MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New York State's Inland Geographic Response Plans

2017· article· en· W2751523796 on OpenAlex
Kirsten Anderson, Kevin G. Hale, T. Festa, Dennis Farrar, Kyle Kolwaite, Scott Stanton, Peter M. Alberti, Logan Reid, Rob Schrader, Jason Maddox, V. Lyle Trumbull

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsTransport Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomeland securityEmergency responseEnvironmental planningStakeholderGovernorPreparednessResource (disambiguation)BusinessEngineeringGeographyTerrorismPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geographic Response Plans (GRPs) are location-specific plans developed to provide guidance for oil spill responses throughout the United States. Until recently, the majority of crude oil transportation in the United States has occurred via waterways on oil tankers and barges, therefore, most existing GRPs focus on the protection of sensitive biological resources and socio-economic features in near shore environments. The recent development of crude oil extraction from the Bakken formation has resulted in a significant increase in the volume of crude oil being transported via railroads and pipelines and has highlighted the need for inland response planning. Rail cars transporting the volatile and flammable Bakken crude oil now traverse more than 850 miles of New York State on two major Class 1 Railroads. In response, Executive Order 125 was issued by the governor directing state agencies to strengthen the state's preparedness for incidents involving crude oil transportation. New York State's (NYS) Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), in collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security & Emergency Services and Department of Health, are leading a multi-stakeholder effort to develop Inland GRPs for the 21 NYS counties currently impacted by crude-by-rail transportation. County steering committees were established consisting primarily of local first response agencies, as well as their state and federal partners. Utilizing Sensitive Resource Maps developed by DEC, coupled with the local steering committee input, location-specific response plans were drafted, reviewed, and set as final working “evergreen” documents, which are open for update/refinement at any time in the future. The NYSDEC GRPs are similar to typical GRPs in that they are map-based, location-specific contingency plans that outline response strategies for the protection of sensitive resources. However, the NYSDEC GRPs differ from traditional GRPs in several ways. They extend contingency planning to cover spills on land, in addition to surface water-based spills. Due to the flammability of Bakken crude oil, much more emphasis is placed on the fire risks associated with a train derailment. This is done by mapping sensitive human receptors (e.g., schools, daycare centers, assisted living centers, etc.), critical infrastructure, and identifying fire (and vapor) suppression assets. The NYSDEC GRPs also place more emphasis on the initial response options available to local first responders, options that can be implemented before other response assets may arrive on-scene (State, Federal, and RP). This presentation will discuss the development, structure, proposed implementation, training and exercises associated with this ongoing program.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · 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