The institutions and organisations involved in the PEGASOS project and the PEGASOS Refinement Project (PRP) are listed here. The same experts were used for both projects, which were carried out according to SSHAC Level 4. The guidelines (NUREG 2117) for this process were developed by the American Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC).
The aim of the process is to ensure the independence of the expert judgments to the greatest extent possible. Up to now PRP has been the most demanding process for the assessment of seismic hazard. It required five years time and a large investment of resources.
The Swiss Seismological Service was, and is, heavily involved in developing and providing the data required for the analyses (e.g. new earthquake catalogue and attenuation model). At times, up to 20 members of the Swiss Seismological Service were involved in the PRP, either as resource experts or subproject experts.
As was the case for the PEGASOS project, the power plant operators and the safety authority ENSI have no influence on the judgment of the PRP experts. The responsibility for the definition and evaluation of the models used lies with the experts themselves. The experts are thus the owners of the process and are responsible for the final results of their sub-models.
|SP1 / TFI||
|SP2 & SP3 / TFI||
- Why has the seismic hazard been reassessed?
- How was the PEGASOS project carried out?
- Why are guidelines needed for the seismic hazard analysis?
- Why were the results of PEGASOS not directly implemented?
- Why is PEGASOS being refined?
- Why was there an interim assessment of the seismic hazard in 2011?
- Where can I find the results of the PEGASOS study?
- Have the PEGASOS results lost weight in the meantime?
- Who are the experts? Were the same experts used in the PEGASOS and PRP projects?
- Who is the contracting organisation for the studies?
- What is the role of ENSI in PEGASOS and the PRP?
- What are the milestones?