Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T07:01:58.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Formal and Informal Expert Judgments When Interpreting Data for Performance Assessments*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 1992

Rob P. Rechard ,
Kathleen M. Trauth ,
Jonathan S. Rath ,
Robert V. Guzowski ,
Stephen C. Hora  and
Martin S. Tierney
Rob P. Rechard
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
Kathleen M. Trauth
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
Jonathan S. Rath
Affiliation:
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM
Robert V. Guzowski
Affiliation:
Science Applications International Corporation, Albuquerque, NM
Stephen C. Hora
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii at Hilo, Hilo, HI
Martin S. Tierney
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
Get access

Abstract

This paper discusses the general process by which data and information are compiled and used for defining modeling parameters. These modeling parameters are input for the mathematical models that are used in performance assessments of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), near Carlsbad, NM, which is designed to safely manage, store, and dispose of transuranic radioactive wastes. The physical and temporal scales, and the difficulty of obtaining measurements in geologic media make interpretation of measured data, including the difference between laboratory experiment scale and repository scale, important tasks. In most instances, standard scientific practices can ensure consistency of data use. To illustrate this point, an example is provided of the interpretation of field measurements of intrinsic permeability for use in computational models using the bootstrap technique. In some cases, sufficient information can never be collected, interpretation of the information is controversial, or information from diverse disciplines must be used. A procedure that formalizes the standard scientific practices under these conditions has been developed. An example is provided of how this procedure has been applied in eliciting expert judgments on markers to deter inadvertant human intrusion into the WIPP.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 294: Symposium V – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVI , 1992 , 943
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Work performed for U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC04-76DP00789.

References

REFERENCES

1. Rechard, R.P., 1991, “Overview of Calculations” in Preliminary Comparison with 40 CFR Pail 191, Subpart B for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1991, Volume 2: Probability and Consequence Modeling SAND91-0893, (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM).Google Scholar
2. Helton, J.C., Marietta, M.G., Rechard, R.P., 1992, “Conceptual Structure of Performance Assessments Conducted for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant,” to be published in Mater. Res. Soc. Proc., Pittsburgh, PA, 1992 (this symposium).Google Scholar
3. WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Division, 1991, 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; Volume 3: Reference Data, SAND91-0893/3, (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM).Google Scholar
4. Rechard, R.P., Trauth, K.M., Guzowski, R.V., 1992, Quality Assurance Procedures for Data Use and Expert Judgment Panels Supporting Performance Assessments of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, SAND91-0429, (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM), In preparation.Google Scholar
5. Hora, S.C., Iman, R.L., 1989. “Expert Opinion in Risk Analysis: the NUREG-1150 Methodology.” Nuclear Science and Engineering 102: 323–331.Google Scholar
6. Trauth, K.M., Hora, S.C. and Rechard, R.P., 1991, “Expert Judgment as Input to Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Performance-Assessment Calculations: Probability Distributions of Significant System Parameters” in Proceedings of the First hutemational Mixed Waste Symposium, Baltimore, MD, August 26–29, 1991.Google Scholar
7. Rechard, R.P., 1989, Review and Discussion of Code Linkage and Data Flow in Nuclear Waste Compliance Assessments, SAND87-2833, (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM), Figure 2–2 and 2–3.Google Scholar
8. Guzowski, R.V., 1991, “Preliminary Identification of Scenarios for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Southeastern New Mexico” in Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management: Proceedings of the International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM), February 4–7, 1991, Beverly Hills, CA. (Elsevier Publishing Company, Inc., Amsterdam).Google Scholar
9. Guzowski, R.V., Helton, J.C., 1991, “Scenarios for Compliance Assessment,” in WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Division, 1991, 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) p. 4–61.Google Scholar
10. Marietta, M.G., Bertram-Howery, S.G., Rechard, R.P., Anderson, D.R., 1991, Status of WIPP Compliance with EPA 40 CFR 191, December 1990, SAND90-2424, (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM).Google Scholar
11. Beauheim, R.L., Saulnier, G.J. Jr., Avis, J.D., 1991, Interpretation of Brine-Permeability Tests of the Salado Formation at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: First Interim Report, SAND91-0893/3, (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM).Google Scholar
12. Howarth, S.M., Peterson, E.W., Lagus, P.L., Lie, K-H., Finley, S.J., Nowak, E.J., 1991, “Interpretation of In- Situ Pressure and Flow Measurements of the Salado Formation at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting and Low-Permeability Reservoirs Symposium, Denver, CO, April 15–17, 1991.Google Scholar
13. Press, W.H., Flannery, B.P., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T.. 1986. Numerical Recipes, The Art of Scientific Computing. (Cambridge University Press, New York), p. 529.Google Scholar
14. Bradley, E., Tibshirani, R., 1991, “Statistical Data Analysis in the Computer Age,” Science 253: 390–395.Google Scholar
15. Hora, S.C., von Winterfeldt, D., and Trauth, K.M., 1991, Expert Judgment on Inadvertent Human Intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, SAND90-3063, (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM).Google Scholar