Review of Recommendations for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis Guidance on Uncertainty and Use of Experts (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
APPENDIX B: LETTER REPORT OF THE PANEL ON SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION, MARCH 1995
APPENDIX B: LETTER REPORT OF THE PANEL ON SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION, MARCH 1995
Pages 67-73
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 67... ...
The discussions of December 9 were carried out in the presence of representatives of the sponsoring organizations. The Panel met in executive session on December 10 to continue its review.
|
From page 68... ...
The Panel recognizes the strengths of the report and the significant contributions it offers to PSHA. As applied to nuclear regulations the SSHAC report breaks new ground in its discussion of the Technical Integrator (TI)
|
From page 69... ...
In addition, the context for the procedures should be framed in such a way that the PSHA analyst who follows other procedures for any of a number of valid reasons is not put in a position of having to defend in a regulatory situation the failure to carry out the SSHAC prescription in every detail. PSHA methodologists often have sound reasons for introducing new concepts and approaches, but have not always included in their reports the background reasoning that has led to these innovations.
|
From page 70... ...
· SSHAC must state its perception of the qualifications required of the TFI. The recommendation for use of a strong TFl for prescribed issues, without clearly expressed qualifications, contradicts one of the stated criteria for success: that the recommended methodology, when applied independently by different groups, should always yield comparable results.
|
From page 71... ...
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL CONCERNS The Panel questions whether the links between SSHAC' s recommended methodology and its applications are spelled out in sufficient clarity. Although SSHAC is not charged with specifying the use of hazard numbers in engineering design, a brief treatment is needed pointing to how the results can be used, and, in particular, what the knowledge of highly refined uncertainty estimates contributes to applications.
|
From page 72... ...
Seismic source zones, a key concept in the prescribed source characterization procedure, should be explicitly recognized as an artificial construct introduced to make hazard calculations tractable. They are not real physical entities.
|
From page 73... ...
The comments give a misleading impression of the goals and potential benefits of a prediction methodology, if one is eventually developed. In particular, it is Implied that the ability to produce accurate short-term predictions would somehow lessen the importance of reliable long-term earthquake hazard assessments, on which sound engineering decisions must be based.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.