Sampling, Testing, and Test Interpretation of Dredged Material Proposed for Unconfined, Open-Water Disposal in Central Puget Sound. Volume 5. Evaluation Procedures Technical Appendix. Phase 1

1988 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Phillips ◽  
David Jamison ◽  
John Malek ◽  
Brian Ross ◽  
Catherine Krueger
Keyword(s):  
Phase 1 ◽  
Puget Sound ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Dredged Material ◽  
Test Interpretation ◽  
Evaluation Procedures ◽  
Water Disposal

Trace Metals in Open Water Disposal of Dredged Material

1976 ◽  
Vol 102 (4) ◽  
pp. 443-454
Author(s):  
Kenneth Y. Chen ◽  
James C. S. Lu ◽  
Amancio Z. Sycip
Keyword(s):  
Trace Metals ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Dredged Material ◽  
Water Disposal

Stakeholder-informed “Choosing Wisely” implementation project in regional oncology clinics.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 207-207
Author(s):  
Karma L. Kreizenbeck ◽  
F. Marc Stewart ◽  
Constance Lehman ◽  
Timothy Carlos ◽  
Eric Y. Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Puget Sound ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
Cancer Surveillance ◽  
Choosing Wisely ◽  
Medical Directors ◽  
Criteria Importance ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

207 Background: ASCO launched the Choosing Wisely campaign to reduce the use of interventions that lack evidence for their use in clinical cancer care. The recommendations have strong support, but lack an implementation plan. The objective of this project is to develop a stakeholder-informed process to improve adherence to ASCO Choosing Wisely within an experimental context. Methods: Participants include Medical Directors from 7 oncology clinics and 1 commercial insurer within the Puget Sound region, and the SEER Puget Sound Cancer Registry. The project consists of 3 phases (1) prioritization, (2) design, (3) implementation and monitoring. For phase 1, Medical Directors were surveyed via e-mail to prioritize the recommendations with the following criteria: importance for improving the value of cancer care; impact of adherence; urgency; and feasibility of implementing an intervention. Participants met via teleconference to discuss survey results, review regional utilization data, and design of interventions. Participants were surveyed again for a final ranking. In phase 2, participants discussed options for interventions and study designs. Results: Initially, the highest ranked recommendations were advanced imaging in staging of local stage prostate cancer, surveillance of local and regional stage breast cancer, and colony stimulating factor (CSF) use for low risk chemotherapy. After discussion, breast cancer surveillance and CSF prescribing ranked the highest. Participants requested utilization and cost-impact data from the health insurer for the top 2 choices. Conclusions: Using a transparent, multi-stakeholder process, it is feasible to implement programs to improve adherence to ASCO Choosing Wisely.

Evaluating direct and strategic placement of dredged material for marsh restoration through model simulations

Shore & Beach ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 33-40
Author(s):  
Samuel Zapp ◽  
Giulio Mariotti
Keyword(s):  
Thin Layer ◽  
Open Water ◽  
Marsh Surface ◽  
Dredged Material ◽  
Computationally Efficient ◽  
Marsh Restoration ◽  
Marsh Area ◽  
Layer Deposition ◽  
Restoration Techniques ◽  
Wave Erosion

Dredged material can be used for marsh restoration by depositing it on the marsh surface (thin-layer placement), by releasing it at the mouth of channels and allowing tidal currents to transport it onto the marsh platform (channel seeding), or by creating new marshes over shallow areas of open water. We investigate the efficacy of these different methods using a comprehensive 2D marsh evolution model that simulates tidal dynamics, vegetation processes, bank and wave erosion, and ponding. Total marsh area is assessed over 50 years in an idealized microtidal marsh under different relative sea level rise (RSLR) scenarios. For a given volume of total sediment added, the frequency of deposition is relatively unimportant in maximizing total marsh area, but the spatial allocation of the dredged material is crucial. For a given volume of sediment, thin-layer deposition is most effective at preserving total marsh area, especially at high rates of RSLR. Channel seeding is less efficient, but it could still provide benefits if larger amounts of sediment are deposited every 1-2 years. Marsh creation is also beneficial, because it not only increases the marsh area, but additionally slows the erosion of the existing marsh. The 2D model is highly computationally efficient and thus suited to explore many scenarios when evaluating a restoration project. Coupling the model with a cost assessment of the different restoration techniques would provide a tool to optimize marsh restoration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document