MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088348951 · doi:10.1115/ipc2008-64317

Connecting the Environmental Management System and Environmental Impact Assessment for Pipeline Projects

2008· article· en· W2088348951 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kent Lien, Ken J. Colosimo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsCanada Energy Regulator
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental consultingAuditScope (computer science)Environmental impact assessmentEnvironmental management systemPipeline (software)Risk analysis (engineering)Pipeline transportRisk managementBusinessComputer scienceEnvironmental resource managementProcess managementEngineeringAccountingEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Energy Board of Canada (NEB) oversees all aspects, including environmental protection, of the construction and operation of hydrocarbon transmission pipelines under federal jurisdiction. The NEB’s regulatory approach is to minimize regulatory burden while maintaining a high standard of environmental protection. To achieve this, the NEB is working toward implementing a flexible, risk-based regulatory approach in which processes fit the scope and range of applications it receives. The NEB requires its regulated companies to develop and implement the equivalent of an environmental management system relating to all aspects of their business. In evaluating the companies’ compliance, the NEB conducts formal audits of these systems to ensure they are appropriately developed, maintained and implemented. The NEB has recently initiated changes to its regulatory processes to utilize companies’ management system information collected during the audits to enhance its application and assessment processes. This paper will discuss how concepts related to risk and management systems principles and information collected during an environmental management system audit can be integrated into a regulator’s environmental impact assessment for a proposed pipeline project. How knowledge and lessons learned are transferred through all stages of the pipeline life cycle will also be discussed.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207