this decision of SSHAC on the grounds that an evaluation of the relative effectiveness of the two approaches, or their relationship, was not in the committee's charge. The full-blown version of the SSHAC procedure, utilizing the technical facilitator/integrator (TFI) technique where needed, is costly and will almost certainly be used only for major critical facilities. The SSHAC report offers useful guidelines as to the level of effort required for various kinds of problems and for various levels of information already available to analysts. In the view of the panel, simpler methods of probabilistic hazard analysis are appropriate for application to noncritical facilities.

GENERAL SHORTCOMINGS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE SSHAC REPORT

The SSHAC report, with its appendixes, is a lengthy and complex document that requires careful reading. Many important ideas, including clarification of the limitations of the SSHAC procedures, are distributed throughout the text. A casual scanning of the document may leave readers with incorrect impressions as to what SSHAC has recommended, especially with regard to nonnuclear facilities. Most importantly, the report appears to have been written for those already quite familiar with PSHA methods, offering guidance on a preferred way to get stable results from a PSHA.

SSHAC's Executive Summary will be useful to administrators and project sponsors who are not specialists in hazard analysis methodology, but it includes nothing about the excellent earth science materials that are in the report and its appendixes.

SSHAC provides an up-to-date procedure for obtaining stable results from the application of PSHA principles that have been established in past practice. It does provide a consistent and systematic approach to elicitation and aggregation of diverse expert opinion and the uncertainties that arise therefrom, but this is not the same as the calculation of seismic hazard from the information elicited.

The SSHAC report does not make reference to nuclear reactors or other nuclear facilities, thereby lending an air of generality to its final report and the applicability of its recommended procedures. The panel believes, nevertheless, that the flavor of the report is strongly influenced by concern for applications to nuclear facilities and this generality is more



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement