MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2055181037 · doi:10.1115/ipc2012-90622

Permitting and Constructing a Large Pipeline Through a State-Regulated, Sensitive Wetland Resource: Alberta Clipper and the Gully 30 Calcareous Fen

2012· article· en· W2055181037 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. L. Arndt, Paul C. Turner, Scott Milburn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceCalcareousPipeline transportHydrology (agriculture)EngineeringGeologyEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pipeline crossings of sensitive, state or federally-regulated resources are occasionally unavoidable and can substantially increase project costs and negatively affect project timelines. During due-diligence surveys for invasive plants, field botanists identified an undocumented calcareous fen and associated state-listed wetland plants along the route of Enbridge’s LSr and Alberta Clipper pipelines in northwest Minnesota. Calcareous fens are rare peat-accumulating wetlands dominated by groundwater discharge, a high mineral content, and are protected by state law. Their hydrology and chemistry provide an environment for a suite of state-listed plants that are specifically adapted and unique to calcareous fens. By state statute, calcareous fens may not be filled, drained, or otherwise degraded by any activity unless the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) authorizes the activity under an approved Fen Management Plan. The proposed LSr and Alberta Clipper Pipeline route in the area was collocated with existing Enbridge pipelines installed before the fen was identified. State regulatory staff quickly officially recognized the Gully 30 Calcareous Fen which initiated a lengthy permitting process to authorize Enbridge to construct the LSr and Alberta Clipper Pipelines through the Gully 30 Calcareous Fen. Avoiding the fen would have involved an impracticable reroute along several miles of greenfield. The state (DNR) and federal (Army Corps of Engineers) process involved detailed characterization of the resource, development and approval of an alternatives analysis according to Section 404(b)(1) guidelines, and drafting and approval of a project-specific Fen Management Plan which stipulated specific construction mitigation procedures including winter construction and protective temporary drainage, and post construction monitoring requirements. This presentation introduces the calcareous fen resource and examines the permitting and iterative, comment-response construction-design process as an example of successful collaboration between state and federal agencies and Enbridge to construct a pipeline through a highly regulated, sensitive natural resource while maintaining schedule.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→