skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Impact Decision Support Diagrams.


Abstract not provided.

Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
OSTI Identifier:
Report Number(s):
DOE Contract Number:
Resource Type:
Resource Relation:
Conference: Proposed for presentation at the 2011 IAA Planetary Defense Conferece held May 9-12, 2011 in Bucharest, Romania.
Country of Publication:
United States

Citation Formats

Boslough, Mark Bruce Elrick. Impact Decision Support Diagrams.. United States: N. p., 2011. Web.
Boslough, Mark Bruce Elrick. Impact Decision Support Diagrams.. United States.
Boslough, Mark Bruce Elrick. Fri . "Impact Decision Support Diagrams.". United States. doi:.
title = {Impact Decision Support Diagrams.},
author = {Boslough, Mark Bruce Elrick},
abstractNote = {Abstract not provided.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Fri Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2011},
month = {Fri Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2011}

Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • Abstract not provided.
  • Abstract not provided.
  • When used as a tool for safety decision making, Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) is as effective as it realistically characterizes the overall frequency and consequences of various types of system and component failures. If significant support system failure events are omitted from consideration, the PSA process omits the characterization of possible unique contributors to core damage risk, possibly underestimates the frequency of core damage, and reduces the future utility of the PSA as a decision making tool for the omitted support system. This paper is based on a review of several recent US PSA studies and the author's participation inmore » several International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) sponsored peer reviews. 21 refs., 2 figs., 1 tab.« less
  • The merging of the artificial intelligence (AI) and decision support systems (DSS) philosophies seems to be a logical eventuality in future years of software system development. The complexity of the managerial decision making environment portends that applications of sophisticated concepts such as those associated with AI are an inevitable outcome if responsive DSS are to be provided. A conceptual framework for this merging is proposed in this paper. This model incorporates four modules, one of which, the AI and learning module, is responsible for the active role which characterizes the use of AI concepts in their projected role. 25 references.
  • Selection of remediation alternatives for large groundwater plumes containing chlorinated solvents are often complex and difficult, in part because they involve competing objectives, e.g. reduction of health risk vs. increased cost. The Department of Energy (DOE) supported development of a Decision Tool to provide a risk-based process for evaluating and comparing remedial options fairly and consistently. The Decision Tool is also intended to provide a process for constructive discussion of alternatives among the appropriate stakeholders. To use the Decision Tool, which is implemented in an Excel spreadsheet, a site manager must evaluate each alternative being considered against six objectives usingmore » detailed performance metrics. The impacts of each alternative on the individual objectives are combined through a formal multi-attribute utility analysis. Predetermined or user-specified relative weights for the objectives can be used, and a variety of visual outputs are generated. The usefulness and validity of the Decision Tool was demonstrated through a Pilot Study application for the A-Area Burning Rubble Pits/Miscellaneous Chemical Basin groundwater plume at the DOE Savannah River Site. The Pilot Study results provided a new perspective on the alternatives and objectives by demonstrating: 1) the relatively small public health risks associated with groundwater contamination at this site, 2) that more active approaches had benefits over monitored natural attenuation (MNA) in reducing time required to meet the maximum contaminant level (MCL) and maximizing regulatory responsiveness, 3) that MNA has acceptable public and worker health and safety risks, while enabling a reduction in costs. Use of the Decision Tool also promoted valuable discussion among the various stakeholders, and provided options for sensitivity analyses that can quickly be visualized to assess relative benefits of each of the alternatives. (authors)« less