Probability, conditional probability and complementary cumulative distribution functions in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 54, Issue 2-3, 1996, Pages 145-163

  Helton, J C ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NUMERICAL METHODS; PERFORMANCE; PROBABILITY; RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL; RANDOM PROCESSES; RISK ASSESSMENT;

COMPLEMENTARY CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS; CONDITIONAL PROBABILITY; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT;

RELIABILITY;

EID: 0030287318     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0951-8320(96)00072-5     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Lewis, H. W., Budnitz, R. J., Kouts, H. J. C., Lowenstein, W. B., Rowe, W. D., von Hipel, F. & Zachariasen, F., Risk assessment review group report to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG/CR-0400, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC, 1978.
2. Kaplan, S. & Garrick, B. J., On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal., 1 (1981) 11-27.
3. Vesely, W. E. & Rasmuson, D. M., Uncertainties in nuclear probabilistic risk analyses. Risk Anal., 4 (1984) 313-322.
4. Paté-Cornell, M. E., Probability and uncertainty in nuclear safety decisions. Nucl. Engng & Design, 93 (1986) 319-327.
5. Whipple, C. G., Dealing with uncertainty about risk in risk management. In Hazards: Technology and Fairness, National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1986, pp. 44-60.
6. Silbergeld, E. K., Five types of ambiguity: scientific uncertainty in risk assessment. Hazardous Waste & Hazardous Materials, 4 (1987) 139-150.
7. Parry, G. W., On the meaning of probability in probabilistic safety assessment. Reliab. Engng System Safety, 23 (1988) 309-314.
8. Apostolakis, G. E., Uncertainty in probabilistic risk assessment. Nucl. Engng & Design, 115 (1989) 173-179.
9. International Atomic Energy Agency, Evaluating the reliability of predictions made using environmental transfer models. Safety Series Report No. 100, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, 1989.
10. Apostolakis, G., The concept of probability in safety assessments of technological systems. Science, 250 (1990) 1359-1364.
11. Finkel, A. M., Confronting Uncertainty in Risk Management, Center for Risk Management, Resources for the Future, Washington DC, 1990.
12. McKone, T. E. & Bogen, K. T., Predicting the uncertainties in risk assessment. Env. Sci. & Tech., 25 (1991) 1674-1681.
13. Breeding, R. J., Helton, J. C., Gorham, E. D. & Harper, F. T., Summary description of the methods used in the probabilistic risk assessments for NUREG-1150. Nucl. Engng & Design, 135 (1992) 1-27.
14. Anderson, E., Deisler, P. F., McCallum, D., St Hilaire, C., Spitzer, H. L., Strauss, H., Wilson, J. D. & Zimmerman, R., Key issues in carcinogen risk assessment guidelines, society for risk analysis.. Risk Anal., 13 (1993) 379-382.
15. Helton, J. C., Risk, uncertainty in risk, and the EPA release limits for radioactive waste disposal. Nucl. Tech., 101 (1993) 18-39.
16. Kaplan, S., Formalisms for handling phenomenological uncertainties: the concepts of probability, frequency, variability, and probability of frequency. Nucl. Tech., 102 (1993) 137-142.
17. US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), An SAB report: multi-media risk assessment for radon, review of uncertainty analysis of risks associated with exposure to radon. EPA-SAB-RAC-93-014, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC, 1993.
18. Hoffman, F. O. & Hammonds, J. S., Propagation of uncertainty in risk assessments: the need to distinguish between uncertainty due to lack of knowledge and uncertainty due to variability. Risk Anal., 14 (1994) 707-712.
19. National Research Council, Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment, National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1994.
20. Helton, J. C., Treatment of uncertainty in performance assessments for complex systems. Risk Anal., 14 (1994) 483-511.
21. WIPP Performance Assessment Division, Preliminary comparison with 40 CFR part 191, subpart b for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1991, volume 1: methodology and results. SAND91-0893/1, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1991.
22. WIPP Performance Assessment Division, Preliminary comparison with 40 CFR part 191, subpart b for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1991, volume 2: probability and consequence modeling. SAND91-0893, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1991.
23. WIPP Performance Assessment Division, Preliminary comparison with 40 CFR part 191, subpart b for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1991, volume 3: reference data. SAND91-0893/3, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1991.
24. Helton, J. C., Garner, J. W., Rechard, R. P, Rudeen, D. K. & Swift, P.N., Preliminary comparison with 40 CFR part 191, subpart b for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1991, volume 4: uncertainty and sensitivity analysis results. SAND91-0893/4, Sandia National Laboratories, ALbuquerque, NM, 1992.
25. WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Department, Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992 volume 1: third comparison with 40 CFR 191, subpart b. SAND92-0700/1, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1992.
26. WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Department, Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992 volume 2: technical basis. SAND92-0700/2, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1992.
27. Sandia WIPP Project, Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992 volume 3: model parameters. SAND92-0700/3, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1992.
28. WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Department, Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992 volume 4: uncertainty and sensitivity analyses for 40 CFR 191, subpart b. SAND92-0700/4, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1993.
29. WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Department, Preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992 volume 5: uncertainty and sensitivity analyses of gas and brine migration for undisturbed performance. SAND92-0700/5, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1993.
30. Feller, W., An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, vol. II, 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1971.
31. Ash, R. B., Real Analysis and Probability, Academic Press, New York, 1972.
32. Breiman, L., Probability, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, 1992.
33. US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), Environmental standards for the management and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, high-level and transuranic radioactive wastes; final rule, 40 CFR part 191. Federal Register 50 (1985) 38066-38089.
34. US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), Environmental radiation protection standards for the management and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, high-level and transuranic radioactive waste; final rule, 40 CFR part 191. Federal Register 58 (1993) 66398-66416.
35. Farmer, F. R., Reactor safety and siting: a proposed risk criterion. Nucl. Safety, 8 (1967) 539-548.
36. Cox, D. C. & Baybutt, P., Limit lines for risk. Nucl. Tech., 57 (1982) 320-330.
37. Munera, H. A. & Yadigaroglu, G., On Farmer's line, probability density functions, and overall risk. Nucl. Tech., 74 (1986) 229-232.
38. Helton, J. C. & Breeding, R. J., Calculation of reactor accident safety goals. Reliab. Engng System Safety, 39 (1993) 129-158.
39. Helton, J. C., Drilling intrusion probabilities for use in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal. Reliab. Engng System Safety, 40 (1993) 259-275.
40. Helton, J. C. & Iuzzolino, H. J., Construction of complementary cumulative distribution functions for comparison with the EPA release limits for radioactive waste disposal. Reliab. Engng System Safety, 40 (1993) 277-293.
41. Helton, J. C., Anderson, D. R., Baker, B. L., Bean, J. E., Berglund, J. W., Beyeler, W., Garner, J. W., Iuzzolino, H. J., Marietta, M. J., Rechard, R. P., Roache, P. J., Rudeen, D. K., Schreiber, J. D., Swift, P. N., Tierney, M. S. & Vaughn, P., Effect of alternative conceptual models in a preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Nucl. Engng & Design, 154 (1995) 251-344.
42. Berglund, J. W., Mechanisms governing the direct removal of wastes from the waste isolation pilot plant repository caused by exploratory drilling. SAND92-7295, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1992.
43. Roache, P. J., The SECO suite of codes for site performance assessment. In High Level Radioactive Waste Management, Proc. Fourth Annual Int. Conf., Las Vegas, NV, 26-30 April 1993, vol. 2, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 1993, pp. 1586-1594.
44. Huyakorn, P. S., White, Jr., H. O. & Panday, S., STAFF2D Solute Transport and Fracture Flow in 2-Dimensions, HydroGeoLogic, Inc, Herndon, VA, 1991.
45. Mosleh, A., Bier, V. M. & Apostolakis, G., A critique of current practice for the use of expert opinions in probabilistic risk assessment. Reliab. Engng System Safety, 20 (1988) 63-85.
46. Hora, S. C. & Iman, R. L., Expert opinion in risk analysis: the NUREG-1150 methodology. Nucl. Sci. & Engng, 102 (1989) 323-331.
47. Bonano, E. J., Hora, S. C., Kenney, R. L. & von Winterfeld, D., Elicitation and use of expert judgment in performance assessment for high-level radioactive waste repositories. NUREG/CR-5411, SAND89-1821, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1989.
48. Ortiz, N. R., Wheeler, T. A., Breeding, R. J., Hora, S., Meyer, M. A. & Keeney, R. L., Use of expert judgement in NUREG-1150. Nucl. Engng & Design, 126 (1991) 313-331.
49. Helton, J. C., Garner, J. W., Marietta, M. J., Rechard, R. P., Rudeen, D. K. & Swift, P. N., Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis results obtained in a preliminary performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Nucl. Sci. & Engng, 114 (1993) 286-331.
50. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1990 integrated data base: spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste inventories, projections and characteristics. DOE/RW-0006, Rev. 6, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 1990.
51. McKay, M. D., Conover, W. J. & Beckman, R. J., A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 21 (1979) 239-245.
52. Iman, R. L. & Shortencarier, M. J., A FORTRAN 77 program and user's guide for the generation of latin hypercube and random samples for use with computer models. NUREG/CR-3624, SAND83-2365, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1984.
53. Hammersley, J. M. & Handscomb, D. C., Monte Carlo Methods, Metheun, London, UK, 1964.
54. Iman, R. L. & Conover, W. J. Small sample sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models, with an application to risk assessment. Also: Rejoinder to comments. Comm. in Stat., A9 (1980) 1749-1842, 1863-1874.
55. Ortiz, N. R. & Cranwell, R. M., Risk assessment methodology for high level waste: assessing compliance with the EPA draft standard including uncertainties. SAND82-0596, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1982.
56. Hunter, R. L., Cranwell, R. M. & Chu, M. S. Y., Assessing compliance with the EPA high-level waste standard: an overview, NUREG/CR-4510, SAND86-0121, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1986.
57. Cranwell, R. M., Campbell, J. E., Helton, J. C. Iman, R. L., Longsine, D. E., Ortiz, N. E., Runkle, G. E. & Shortencarier, M. J., Risk methodology for geologic disposal of radioactive waste: final report. NUREG/CR-2452, SAND81-2513, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1987.
58. Campbell, J. E. & Cranwell, R. M. Performance assessment of radioactive waste repositories. Science, 238 (1988) 1389-1392.
59. Bonano, E. J. & Wahi, K. K., Use of performance assessment in assessing compliance with the containment requirements in 40 CFR part 191. NUREG/CR-5521, SAND90-0127, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1990.
60. Rechard, R. P., Review and discussion of code linkage and data flow in nuclear waste compliance assessments. SAND87-2833, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1989.
61. Helton, J. C. & Shiver, A. W., A Monte Carlo procedure for the construction of complementary cumulative distribution functions for comparison with the EPA release limits for radioactive waste disposal. Risk Anal., 16 (1996) 43-55.
62. Kaplan, S., On the method of discrete probability distributions in risk and reliability calculations-application to seismic risk assessment. Risk Anal., 1 (1981) 189-196.
63. US NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission), Severe accident risks: an assessment for five US nuclear power plants. NUREG-1150, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC, 1990.
64. Helton, J. C., Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for use in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal. Reliab. Engng System Safety, 42 (1993) 327-367.