Expert judgment on markers to deter inadvertent human intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Page: 109 of 349
This report is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Appendix F: Team A Report
Futures panel. The charge to the Markers panel will be discussed in more detail in Section 1.2.
The Sandia work is the second major effort to consider the long-term marking of nuclear waste
disposal sites. The U.S. Department of Energy convened the Human Interference Task Force
(HITF) in 1980 [Ref. 1-2].
The value of that work lies in establishing the credibility and feasibility of the effort to design
long-term marking systems for nuclear waste disposal sites. The Sandia approach differs from
the HITF approach in two important features:
" The Sandia approach divided the experts into two teams. The reports, then, reflect
interdisciplinary team efforts rather than the focus of individual specialties. It should not be
surprising that some designs presented in this report are dramatically different from those
presented a decade ago.
" The Sandia approach involves the elicitation of subjective probabilities for the likelihood of
deterring human interference with the site. This part of the effort is required to evaluate
whether WIPP meets the probabilistic basis of the EPA regulation.
1.2 Charge to the expert panel
The Marking System Teams were given a seven-fold charge:
" Recommend markers that should be used to mark the WIPP disposal site.
" Provide physical descriptions of the markers, including size, location, shape, and materials.
" Provide the message on the markers and the method of conveying the messages.
For each major mode of intrusion identified by the Futures panel:
" Estimate the likelihood that each marker has survived (i.e., it is recognizable and the message
is apparent).
" Estimate the likelihood that the potential intruder will recognize and correctly interpret the
message, given that the marker has survived.
" Estimate the likelihood that a potential intruder will take appropriate action to avoid intrusion
given that the marker has survived and that the potential intruder has recognized and correctly
interpreted the message.
For the system of markers:
" Re-estimate the likelihood that the system persists, the message is correctly interpreted, and
intrusion is deterred.
F-20
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View 114 places within this report that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Trauth, K. M.; Hora, S. C. & Guzowski, R. V. Expert judgment on markers to deter inadvertent human intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, report, November 1993; Albuquerque, New Mexico. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1279277/m1/109/?q=human%20interference%20task%20force: accessed November 10, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.