Facilitating relative comparisons of health impacts from postulated accidents in environmental impact statements

Conference · Wed May 01 04:00:00 EDT 1996

OSTI ID:231530

Mueller, C J

Current US Department of Energy (DOE) guidance on the performance of accident analyses supported an environmental impact statement (EIS) stresses a graded approach that emphasizes the most important risks, calls for the evaluation of frequencies as well as consequences for severe accident scenarios, and discourages the use of bounding analyses that confound risk comparisons among EIS alternatives. This paper discusses methods in probabilistic risk analysis that were developed and applied in defining accidents and generating radiological source terms for the DOE Draft Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS); publication of the Final WM PEIS is due in late summer 1996. The strengths and shortcomings of the cited probabilistic risk analysis methods used to evaluate facility accidents are addressed, both as they relate to the WM PEIS and as they relate to more general EIS applications. Key guidance is discussed that was developed by DOE and used in shaping the techniques cited herein for application in an EIS. Related perceptions on accidents observed from the public comment process for the WM PEIS are cited. Finally, recommendations are made on the basis of needs as well as lessons learned in implementing the accident analysis for the WM PEIS.

• Research Organization: Argonne National Lab., IL (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)
• DOE Contract Number: W-31109-ENG-38
• OSTI ID: 231530
• Report Number(s): ANL/EA/CP--88164; CONF-960648--5; ON: DE96010794
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

05 NUCLEAR FUELS
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY
COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HEALTH HAZARDS
PLANNING
PROBABILITY
RADIATION HAZARDS
RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
RISK ASSESSMENT