay mines.
Public guidance from Pennsylvania agencies also reflects ongoing concern around how karst terrain, sinkhole activity, groundwater movement, and human activity can affect subsurface stability. Pennsylvania DCNR states that sinkhole formation can be accelerated by human activity, while Pennsylvania DEP notes that sinkholes in the state can affect stream quality, groundwater quality, and public health and safety.
There is also a major infrastructure workload moving through the market. Pennsylvania’s 2025 to 2028 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program includes $28.8 billion in planned capital improvements, including $16.7 billion for highways and bridges and $12.1 billion for transit over the four-year period.
Large infrastructure programs leave less room for avoidable surprises. Delays, redesigns, ground-related claims, unexpected conditions, and construction-stage changes are becoming harder for owners, contractors, and consultants to absorb.
In that environment, geotechnical input needs to arrive earlier, be clearer, and carry more commercial weight.
Ground risk is moving earlier in the process
Historically, geotechnical risk was often dealt with after the project was already moving. Investigation would take place, reports would be issued, risks would be caveated, and the delivery team would respond when conditions became clearer. That model is under pressure.
Rising construction costs, tighter public scrutiny, increased claims exposure, and more complex delivery models mean subsurface issues can now affect a project much faster. Poorly understood ground conditions can influence procurement, phasing, contractor pricing, design assumptions, contingency planning, and stakeholder confidence long before construction begins.
At the federal level, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has directed additional infrastructure funding to Pennsylvania. PennDOT states that the law provides more than $4 billion in additional highway and bridge funding over five years, alongside broader formula funding and competitive grant opportunities across the Commonwealth.
That is why senior geotechnical engineers are being pulled into earlier conversations. Federico says this is changing when senior geotechnical professionals are expected to influence project decisions.
Ground conditions can evolve, legacy information can be incomplete, and construction activity itself can expose issues that were not obvious during design.
The value of a senior geotechnical engineer is therefore not just in identifying the risk. It is in helping the project team decide how to manage it.
“Senior” means something different now
For a long time, seniority in geotechnical engineering was associated with years of experience, technical depth, and sign-off authority. Those things are still important. But they are no longer enough on their own.
The market is increasingly rewarding engineers who can:
- Identify delivery risk before it becomes a construction problem
- Explain technical exposure in commercial terms
- Guide investigation strategy without overdesigning or under-scoping
- Work effectively with civil, structural, environmental, and construction teams
- Understand how subsurface conditions affect sequencing and procurement
- Make defensible decisions when information is incomplete
- Communicate clearly with owners, contractors, project managers, and public stakeholders
It requires judgment, communication, commercial awareness, and the confidence to make practical recommendations when the answer is not perfect.
This is where many firms are feeling the talent shortage most sharply. There are technically capable engineers in the market, but there are far fewer who can manage risk, clients, contractors, internal pressure, and field uncertainty at the same time.
Organisations want usable advice, not just longer reports
Clients are no longer satisfied with reports that simply document findings, list limitations, and leave the project team to interpret the consequences. They want geotechnical input that helps them make decisions.
A strong senior geotechnical professional now needs to explain what the ground conditions actually mean for design, cost, sequencing, constructability, risk allocation, and schedule.
Federico says this ability to translate technical uncertainty into usable advice is becoming a major differentiator.
Clients do not just need to know what was found in the ground. They need to understand what it means for cost, schedule, constructability, and risk allocation. The engineers who can make that translation clearly are the ones becoming most valuable.
That is especially important on Pennsylvania infrastructure work, where legacy assets, restricted access, mining history, groundwater, karst, and ageing foundations can quickly turn a design assumption into a delivery constraint.
Firms that provide clear, practical and defensible advice will be better placed to support their clients. Those that fall short may be forced to respond later, when fewer options remain, and costs have increased.
Contractors are reassessing geotechnical risk
The contractor side of the market is also changing. Many contractors have historically treated geotechnical risk as something inherited from the owner or design team. That approach is becoming less comfortable, particularly on larger infrastructure and design-build programs.
Contractors are now paying closer attention to:
- How reliable the ground model is
- Where investigation gaps exist
- How groundwater could affect productivity or sequencing
- Whether access, staging, or temporary works could be affected
- What contingency measures may be needed
- Where claims exposure could develop
- How subsurface conditions may affect schedule certainty
This is particularly relevant in Pennsylvania, where construction activity can trigger or reveal instability in sensitive conditions such as karst terrain, old mine workings, weak slopes, or historically disturbed ground.
Equipment sits idle. Crews lose productivity. Design teams are pulled back in. Owners face delays. Contractors start looking at responsibility and recovery.
That is why senior geotechnical leadership is becoming more important earlier in bid strategy, constructability reviews, risk assessment, and delivery planning.
Ageing infrastructure is increasing the pressure
Pennsylvania’s aging infrastructure portfolio adds another layer to the issue. The state continues to manage thousands of bridges alongside dams, slopes, embankments, retaining structures, utilities, transportation corridors, and legacy assets that require repair, rehabilitation, or replacement.
The American Road and Transportation Builders Association reports that Pennsylvania has 23,314 bridges, with 2,813 classified as structurally deficient, equal to 12.1% of the Commonwealth’s bridges. Separate bridge inventory data also puts Pennsylvania’s average bridge age at roughly 56 years.
Pennsylvania also carries a significant dam safety burden. The Association of State Dam Safety Officials’ 2024 Pennsylvania data lists 1,494 National Inventory of Dams structures in the state, including 788 high-hazard potential dams.
That creates long-term demand for geotechnical judgment. Rehabilitation work often brings more complexity than new-build projects. Existing foundations, unknown legacy conditions, restricted working areas, live traffic, utilities, public disruption, and old construction records can all make subsurface risk harder to manage.
In those environments, firms need senior engineers who can balance technical caution with practical delivery. Over-investigate and the project can lose time and budget. Under-investigate and the team may carry unnecessary risk into construction. The best senior geotechnical professionals know how to find that balance.
Why hiring has become more competitive
The hiring challenge is not simply a shortage of geotechnical engineers. It is a shortage of senior geotechnical professionals who can operate effectively in high-pressure, commercially sensitive project environments.
Technical training alone does not automatically produce someone who can manage client expectations, support contractor decisions, communicate risk clearly, handle difficult meetings, and make confident field decisions when conditions change.
Those skills usually come from years of exposure to complicated projects. Federico says this is why firms are becoming more careful about how they assess senior geotechnical candidates:
A CV can show project experience, but it does not always show whether someone can handle pressure, manage difficult conversations, or make clear decisions when information is incomplete.
That is where the market is tightening. The people firms want most are often already valuable where they are. They are client-facing, project-critical, commercially aware, and trusted internally. And, they are also difficult to replace, which makes reactive hiring risky. By the time a project is already under pressure, the right person is rarely available at short notice.
The market is repricing judgment
The state has always had complex subsurface conditions. What has changed is the commercial environment around infrastructure delivery.
Projects are operating under tighter timelines, higher scrutiny, stronger financial oversight, more visible funding accountability, increased claims exposure, and less tolerance for avoidable delays.
Technical knowledge is still essential, but judgment is becoming the premium skill. Firms want engineers who can recognise risk early, explain consequences clearly, avoid false certainty, make practical recommendations, and stay credible when conditions are difficult. And in Pennsylvania, where the ground regularly tests project assumptions, that confidence is becoming increasingly valuable.
Firms cannot afford to get this hire wrong
Pennsylvania’s infrastructure market is forcing firms to rethink what strong geotechnical leadership actually looks like.
The old model placed heavy emphasis on technical depth, report writing, and sign-off authority. Those skills still matter, but the current market expects more.
Owners, contractors, and consultants need senior professionals who understand that ground risk does not sit neatly inside the geotechnical report. It affects procurement, sequencing, cost, claims, safety, stakeholder confidence, and overall program delivery.
A small subsurface issue, missed early, can become a major financial and operational problem later.
That is why experienced geotechnical leadership is becoming harder to secure and more important to plan around.
Federico says firms that wait until the problem is already visible are often too late:
The firms that handle this best are not waiting for a project to become difficult before they think about senior geotechnical leadership. By that point, they are usually already hiring under pressure. The better approach is to understand where the exposure is likely to come from and make sure the right people are in place before it becomes urgent.
As infrastructure investment continues across Pennsylvania, firms that build strong geotechnical leadership early will be better placed to manage risk, protect delivery, and maintain client confidence.
Organisations hiring senior geotechnical professionals, or planning major infrastructure delivery across the state, can request a call back to discuss market conditions, hiring strategy, and available geotechnical talent.
