Recent PRCI Guidelines for Pipelines Exposed to Landslide and Ground Subsidence Hazards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes key considerations in guidelines published in early 2009 that were developed through a Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. (PRCI) supported by PRCI, the Pipeline Hazardous Materials and Safety Administration of the Department of Transportation, and the California Energy Commission. Past practices for pipelines, as well as almost all other construction projects, have focused on avoidance of areas that have a reasonable probability of experiencing geohazards (defined as large ground displacements that may arise from slope failure, slope creep, earthquake triggered slope movement, and subsidence). This approach has been generally successful when there are limited restrictions on selecting a pipeline alignment. Avoiding potential geohazards is becoming increasingly difficult because of the inability to obtain landowner agreements, the lack of space in common utility corridors, environmental restrictions, incompatibility with existing land use, and/or public opposition. In route corridors where geohazards cannot be avoided, the potential risks associated with these hazards must be managed. Pipeline integrity management strategies to mitigate geohazards consist of: (1) design measures that improve the pipeline resistance to the geohazard, (2) measures that limit or control the severity of the geohazard, and (3) operational programs to monitor ground displacement or pipeline response and identify conditions that may warrant further engineering investigations or mitigation activities. Identifying the most appropriate mitigation strategy needs to be based upon specific hazard scenarios and operating circumstances. The PRCI guidelines provide recommendations for the assessment of new and existing natural gas and liquid hydrocarbon pipelines subjected to potential ground displacements resulting from landslides and ground subsidence. One of the most significant benefits of the guidelines is the systematic approach developed for managing pipeline risks from landslide and ground subsidence hazards. It is hoped that this approach, presented in detailed flow charts, will lead to improvements in current practices by providing a common framework for pipeline operators, the local, state, and federal agencies that have regulatory oversight, and the general public to engage in discussions regarding potential risks from pipelines in areas of unstable ground and the most effective and practical means to reduce those risks to an acceptable level.
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 | 0.018 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
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".