Accident Sequence Evaluation Program: Human reliability analysis procedure

Swain, Alan D.

doi:10.2172/6370593

Cited by 160 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…• Technique for Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP) (Swain and Guttmann, 1983) • Accident Sequence Evaluation Program (ASEP) (Swain, 1987) • Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method (CREAM) (Hollnagel, 1998) • Human Error Assessment and Reduction Technique (HEART) (Williams, 1988) • A Technique for Human Event Analysis (ATHEANA) (USNRC, 1998) Note that of the five methods listed above, only ASEP qualifies as a screening method. The others either contain aspects of screening methods or can be truncated and used in that fashion.…”

Section: Hra Comparison Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simplified Plant Analysis Risk (SPAR) Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Methodology: Comparisons with Other HRA Methods

Byers

Gertman

Hill

et al. 2000

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 1994 Accident Sequence Precursor (ASP) human reliability analysis (HRA) methodology was developed for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) in 1994 by the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). It was decided to revise that methodology for use by the Simplified Plant Analysis Risk (SPAR) program. The 1994 ASP HRA methodology was compared, by a team of analysts, on a point-by-point basis to a variety of other HRA methods and sources. This paper briefly discusses how the comparisons were made and how the 1994 ASP HRA methodology was revised to incorporate desirable aspects of other methods. The revised methodology was renamed the SPAR HRA methodology.

show abstract

Section: Hra Comparison Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simplified Plant Analysis Risk (SPAR) Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Methodology: Comparisons with Other HRA Methods

Byers

Gertman

Hill

et al. 2000

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Accident Sequence Evaluation Program (ASEP) HRA method (NUREG/CR-4772: Swain, 1987) Table 2-1, and (c) there is a backup written procedure. While these items account for the failure to use procedures correctly pre-and post-initiator, they do not adequately address procedure quality nor elements of the interface that might prove relevant to computerized procedure implementation.…”

Section: Asepmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human reliability analysis for computerized procedures, part two: Applicability of current methods

Boring¹,

Gertman²

2012

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This report presents a limited assessment of the conservatism of the Accident Sequence Evaluation Program (ASEP) human reliability analysis (HlU) procedure described in NUREG/CR-4772 (Swain 1987). In particular, the ASEP post-accident, post-diagnosis, nominal HRA procedure is assessed within the context of an individual's performance of critical tasks on the simulator portion of requalification examinations administered to nuclear power plant operators.…”

Section: Nuregicr-6355mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reliability Analysis Procedure (Swain 1987), which is referred to in this report as "ASEP". This assessment is of interest to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) because human error is an important contributor to the risk of nuclear power plant operation and because ASEP is frequently used to estimate human error probabilities, which are one component of probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs).…”

Section: Accident Sequence Evaluation Program (Asep) Humanmentioning

confidence: 99%

A limited assessment of the ASEP human reliability analysis procedure using simulator examination results

Gore¹,

Dukelow²,

Mitts³

et al. 1995

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Washington, DC 20555-0001 NRC Job Code L1120 DISCLAIMERPortions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. AbstractThis report presents a limited assessment of the conservatism of the Accident Sequence Evaluation Program (ASEP) human reliability analysis (HRA) procedure described in NuREG/CR-4772. In particular, the ASEP post-accident, post-diagnosis, nominal HRA procedure is assessed within the context of an individual's performance of critical tasks on the simulator portion of requalification examinations administered to nuclear power plant operators. An assessment of the degree to which operator performance during simulator examinations is an accurate reflection of operator performance during actual accident conditions was outside the scope of work for this project; therefore, no direct inference can be made from this report about such performance. The data for this study are derived from simulator examination reports from the NRC requalification examination cycle. A total of 4071 critical tasks were identified, of which 45 had been failed. The ASEP procedure was used to estimate human error probability (HEP) values for critical tasks, and the HEP results were compared with the failure rates observed in the examinations. The ASEP procedure was applied by PNL operator license examiners who supplemented the limited information in the examination reports with expert judgment based upon their extensive simulator examination experience. ASEP analyses were performed for a sample of 162 critical tasks selected randomly from the 4071, and the results were used to characterize the entire population. ASEP analyses were also performed for all of the 45 failed critical tasks. Two tests were performed to assess the bias of the ASEP HEPs compared with the data from the requalification examinations. The first compared the average of the ASEP HEP values with the fraction of the population actually failed and it found a statistically significant factor of two bias on the average. The second test partitioned the critical tasks into subgroups based on the ASEP HEP values and compared the subgroup average ASEP HEP values with the observed subgroup failure rates. It found little or no bias for small ASEP HEP values, but a considerable bias for larger ASEP HEP values.

show abstract

Accident Sequence Evaluation Program: Human reliability analysis procedure

Cited by 160 publications

References 4 publications

Simplified Plant Analysis Risk (SPAR) Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Methodology: Comparisons with Other HRA Methods

Simplified Plant Analysis Risk (SPAR) Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Methodology: Comparisons with Other HRA Methods

Human reliability analysis for computerized procedures, part two: Applicability of current methods

A limited assessment of the ASEP human reliability analysis procedure using simulator examination results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About