Risk-based inspection and maintenance in process plants and their practices in Taiwan

References

• Aller, J. E., N. C. Horowitz, J. T. Reynolds, and B. J. Weber. 1995. Risk Based Inspection for Petrochemical Industry: Risk and Safety Assessment Where is the Balance?. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
   Google Scholar
• API (American Petroleum Institute). 1995. Base Resource Document on Risk Based Inspection for API Committee on Refinery Equipment. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
   Google Scholar
• API (American Petroleum Institute). 1998. Base Resource Documentation – Risk-based Inspection. 1st ed. API Publication 581. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
   Google Scholar
• API (American Petroleum Institute). 1999. Recommended Practice for Risk-based Inspection. API Publication RP 580. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
   Google Scholar
• API (American Petroleum Institute). 2000a. Base Resource Documentation – Risk-based Inspection. API Publication 581. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
   Google Scholar
• API (American Petroleum Institute). 2000b. Risk-based Inspection, API Recommended Practice, Draft #2. API Publication 580. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
   Google Scholar
• API (American Petroleum Institute). 2000c. Risk-based Inspection – Lite Version, API Recommended Practice, Draft #1. API Publication 580. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
   Google Scholar
• API (American Petroleum Institute). 2002. Risk-based Inspection: API Recommended Practice 580. Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Arendt, J. S. 1990. “Using Quantitative Risk Assessment in the Chemical Process Industry.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 29 (1): 133–149. doi:10.1016/0951-8320(09)90075-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). 1991. Risk-based Inspection – Development of Guidelines, vol. 1: General Document. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
   Google Scholar
• ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). 1996a. Risk-based Inspection Guidelines, Handbook for Fossil Fuel-fired Power Plants. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
   Google Scholar
• ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers). 1996b. Risk-based In-service Testing – Development of Guidelines, vol. 1: General Document. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
   Google Scholar
• Balkey, K. R., R. J. Art, and R. J. Bosnak. 1998. “ASME Risk-based Inservice Inspection and Testing: An Outlook to the Future.” Risk Analysis 18 (4): 407–421. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb00355.X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertolini, M., M. Bevilacqua, F. E. Ciarapica, and G. Giacchetta. 2009. “Development of Risk-based Inspection and Maintenance Procedures for an Oil Refinery.” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 22 (2): 244–253. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2009.01.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, S. J. 2006a. “Historical Development of a Standard to Reduce Risk from Pressure Systems Failure – Part I: The ASME HPS Section 6000.” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 128 (1): 109–115. doi:10.1115/1.2137767.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, S. J. 2006b. “Historical Development of a Standard to Reduce Risk from Pressure Systems Failure – Part II: The ASME HPS-2003 Section 6000 ‘Hazardous Release Protection’.” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 128 (1): 116–121. doi:10.1115/1.2140288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capuano, M., and S. Koritko. 1996. “Risk Oriented Maintenance.” Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology 30 (1): 25–37.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• CCPS (Center for Chemical Process Safety). 1985. Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures. New York: American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Center for Chemical Process Safety.
   Google Scholar
• CCPS (Center for Chemical Process Safety). 1989. Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. New York: American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Center for Chemical Process Safety.
   Google Scholar
• CEA (Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives). 1990. A Probabilistic Safety Assessment of the Standard French 900MW9e Pressurized Water Reactor. Paris: French Atomic Energy Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Chang, M. K., R. R. Chang, C. M. Shu, and K. N. Lin. 2005. “Application of Risk Based Inspection in Refinery and Processing Piping.” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 18 (4–6): 397–402. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2005.06.036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheok, M. C., G. W. Parry, and R. R. Sherry. 1998. “Use of Importance Measures in Risk-informed Regulatory Applications.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 60 (3): 213–226. doi:10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00144-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CIA (Chemical Industries Association). 1977. A Guide to Hazard and Operability Studies. London: Chemical Industries Association.
   Google Scholar
• Conley, M. 2005. “Integrating Risk-based Inspection into Risk Management Plans.” Process Safety Progress 24 (4): 236–243. doi:10.1002/prs.10103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawotola, A. W., T. D. Trafalis, Z. Mustaffa, P. H. A. J. M. van Gelder, and J. K. Vrijling. 2013. “Risk-based Maintenance of a Cross-country Petroleum Pipeline System.” Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice 4 (3): 141–148. doi:10.1016/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000121.
   Google Scholar
• Dey, P. M. 2001. “A Risk-based Model for Inspection and Maintenance of Crosscountry Petroleum Pipeline.” Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 40 (4): 24–31.
   Google Scholar
• Duan, X., M. Wang, and M. J. Kozluk. 2015. “Benchmarking PRAISE-CANDU 1.0 with Nuclear Risk Based Inspection Methodology Project Fatigue Cases.” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 137 (2): 021601–21610. doi:10.1115/1.4028202.
   Google Scholar
• ENIQ (European Network for Inspection and Qualification). 1997. European Methodology for Qualification of Non-destructive Testing. ENIQ Report No. 2, EUR EN17299. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1991. Risk Management Programs for Chemical Accident Release Prevention. 40 CFR Part 68, Proposed Rule, Docket A-91-73. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.
   Google Scholar
• EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). 1998a. Streamlined Reliability-centered Maintenance (SRCM) Program for Fossil-fired Power Plants. EPRI TR-109975, Final report. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.
   Google Scholar
• EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). 1998b. Streamlined Reliability Centered Maintenance at Montana Power Company’s Colstrup Unit 1. EPRI TR-109990, Final report. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.
   Google Scholar
• EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). 2002. BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Safety Assessment of BWR Reactor Internals. EPRI TR-105707, BWRVIP-06-A. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.
   Google Scholar
• EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). 2011. Materials Reliability Program: Pressurized Water Reactor Internals Inspection and Evaluation Guidelines. EPRI TR-1022863, MRP-227-A. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI.
   Google Scholar
• Freudenthal, A. M. 1981. Selected Papers by Alfred M. Freudenthal: Civil Engineering Classics. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Gabbar, H. A., H. Yamashita, K. Suzuki, and Y. Shimada. 2003. “Computer-aided RCM-based Plant Maintenance Management System.” Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 19 (5): 449–458. doi:10.1016/S0736-5845(03)00031-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrick, B. J. 1988. “The Approach to Risk Analysis in Three Industries: Nuclear Power, Space Systems, and Chemical Process.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 23 (3): 195–205.10.1016/0951-8320(88)90109-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guymer, P., G. D. Kaiser, T. C. Mckelvey, and G. W. Hannaman. 1987. “Probabilistic Risk Assessment in the CPI.” Chemical Engineering Progress 83 (1): 37–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagemeijer, P. M., and G. Kerkveld. 1998. “A Methodology for Risk-based Inspection of Pressurized Systems.” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part E: Journal of Process Mechanical Engineering 212 (1): 37–47. doi:10.1243/0954408981529286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hameed, A., F. Khan, and S. Ahmed. 2015. “A Risk-based Methodology to Estimate Shutdown Interval Considering System Availability.” Process Safety Progress 34 (3): 267–279. doi:10.1002/prs.V34.3/issuetoc.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harnly, J. A. 1998. “Risk Based Prioritization of Maintenance Repair Work.” Process Safety Progress 17 (1): 32–38. doi:10.1002/prs.680170108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayns, M. R. 1999. “The Evolution of Probabilistic Risk Assessment in the Nuclear Industry.” Process Safety and Environmental Protection 77 (3): 117–142. doi:10.1205/095758299529947.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health and Safety Executive. 1998. The Tolerability of Risk from Nuclear Power Stations. London: HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Henna, S. R., and P. J. Drivas. 1987. Guidelines for Use of Vapor Cloud Dispersion Models. New York: American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Center for Chemical Process Safety.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, S. T. 2006. “The Study of Decision Support System in Risk Significance for Nuclear Power Plants Inspectors.” MS thesis, Chung Yuan Christian University.
   Google Scholar
• IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). 1984. Report of the Advisory Group on Development of a Manual for Probabilistic Risk Analysis and Its Application to Safety Decision Making. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
   Google Scholar
• IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission). 1998. International Standard: Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-related systems – Part 1: General Requirements. IEC-CEI 61508. See also DIN IEC 65A/179/CDV∗VDE 0801 Teil 1 (IEC 65A/179/CDV:1995). Switzerland: International Electrotechnical Commission.
   Google Scholar
• ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2011. Road Vehicles – Functional Safety – Part 1: Vocabulary. ISO 26262-1. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. A. 1992. Nomenclature for Hazard and Risk Assessment in the Process Industries. Rugby: Institution of Chemical Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Jovanovic, A. 2003. “Risk-based Inspection and Maintenance in Power and Process Plants in Europe.” Nuclear Engineering and Design 226 (2): 165–182. doi:10.1016/j.nucengdes.2003.06.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kadak, A. C., and T. Matsuo. 2007. “The Nuclear Industry's Transition to Risk-informed Regulation and Operation in the United States.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 92 (5): 609–618. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2006.02.2004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katchmar, A. 1997. Reliability Centered Maintenance. Hamilton: Association of Iron and Steel Engineers (AISE) – Evolving Maintenance Strategies.
   Google Scholar
• Keller, W., and M. Modarres. 2005. “A Historical Overview of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Development and Its Use in the Nuclear Power Industry: A Tribute to the Late Professor Norman Carl Rasmussen.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 89 (3): 271–285. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2004.08.022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, F. I., and S. A. Abbasi. 1998. Risk Assessment in Chemical Process Industries: Advanced Techniques. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House.
   Google Scholar
• Khan, F. I., and M. R. Haddara. 2004. “Risk-based Maintenance of Ethylene Oxide Production Facilities.” Journal of Hazardous Materials 108 (3): 147–159. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2004.01.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, F. I., M. M. Haddara, and S. K. Bhattacharya. 2006. “Risk-based Integrity and Inspection Modeling (RBIIM) of Process Components/System.” Risk Analysis 26 (1): 203–221. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00705.X.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, F. I., R. Sadiq, and M. Haddara. 2004. “Risk-based Inspection and Maintenance (RBIM).” Process Safety and Environmental Protection 82 (6): 398–411. doi:10.1205/psep.82.6.398.53209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knowlton, R. E. 1987. An Introduction to Hazard and Operability Studies. Vancouver: Chemetics International.
   Google Scholar
• Koppen, G. 1998. “Development of Risk-based Inspection.” In Proceedings of the First International Conference on NDE Relationship to Structural Integrity for Nuclear and Pressurized Components, Vol. II, 20–22 October 1998, Amsterdam. Cambridge: Woodhead.
   Google Scholar
• Krishnasamy, L., F. I. Khan, and M. M. Haddara. 2005. “Development of a Risk-based Maintenance (RBM) Strategy for a Power-generating Plant.” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 18 (2): 69–81. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2005.01.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar, U. 1998. “Maintenance Strategies for Mechanized and Automated Mining Systems: A Reliability and Risk Analysis Based Approach.” Journal of Mines, Metals and Fuels 46 (11): 343–347, 354.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S. M., Y. S. Chang, J. B. Choi, and Y. J. Kim. 2006. “Application of an Enhanced RBI Method for Petrochemical Equipments.” Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology 128 (3): 445–453. doi:10.1115/1.2218350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y. C. 2012. “The Studies on Risk-informed Evaluations for In-service Inspection and In-service Testing of Nuclear Power Plants.” Ph.D. dissertation, National Chung Hsing University.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, J. D., C. K. Lo, P. L. Hsu, S. T. Ho, J. Y. Wu, R. C. Shyu, T. M. Kao, T. C. Horng, H. S. Syu, C. P. Chang, and F. S. Wang. 2008. “Initiatives of Risk-informed Regulation Study and Implementation.” Monthly Journal of Taipower’s Engineering 721: 37–52.
   Google Scholar
• Madsen, H. O., S. Krenk, and N. C. Lind. 1986. Methods of Structural Safety. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Modarres, M. 2009. “Advanced Nuclear Power Plant Regulation Using Risk-informed and Performance-based Methods.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 94 (2): 211–217. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2008.02.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montague, D. F. 1990. “Process Risk Evaluation – What Method to Use?” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 29 (1): 27–53. doi:10.1016/0951-8320(90)90071-T.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nessim, M., and M. Stephens. 1998. “Quantitative Risk-analysis Model Guides Maintenance Budgeting.” Pipe Line and Gas Industry 81 (6): 33–40.
   Google Scholar
• NTU (National Taiwan University). 2014a. Forum and Press Conference on the Event of Kaohsiung Petrochemical Gas Explosion. Taipei: Risk Society and Policy Research Center, College of Social Sciences, National Taiwan University.
   Google Scholar
• NTU (National Taiwan University). 2014b. “Propositions of Improvement for the Event of Kaohsiung Petrochemical Gas Explosion.” NTU Spotlight, Chinese Version, No. 349. Taipei: National Taiwan University.
   Google Scholar
• Ochiai, S., T. Makita, T. Sanjo, K. Sato, and M. Katagiri. 2005. “Quantitative Risk Evaluations of LNG Equipment Applying ASME Risk-based Maintenance Concepts.” Process Safety Progress 24 (3): 187–191. doi:10.1002/prs.10087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OSHA (Occupational Safety & Health Administration). 1992. Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals Standard. Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1910.119, FR 57(36). Washington, DC: Occupational Safety & Health Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Pandey, M. D. 1998. “Probabilistic Models for Condition Assessment of Oil and Gas Pipelines.” NDT&E International 31 (5): 349–358. doi:10.1016/S0963-8695(98)0003-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen, K. E. 1986. Risk Analysis Uses and Techniques in the Non-nuclear Field: A Nordic Perspective. Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers.
   Google Scholar
• Pyy, P., and U. Pulkkinen. 1998. “Risk and Reliability Analysis (LURI) and Expert Judgement Techniques.” In Proceedings of the Finnish Research Programme on Reactor Safety 1995–1998. VTT-SYMP-189: 163–176.Espoo: VTT Automation.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, K. 2013. “Manage the Potential for Equipment Failure with Risk-based Inspection.” Chemical Engineering Progress 109 (7): 14–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ridgway, M. 2001. “Classifying Medical Devices according to Their Maintenance Sensitivity: A Practical, Risk-based Approach to PM Program Management.” Biomedical Instrumentation and Technology/Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation 35 (3): 167–176.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Royal Society. 1983. Risk Assessment. London: Royal Society study group.
   Google Scholar
• Royal Society. 1992. Risk: Analysis, Perception and Management. London: Royal Society study group.
   Google Scholar
• Shen, Y. L., and T. M. Kao. 2008. Quantitative Risk Assessment Guidelines for Hazardous Mechanical Equipment. IOSH 95-S307. New Taipei City: Institute of Labor Safety and Health.
   Google Scholar
• Shishesaz, M. R., M. N. Bajestani, S. J. Hashemi, and E. Shekari. 2013. “Comparison of API 510 Pressure Vessels Inspection Planning with API 581 Risk-based Inspection Planning Approaches.” International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 111–112: 202–208. doi:10.1016/j.ijpvp.2013.07.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh, M., and T. Markeset. 2009. “A Methodology for Risk-based Inspection Planning of Oil and Gas Pipes Based on Fuzzy Logic Framework.” Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (7): 2098–2113. doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2009.02.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SRA (Society for Risk Analysis). 2014. Joint Newsletter for the Forum and Press Conference on the Event of Kaohsiung Petrochemical Gas Explosion. Taiwan Chapter of Society for Risk Analysis and Risk Society and Policy Research Center, College of Social Sciences, National Taiwan University. Taipei: National Taiwan University.
   Google Scholar
• Straub, D., and M. H. Faber. 2003. “Modeling Dependency in Inspection Performance.” In Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, Millpress, 6–9 July 2003: vol: 2: 1123–1130. Zürich: ETH Zürich.
   Google Scholar
• Straub, D., and M. H. Faber. 2004. “System Effects in Generic Risk Based Inspection Planning.” Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering 126 (3): 265–271.10.1115/1.1782642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Straub, D., and M. H. Faber. 2005. “Risk Based Inspection Planning for Structural Systems.” Structural Safety 27 (4): 335–355. doi:10.1016/j.strusafe.2005.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tan, Z., J. Li, Z. Wu, J. Zheng, and W. He. 2011. “An Evaluation of Maintenance Strategy Using Risk Based Inspection.” Safety Science 49 (6): 852–860. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2011.01.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, W. H. 1973. “Probabilistic Updating of Flaw Information.” Journal of Testing and Evaluation 1 (6): 459–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tien, S. W., W. T. Hwang, and C. H. Tsai. 2007. “Study of a Risk-based Piping Inspection Guideline System.” ISA Transactions 46 (1): 119–126. doi:10.1016/j.isatra.2006.06.006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ting, K., Y. C. Li, F. T. Chien, C. C. Chen, G. D. Li, and S. H. Huang. 2009. “Applications of the Risk-informed and Reliability Technology to the Testing and Maintenance Optimization Related with the Maintenance Rule of the Safety Related Valves and the Pilot Study of Regulation Evaluations.” Monthly Journal of Taipower’s Engineering 731: 8–25.
   Google Scholar
• Tsai, C. H., and W. F. Wu. 1994. “On the Application of Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics to the Reliability and Inspection of Pressure Vessels.” International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 59 (1–3): 323–333. doi:10.1016/0308-0161(94)90166-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsaur, C. C., and Y. J. Hong. 2008. The Role and Function of Risk Assessment on Safety and Health Management – A Study on Petrochemical Process Industries. IOSH 97-S319. New Taipei City: Institute of Labor Safety and Health.
   Google Scholar
• TÜV Rheinland. 1980. “The German Risk Study for Nuclear Power Plants.” IAEA Bulletin 22 (5/6): 23–33. Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1975. WASH-1400: Reactor Safety Study. NUREG-75/014. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1986. Safety Goals for the Operations of Nuclear Power Plant; USNRC Policy Statement. US Federal Register, vol. 51, 30028. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1988. Individual Plant Examination for Severe Accident Vulnerabilities. 10 CFR 50.54(f). USNRC Generic Letter 88-20. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1998a. An Approach for Plant-specific, Risk-informed Decision Making: Inservice Testing. USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1.175. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1998b. An Approach for Plant-specific, Risk-informed Decision Making: Graded Quality Assurance. USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.176. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1998c. An Approach for Plant-specific, Risk-informed Decision Making: Technical Specifications. USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1.177. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2002. An Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-informed Decisions on Plant-specific Changes to the Current Licensing Basis. USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1.174, Revision 1. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2003. Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability. ASME Section XI, Division 1. USNRC, Regulatory Guide 1.147, Revision 13. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2007. Feasibility Study for a Risk-informed and Performance-based Regulatory Structure. USNRC NUREG-1860. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• USNRC (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2010. Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report. NUREG-1801, Rev. 2. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Van Sciver, G. R. 1990. “Quantitative Risk Analysis in the Chemical Process Industry.” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 29 (1): 55–68. doi:10.1016/0951-8320(90)90072-U.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Y., G. Cheng, H. Hu, and W. F. Wu. 2012. “Development of a Risk-based Maintenance Strategy Using FMEA for a Continuous Catalytic Reforming Plant.” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 25 (6): 958–965. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2012.05.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Q., and J. Gao. 2012. “Research and Application of Risk and Condition Based Maintenance Task Optimization Technology in an Oil Transfer Station.” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 25 (6): 1018–1027. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2012.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Q., W. Liu, X. Zhong, J. Yang, and Q. Yuan. 2011. “Development and Application of Equipment Maintenance and Safety Integrity Management System.” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 24 (4): 321–332. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2011.01.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weibull, W. A. 1951. “A Statistical Distribution Function of Wide Applicability.” Journal of Applied Mechanics 18 (3): 293–297.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westkämper, E., W. Sihn, and S. Stender. 1999. Maintenance Management in New Forms of Organization. New York: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-3-642-58374-2
   Google Scholar
• Wong, D. 2000. “A Knowledge-based Decision Support System in Reliability-centered Maintenance of HVAC Systems.” Ph.D. thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, K. Y. 2013. “Risk Analysis of Nuclear Power Plants.” NTU Alumni Bimonthly 87: 59–62.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, J. S., and G. E. Apostolakis. 1992. “Experience with Probabilistic Risk Assessment in the Nuclear Power Industry.” Journal of Hazardous Materials 29 (3): 313–345. doi:10.1016/0304-3894(92)85040-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, W. F., C. H. Tsai, K. C. Tu, and J. S. You. 2002. “Probabilistic Analysis of Core Shroud Cracks.” Nuclear Engineering and Design 214 (1–2): 103–112. doi:10.1016/S0029-5493(02)00019-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, W. F., J. S. You, H. T. Kuo, and C. H. Wu. 2007. “Degradation Analysis and Risk-informed Management of Feedwater System in Nuclear Power Plants.” International Journal of Performability Engineering 3 (1): 149–168.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, J. N., and W. J. Trapp. 1974. “Reliability Analysis of Aircraft Structures under Random Loading and Periodic Inspection.” AIAA Journal 12 (12): 1623–1630. doi:10.25141/3.49570.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, J. N., and W. J. Trapp. 1975. “Inspection Frequency Optimization for Aircraft Structures Based on Reliability Analysis.” Journal of Aircraft 12 (5): 494–496. doi:10.2514/3.44469.
   Google Scholar
• Yi, J., W. Wang, and Z. Xu. 2012. “Method of Preventive Maintenance and Plan for Natural Gas Pipelines Based on Risk Inspection.” Disaster Advances 5 (4): 1167–1171.
   Google Scholar
• You, J. S., H. T. Kuo, and W. F. Wu. 2006. “Case Studies of Risk-informed Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Piping Systems.” Nuclear Engineering and Design 236 (1): 35–46. doi:10.1016/j.nucengdes.2005.06.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• You, J. S., and W. F. Wu. 2002. “Probabilistic Failure Analysis of Nuclear Piping with Empirical Study of Taiwan's BWR Plants.” International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 79 (7): 483–492. doi:10.1016/S0308-0106(02)00061-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar