Risk Management for Lateral Channel Movement at Pipeline Water Crossings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pembina Pipeline Corporation (Pembina) owns and operates close to 10,000 km of crude, natural gas liquids (NGL), and natural gas pipelines across North America, with the majority of assets in western Alberta and eastern British Columbia. The Pembina pipeline network includes over 1,600 river and stream crossings, most of which are subject to varying degrees of vertical and/or lateral erosion. 1,260 crossings were in Alberta at the onset of the study. Identifying potential lateral erosion hazards is a critical component of geohazard management program for pipeline integrity. In 2012, Pembina initiated a three-phase program to proactively address lateral-stability issues at river and stream crossings in Alberta: phase one identified and short-listed crossings that have potential lateral channel-shifting problems; phase two assessed which short-listed crossings have insufficient cover depth to accommodate the potential channel-shifting activities and ranked these crossings as high risk of exposure; and phase three will develop plans for repair and/or replacement of the high-risk crossings. Through this program, Pembina explores the significance of lateral erosion and encroachment at pipeline water crossings of various vintages, with regards to pipeline integrity. This paper provides discussion as to how crossing geohazard risks are identified, with particular emphasis on stream bank erosion, and how this fits into Pembina’s overall risk management program. As well, selected case studies are provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".