Computational structure of a performance assessment involving stochastic and subjective uncertainty

ABSTRACT

A recent performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), which is being developed by the U.S. Department of Energy for the geologic disposal of transuranic waste, is used to illustrate the computational structure of a large analysis that maintains a separation between stochastic (i.e., aleatory) and subjective (i.e., epistemic) uncertainty. In this analysis, stochastic uncertainty arises from the many possible disruptions that could occur over the 10,000 yr regulatory period that applies to the WIPP, and subjective uncertainty arises from the imprecision with which many of the quantities required in the analysis are known. Important parts of the computational structure are (1) the use of Latin hyper cube sampling to incorporate the effects of subjective uncertainty, (2) the use of Monte Carlo (i.e., random) sampling to incorporate the effects of stochastic uncertainty, and (3) the efficient use of the necessarily limited number of mechanistic calculations that can be performed to support the analysis.

REFERENCES

• 1: Helton, J.C. 1993. Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Techniques for Use in Performance Assessment for Radioactive Waste Disposal. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 42: 327-367.
• 2: Helton, J.C. 1994. Treatment of Uncertainty in Performance Assessments for Complex Systems. Risk Analysis 14:483-511.
• 3: Helton, J.C., and H.J. Iuzzolino. 1993. Construction of Complementary Cumulative Distribution Functions for Comparison with the EPA Release Limits for Radioactive Waste Disposal. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 40: 277-293.
• 4: Helton, J.C., and A.W. Shiver. 1996. A Monte Carlo Procedure for the Construction of Complementary Cumulative Distribution Functions for Comparison with the EPA Release Limits for Radioactive Waste Disposal. Risk Analysis 16: 43-55.
• 5: Helton, J.C., et al. 1993. Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Results Obtained in a Preliminary Performance Assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Nuclear Science and Engineering 114: 286- 331.
• 6: Helton, J.C., et al. 1995a. Effect of Alternative Conceptual Models in a Preliminary Performance Assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Nuclear Engineering and Design 154:251-344.
• 7: Helton, J.C., et al. 1995b. Robustness of an Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis of Early Exposure Results with the MACCS Reactor Accident Consequence Model. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 48: 129-148.
• 8: Helton, J.C., et al. 1996. Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Results Obtained in the 1992 Performance Assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 51: 53-100.
• 9: Iman, R.L. 1982. Statistical Methods for Including Uncertainties Associated with Geologic Isolation of Radioactive Waste Which Allow for a Comparison with Licensing Criteria. Proceedings of the Symposium on Uncertainties Associated with the Regulation of the Geologic Disposal of High Level Radioactive Waste, Gatlinburg, Tennessee, March 9-13, 1981, ed. D.C. Kocher. NUREG/CP-0022, CONF- 810372. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 145-157.
• 10: Iman, R.L., and W.J. Conover. 1982. A Distribution- Free Approach to Inducing Rank Correlation Among Input Variables. Communications in Statistics Bll: 311-334.
• 11: Iman, R.L., and J.C. Helton. 1988. An Investigation of Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Techniques for Computer Models. Risk Analysis 8:71-90.
• 12: iman, R.L., and J.C. Helton. 1991. The Repeatability of Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analyses for Complex Probabilistic Risk Assessments. Risk Analysis 11: 591-606.
• 13: McKay, M.D., W.J. Conover, and R. J. Beckman. 1979. A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output from a Computer Code. Technometrics 21: 239-245.
• 14: U.S. DOE (Department of Energy). 1990. Final Supplement Environmental Impact Statement, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/EIS-0026-FS. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Washington, DC.
• 15: U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1985. Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Waste; Final Rule, 40 CFR Part 191. Federal Register 50: 38066-38089.
• 16: U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1993. 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: 66398-66416.
• 17: U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1996. 40 CFR Part 194: Criteria for the Certification and Recertification of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant's Compliance With the 40 CFR Part 191 Disposal Regulations; Final Rule. Federal Register 61: 5224- 5245.
• 18: WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Division. 1991. Preliminary Comparison with 40 CFR Part 191, Subpart B for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1991, Vols. 1-4. SAND91-0893/1-4. Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
• 19: WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Department. 1992. Preliminary Performance Assessment for the Waste isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992, Vols. I-5. SAND92-0700/1-5. Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.