Geographic Response Plan Development – An Innovative Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The Trans Mountain pipeline system extends from Edmonton, AB to Burnaby, BC, and into Washington State. The pipeline transports a variety of refined and non-refined products to refineries in Canada and the United States, and to the Westridge Marine Terminal in Burnaby, BC for export. The Trans Mountain Expansion Project will twin the existing 1,150 kilometer (714 mile) pipeline between Edmonton, AB, and Burnaby, BC, and increase the systems capacity from 300,000 barrels per day to 890,000 barrels per day. The Trans Mountain pipeline system has vulnerability to geographic and man-made hazards that could lead, in worst case scenarios, to line ruptures and spill releases. The development of Geographic Response Plans (GRPs) are a vital component of this project because they limit the risk of line ruptures posed by hazards. GRPs provide mitigation for potential spill impacts by enabling timely and effective response with pre-identified control points, response tactics, and other specific geographic details. Trans Mountain's GRPs are designed to expedite the decisions and actions of responders during an incident, as well as minimize impacts to ecologically and culturally sensitive areas by identifying and prioritizing them during a response. The Trans Mountain pipeline traverses multiple High Consequence Areas (HCAs), including Indigenous communities, urban centers, parks, protected areas, watercourses, and sensitive ecosystems. Due to the complex nature of the HCAs, an all-encompassing multi-stage approach to the development of the GRPs was established. Trans Mountain's GRP development began with simulating and modelling hypothetical spills along the pipeline to determine the largest possible extent of impact. This was followed by an inclusive field program involving a multi-disciplinary team of spill response and environmental specialists, local stakeholders, and Indigenous Peoples that travelled the pipeline and verified proposed control points while documenting environmental, social, and cultural HCAs. The participation of Indigenous communities and local stakeholders was invaluable in providing local knowledge on various aspects of the environment. As a result, approximately 600 control points were field-verified and corresponding tactical Control Point Data Sheets were developed. The two-page Control Point Data Sheets provide detailed information on waterbody type, site safety, logistics, resources at risk, and spill response tactics which includes a photos and diagrams to visually aid responders in implementing containment and recovery tactics. The GRP and Data Sheets are publicly available at https://grp.transmountain.com. Trans Mountain is committed to conducting business in a safe and environmentally responsible manner. Development of the GRPs has contributed to Trans Mountain being as prepared as possible to mitigate and minimize environmental and socio-economic impacts in the unlikely event of a spill. The GRP development has also enabled First Responders, Indigenous Peoples, communities, and fellow infrastructure operators to augment their response toolbox and enhance their ability to respond.
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 | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.004 |
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".