ML20054D901
| ML20054D901 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1982 |
| From: | Benton J, Lookabaugh A Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054D873 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8204230488 | |
| Download: ML20054D901 (20) | |
Text
e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY Docket No. 50-382 (Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3) )
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY TESTIMONY OF JOHN W.BENTON AND ALBERT L. LOOKABAUGH REGARDING EMERGENCY PLANNING (CONTENTION 17/26)
I, Albert L. Lookabaugh, am employed as an Emergency Management t
Officer, and I, John W. Benton, am employed as an Emergency Management Specialist by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region VI, Denton, Texas, where we are assigned to the Natural and Technological Hazards Division. In our respective positions we are responsible for providing assistance to State and local governments in the preparation of Radio-logical Emergency Response Plans (RERPs). We also review those RERPs to assure compliance with NUREG-0654 (FEMA REP 1, Revision 1), and make recommendations to the Regional Director regarding the RERPs' compliance with those criteria.
Each review involves a review of the written RERP, l the evaluation of an exercise of the RERP, at least one public meeting i
on the RERP, and input from those Federal agencies represented on the Regional Assistance Committee (RAC). Copies of our professional quali-fications are attached hereto.
On November 25, 1981, the State of Louisiana submitted to FEMA the
! " Louisiana Peacetime Radiological Response Plan" (Revision 3, September L
R204980 9% -
. . - ., a
o 1981), along with the St. Charles Parish and St. John the Baptist Parish Plans, (Revision 3, September 1981) Attachment 1, Enclosures 1 and 2 to the State Plan (hereinafter referred to as " Parish Plans"). Comments were received from RAC members, coordinated by FEMA, and were provided to the State of Louisiana to assist it in developing and improving the State and Parish Plans for Waterford 3. Subsequently, the State of LoLisiana forwarded to FEMA " Revision 4" of the State Plan (February 1982). We have personally reviewed Revision 4 of the State Plan ,
although, to date, there has been no RAC review of Revision 4 The State Plan was partially tested in connection with the exercise held for the Grand Gulf Nuclear iawer Station in Mississippi. Neither the site specific portion of the State Plan nor the Parish Plans have been exercised in connection with Waterford 3.
Prior to FEMA Region VI making any recommendations regarding the State and Parish Plans, FEMA will conduct a site specific exercise, will conduct a test of the alert notification system (either in connection with the exercise or as a separate test), and will conduct a public meet-ing. Any items identified as needing modification or improvement will be brought to the attention of the State and Parishes. No recommendation on the State and Parish Plans will be made until the State responds to the items identified.
Subsequently, a FEMA Region VI recommendation as to the adequacy of these Plans will be made and forwarded to FEMA headquarters in Washington, D.C. FEMA headquarters will also conduct a review of the State and Parish Plans before making a recommendation to the NRC as to the adequacy of those Plans.
Aw-
The purpose of this testimony testimony is to respond to Contention 17/26 raised by the Joint Intervenors in this proceeding. In the discussion which follows, each of the subparts of the contention is addressed separately.
Contention 17/26(1)
(a) "the provisions for notifying residents of evacuation procedures are inadequate".
Response
This contention addresses the adequacy of the pre- and post-incident notification of the population within the EPZ. flVREG-0654, FEf4A-REP-1, Revision 1.(" Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of fluclear Power Plants") requires the following:
Information is made available to the public on a pe: iodic basis on how they will be notified and what their initial actions should be in an emergency (e.g.,
listening to a local broadcast station and remaining indoors), and principal points of contact with the news- "
media for dissemination of information during an emer- ,
gency (including the physical location or locations) are established in advance, and procedures for coordinated dissemination of information to the public are established. l The subject of providing residents with evacuation procedures is
! addressed in Chapter 1, attachment I to Annex J., Appendix 7.
Specifically, the objectives are to establish a program to notify persons living, working or traveling in the risk area (of Waterford 3) of plans and procedures for their notification, actions and further contact in the l event of an accident at Waterford 3.
l l
a .
The organization which bears responsibility for developing, coordinating and implementing such a program is the Louisiana Nuclear Energy Division (LNED) with appropriate utilities (here, Louisiana Power
& Light Company). Local parish Civil Defense Directors and Public
. Information Officers are responsible for making recommendations'and providing supyprt to LNED for advance development of printed materials as
~
well as advance development of prepared messages desig.ed for dissemination via local news media and the Emergency Broadcast System (EBS) at the time of an emergency. Chapter 1, Attachment 1, IV, B,
- p. 24 The plan provides that educational material will be developed which 4 includes information on shelters, evacuation routes, risk areas, pick-up points, affected school districts end reception centers. It indicates this inforpation may be placed in phone books, on walls, and in utility bili mail-outs' and other publications. Chapter 1, Attachment 1, pp. 24 e
and 25.
i The Public Information Program and Emergency Public Information l
System brochure has not been distributed at this time, however, the plan indicates what will be contained in the program: e.g., information on
, ' radiation, sources of additional information, protective measures for the E
public and special preparations for the handicapped. As of this date, we have not received, reviewed or evaluated the proposed public information brochure. The plan does not indicate how material is to be distributed j to the resident and transient populations. Based on previous experience
- involving the State of Louisiana's distribution of brochures to residents in the area surrounding the Grand Gulf nuclear power plant, it is assumed that distribution will be accomplished by a direct mailing to the resident populace.
~
w w ,
The Louisiana Office of Emergency Preparedness (LOEP) is responsible for disseminating emergency information to the public during an accident by activation of the EBS station serving the risk area. Chapter 1, Attachment 1, IV, D, p. 24. The parish president or his designee will be the parish spokesperson and will release public information. These releases will be coordinated with LNED by the Public Information Officer. )
Chapter 1, Attachment 1, V, 8, p. 25. !
Prescripted emergency public information broadcast messages found
~
in the plans include: initial notification, take shelter, evacuation (general), evacuation (school) and reentry. Evacuation procedures as outlined in the REP plans appear to meet the requirements of the criteria established by NUREG-0654. St. Charles Parish, Chapter 3, p.120; St. John the Baptist ("St. John") Farish, Chapter 3, p. 288.
Subject to FEMA's review of the public information brochure, the plans adequately provide for notification of the public as to evacuation procedures.
(b) "the roads and highways necessary for such evacuation are inadequate".
Response
We have reviewed the adequacy of the proposed evacuation routes from Waterford 3. In forming our opinion we have reviewed the evacuation time estimate study submitted by Louisiana Power and Light Company dated February 1982 ("ETE Study"); we have been briefed by EBASCO Services, the l
~
contractor who prepared the ETE Study for Louisiana Power & Light Company; we interviewed the Civil Defense Directors for the risk area parishes; we 4
considered the comments of the RAC member from the Federal Highway Admini-stration; and we made personal observations of the road network in the vicinity of Waterford 3. Based upon the foregoing we are of the opinion that the roads are adequate for evacuation purposes.
(c) "the evacuation warning system is inadequate".
Response
A proposed warning system using 38 fixed sirens as the chief means of alerting the public to a possible problem at the Waterford plant site was submitted to FEMA Region 6 for evaluation. FEMA Region 6 reviewed the warning plan proposed in accordance with FEMA Civil Preparedness Guide (CPG) 1-17, dated March 1, 1980 and entitled " Outdoor Warning Systems Guide", as required by NUREG-0654/ FEMA REP 1, Revision 1, Appendix 3, p. 3-7 et seg. We have also reviewed a document entitled
" Report: Verification of the Sirca Alert System for Waterford 3 Nuclear Power Station", February,1982, prepared by Acoustic Technology, Inc.
Based on the findings from this review it appears the system proposed will satisfy the criteria for that portion of the 10 mile emergency planning zone it is designed for and will adequately warn the populace in '
that area. Two possible exceptions to this conclusion are the hearing impaired and those persons working in facilities where the ambient background noise levels may preclude their hearing the sirens. St.
Charles Parish has a provision for notifying the industries located in l that parish within the 10-mile EPZ via a direct line from the EOC. St.
John Parish has a similar system but at present it does not cover all of the industrial facilities in the parish within the 10-mile EPZ. The warning system must be augmented as needed with other means of warning l -
for the affected groups of persons.
FEMA withholds final approval on the warning system until all systems are installed, tested, and evaluated in accordance with FEMA rules and regulations.
(d) "there is not an adequate command decision structure, including appropriate guidance, for commencing evacuation".
Response
The requirements for the command decision structure are set out in Part A of NUREG-0654/ FEMA REP 1, Revision 1 at pages 31-33. The State of Louisiana addresses these requirements in the Peacetime Radiological l
Response Plan, Annex J, Appendix 7 at pages 17-39. The command structure for St. Charles Parish is set forth generally on pages 66-77 of Enclosure 1 to Attachment 1, with more specific responsibilities set out in the subsequent tabs. The command structure for St. John the Baptist Parish is set forth generally on pages 228-38 of Enclosure 2 to Attachment 1, with more specific responsibilities set out in the subse-quent tabs.
At the State level, LNED makes protective response recommendations to the Assistant Secretary, Office of Environmental Affairs 1450EA) who considers the protective response recommendation and confers with LNED.
LNED will then notify the risk parishes of the protective response recommendation. The Parish President and/or his designated representa-tive will make a decision on the implementation of the State recommenda-tions. At the designated time, coordinated by LNED, each Parish will activate the alert and notification system. LOEP will activate the emergency broadcast system for notifying the public in the risk areas and providing instructions on what to do (also see 17/26(1)a, reference EPI).
The Governor reserves the right to compel the evacuation of the risk area should such an evacuation become necessary.
The Parish Plans do not name by title a Parish official as emergency coordinator at the E0F who shall have the authority or responsibility to provide protective action recommendations to official off-site authorities. This person should be identified in the plan. Otherwise, the command structure appears to be adequate.
(e) "the Emergency Plan fails to provide for realistic and comprehensive evacuation drills, in that the provisions for moving individuals are not actually tested".
Response
NUREG-0654, FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1, does not require actual movement of people during evacuation drills. Similarly, FEMA does not require the actual movement of people during drills, for the following reasons:
(1) such movement during drills would result in unnecessary interruptions of daily activities and commerce; (2) it is unlikely that the entire plume exposure pathway EPZ would be evacuated at any one time, (3) such movement would create a risk of accidents which cannot be justified for exercise purposes, (4) there is no legal authority for directing evacuation of all persons for exercise purposes, and without full public )
participation the exercise would be inconclusive, (5) in observed exercises where residents within the 10 mile EPZ were given the opportunity and were encouraged to participate j l
l l
- c. . -
in a realistic evacuation, they have not in fact, chosen to
- participate, and (6) based on information pertaining to the evacuation of persons ,
1 for other emergencies in the past, there is evidence that the
- populace can be evacuated in a timely manner.
(f) " procedures are inadequate for evacuating people who are l (i) without vehicles".
Response
Transportation for persons without vehicles is covered in Tab 7 of Enclosure 1 and 2 respectively for St. Charles and St. John the Baptist Parishes. According to the Evacuation Time Estimate which is incorpor-ated by reference in the St. Charles plan at p.162 and in the St. John plan at p. 328, the total population without vehicles in the 10 mile EPZ is 5,777. See Table 14. The estimated required number of buses to evacuate the population is 143. Jji. This is a conservative estimate; for example, in sectors NE 5-10, they suggest one bus for 20 people; in Sectors SE 5-10, they suggest one bus for 9 people and one bus for 15 people; in sectors NE 2-5, they suggest one bus for 13 people. Both the St. Charles and St. John plans list the pick-up points for persons without vehicles. See Enclosures 1 and 2, Tab 1, at pages 185 and 347
! respectively. All of the pick-up points in both parishes are schools and-are therefore easily identified for the public. The educational material which will be distributed in advance will include a list of the pick-up
. points for the public without vehicles. Chapter 1, Attachment 1, pp. 24 and 25.
1 i .
The St. Charles and St. John plans do not indicate the resources which will be utilized to evacuate those persons without vehicles. In St. Charles Parish the list of transportation providers has not been developed as of the date this testimony was prepared. See St. Charles Plan, Insert I to Tab 1, page 104. Chapter 8 of the respective parish plans state that the parishes will enter into agreements or develop letters of understanding with certain transportation providers including bus companies. The current plan does not include any letters of agree-ment for review. The plans, therefore, do not provide sufficient information to determine whether or not the parishes are capable of undertaking a timely evacuation of the public without vehicles; our conclusion as to this area is subject to further revision of the plans.
"(ii) school children"
Response
Transportation for school children is addressed in Tab 6 to the Basic Plan in Enclosures 1 and 2. Total estimated 1982 student popula-tion for each parish within the EPZ appear in Table 17 of the ETE Study.
There are approximately 22,200 students in both parishes. The plan indicates that St. John Parish has 31 buses on the East Bank and 10 on the West Bank while St. Charles Parish has 44 buses on the East Bank and 62 on the West Bank. ETE Study, 3.4.1 at p. 18. This number is
! sufficient to evacuate approximately one-half of the student population in one trip. ETE Study, 3.4.1 at p. 21. The plan indicates that additional buses from Jefferson and St. James Parishes will be utilized in an evacuation, if necessary. ETE Study, 3.4.1 at p. 21. No letters i
of agreement have been included in the current plan to indic. ate that
i l
Jefferson and St. James Parishes will ' provide buses in the event that they are needed for evacuation, however, it is unlikely that the entire 10 mile EPZ would be evacuated simultaneously. FEMA cannot conclude at this time whether there are sufficient resources within the parishes to accomplish a complete evacuation of the affected students in a timely manner.
"(iii) aged and crippled"
Response
The Applicant's ETE Study recognizes and addresses "special situations" in evacuation, one of which is evacuation of the elderly and handicapped persons residing within the subject planning zone (see 3.7.4,
- p. 33). The ETE Study indicates that there are 5,777 persons without vehicles. It is not clear from that document whether this number includes persons who are aged or crippled without vehicles. For purposes of responding to these contentions, we have assumed that aged and crippled persons are a separate category and are not included in the 5,777 figure.
In St. Charles Parish there are approximately 1500 people who are non-ambulatory and approximately 2500 people 60 years of age or older who do not own cars. The Council of Aging in St. Charles Parish operates three 12-passenger vans and one van for non-ambulatory people. In St. John Parish there are approximately 1200 people 60 years of age or older without cars, approximately 300 elderly who are totally dependent on the Council of Aging for transportation and approximately 100-110 i
handicapped and invalid persons (assumed to be non-ambulatory for planning purposes). The St. John Parish Council of Aging has two i
12-passenger vehicles, one on either side of the river. There is a Health and Medical Officer appointed in each of the two parishes whose responsibility it is, among other things, to coordinate and assist in providing protective response for non-ambulatory residents within the respective parishes including transportation resources to support an evacuation. Chapter 6, p. 193 of enclosure 1 and Chapter 6, p. 354 of enclosure 2. The Council on Aging in each parish is responsible for maintaining current rosters of non-ambulatory residents within the parish and for assisting the Health and Medical Officer in providing for the evacuation of subject persons. See enclosures 1 and 2, pages 194 and 355 respectively.
St. Charles Parish (Tab 2, Chapter 6, Enclosure 1, pp. 207 and 208) and St. John Parish (Tab 2, Chapter 6, Enclosure 1, pp. 365 and 366) list ambulance services and vehicles available for supporting the evacuation of health care facilities and non-ambulatory persons. See also Chapter 6, para. III, I. p.196, Enclosure 1, St. Charles Parish and Chapter 6, para. III, H. p. 356, Enclosure 2, St. John Parish. The listing for the two parishes include a total of 53 ambulances which may be available to support the evacuation effort of the subject populace, 46
- of which are from other jurisdictions. There are no letters of agreement contained in the plans indicating that these ambulance services from other jurisdictions would be available to support an evacuation.
Given a scenario in which the aged and crippled within the 10 mile EPZ would have to be evacuated within "I to several hours" it is highly questionable that an evacuation could be effective utilizing only those resources listed in the plan, absent further revision to the plan.
1 "(iv) sick and hospitalized" As noted above, there are 5,777 persons without vehicles; it is not clear from the Applicant's ETE Study whether this figure includes persons who are aged or crippled without vehicles. For purposes of responding to these contentions, we have assumed that aged and crippled persons are a I separate category and are not included in the 5,777 figure.
(a) St. Charles Parish Evacuation of the sick and hospitalized in St. Charles Parish is addressed in Chapter 6 of Enclosure 1. There are two facilities within the 10-mile EPZ which might be affected by an accident at Waterford 3.
They are the St. Charles Hospital, a 50-bed acute and chronic care facility and Luling Nursing Home, Inc., a 145-bed long-term care facility. According to the plan, both St. Charles Hospital and Luling Nursing Home are located approximately eight (8) miles from Waterford 3.
Chapter 6, p. 195. In the event that evacuation of these facilities is necessary, patients from St. Charles Hospital will be received at West Jefferson General Hospital in Marrero, Louisiana and patients from Luling Nursing Home will be received by Heritage Manor of Thibodaux, Louisiana.
Chapter 6, pp. 195 and 196. The plan indicates that protective response procedures for fixed nuclear facilities accidents have been incorporated into St. Charles Hospital's and Luling Nursing Home's emergency management disaster plans. However, it does not indicate whether this includes logistical support for evacuation, i.e., ambulances or other suitable vehicles.
/
vm 1 - _ - .
, e .
The Plan states:
Parish emergency medical services (ambulance) vehicles (operated by St. Charles Hospital), not committed to maintaining standby emergency coverage to the Parish will assist in evacuation of St. Charles Hospital patients. (emphasis added) Chapter 6, p. 196.
There are only three (3) ambulances operated by St. Charles Hospital.
Chapter 6, Tab 2, p. 208. The Plan is silent as to what, if any, vehicles are available to evacuate Laling Nursing Home.
The Parish Health and Medical Officer, with assistance from the Department of Health and Human Services, is responsible for providing transportation resources to support evacuation. The only resources 4
identified in the Pldn to carry out evacuation are the prrviously mentioned St. Charles Hospital ambulances and a list of ambulance services contained in Tab 3 to Chapter 6. There is no indication that St. Charles Parish has contracts or letters of agreements with any of these ambulance services to assist in an evacuation resulting from an accident at Waterford 3.
Thus, only three (3) ambulances have been identified as available to evacuate the 50-bed St. Charles Hospital and the 145-bed Luling Nursing Home.
(b) St. John the Baptist Parish-Evacuation of the sick and hospitalized in St. John Parish is contained in Chapter 6 of Enclcsure 2 at p. 354. The plan for St. John Parish is substantially the same as that for St. Charles Parish.
There are two facilities within the 10-mile EPZ which might be affected by an accident at Waterford 3. The River Parishes Medical j _
l Center at Laplace, Louisiana is a 102-bed acute and chronic care medical facility. Twin Oaks Nursing Home, Inc. is a 132-bed long-term care facility. Both are located approximately five miles from Waterford 3.
In the event an evacuation is necessary, patients from River Parishes Medical Center will be transferred to Spedale General Hospital in Plaquemine, Louisiana and patients from Twin Oaks Nursing Home will be evacuated to the Riverlands Health Care Center in Lutcher, Louisiana.
The Health and Medical Officer is responsible for coordination and asristance of these two facilities including provisions for transporta-tion resources to support evacuation. Chapter 6, II, 3, p. 354.
The St. John Parish Plan states:
Parish emergency medical services (ambulance) vehicles (operating by Baloney Ambulance Service, Hobson Brown
! Ambulance Service and the Parish Sheriff's Department) not committed to maintaining standby emergency coverage to the Parish will assist in the evacuation of River Parishes Medical Center. (emphasis added) Chapter 6, III, G, Page 356.
According to Tab 2 to Chapter 5, the total number of ambulances identified above is 4. The Plan is silent as to what resources are available to evacuate Twin Oaks Nursing Home.
Additional ambulances are identified in Tab 2 to Chapter 6. This list is identical to that which appears in the St. Charles Plan. There is no evidence that the Parish has contracts or letters of agreement with any of the ambulance services listed in Tab 2 to Chapter 6 to provide services in the event an evacuation resulting from an accident at Water-ford 3 was necessary.
W w
Thus, only four (4) ambulances have been identified as available to evacuate the 102-bed River Parishes Medical Center and the 132-bed Twin Oaks Nursing Home.
(c) Conclusion If these health care facilities in St. Charles and St. John parishes had to be evacuated, the resources identified as available would not assure that such an evacuation could be accomplished in a timely manner.
There may be other resources available, but they have not been identified in the respective plans. FEMA's final conclusion is withheld subject to revision of the parish plans to correct these matters.
"(v) imprisoned"
Response
Protective measure procedures (including evacuation) for St. Charles and St. John parishes are covered in Chapter 4, Tab 6, pages 183 and 345 respectively.
The ETE Study, Table 17, indicates the average daily number of prisoners incarcerated in St. John Parish Jail, Laplace, is 25.
St. Charles Parish Jail located in Hahnville has an average daily number of 30 persons incarcerated. Both of these jails are within the 10 mile EPZ.
If an evacuation is recommended but cannot be immediately accomplished, the use of radioprotective drugs will be considered. These substances will only be administered to prisoners upon the order of the ASOEA. Pp. 183 and 345. Transportation arrangements for the evacuation of prisoners will be established by the Parish Sheriffs. The inmates
_w _ - - _ _ _ _
l will be evacuated by police cars or a bus according to information contained on page 20 of the ETE Study. Agreements have been reached with the sheriffs of neighboring parishes for the confinement of prisoners if an evacuation becomes necessary. Based on our review of this subject, it is our conclusion that the plans adequately treat the provisions for evacuation of prisoners.
"(vi) transient workers"
Response
The ETE Study indicates, based upon conservative population projections, that there is an estimated peak industrial population of 14,092 within the 10 mile EPZ including construction workers.
Enclosures 1 and 2, Tab 7, pages 102 and 265 respectively indicate the principal means of transportation in an emergency (evacuation) would be by private automobile for those persons working or traveling in the risk a rea. In addition to the estimated 14,092 industrial workers in the 10 mile planning area, according to Table 16, sheet 2 of 2 of the ETE Study there are estimated to be 23,757 commercial employees during peak periods who would evacuate via some 16,844 automobiles. The 14,092 industrial population would generate approximately 9,990 vehicles, for a total of 26,834 vehicles from industrial and commercial sources. The ETE Study further indicates that schools will be notified to evacuate 15 minutes prior to notification of industry and that the existing roadways will handle the traffic so that evacuation can be accomplished in a timely manner. Using these projected population figures, the ETE Study indicates that evacuation of the transient population ccn be accomplished in a timely manner.
Contention 17/26(2)
Response
The plan indicates that radioprotective drugs (potassium iodide (KI)) will be available for use by emergency workers operating in the risk area during an accident ar.d to institutionalized persons. KI will be supplied by LNED and administered upon the recommendation of the AS0EA in accordance with State policy. See LNED's " Policy Statement: Use of Potassium Iodide (KI) in Louisiana for Emergencies at Fixed Nuclear Facilities", dated March 10, 1982.
NUREG-0654 does not require the use of potassium iodide for the general public. FEMA's policy with regard to the use of KI is that the decision to distribute it to the general public is a matter of State public health policy. The State of Louisiana has not indicated that it t
intends to distribute KI to the general public. Accordingly, the State's plan is not inconsistent with NUREG-0654.
r f
0 k
. . , , . , e p-+- ---e
e STATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATICNS OF JOHN W. BENTON I, John W. Benton, am presently employed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region VI, Denton, Texas as an Emergency Management Specialist. In that capacity my responsibilities include review of Radiological Emergency Response Plans (RERPs) prepared by State and local governments in accordance with the requirements of NUREG-0654/ FEMA Rep. 1, Revision 1. I have formally been involved with RERP since FEMA was designated as lead agency in this area by President Carter.
The past seventeen years of my professional career have involved training and assisting State and local officials in emergency planning.
Prior to the creation of FEMA I was employed by its predecessor, the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency, Department of Defense, as a Region Field Officer. In that position I acted as a liaison between DCPA and State and local governments.
The substantial portion of my experience in emergency preparedness has been as an educator. At North Texas State University (1976-1978) I conducted training courses for State and local officials at various locations in Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas. This training was designed to develop emergency operating skills within the States.
Since 1965 I have served as Assistant Director of the Civil Defense University Extension Program at the University of New Mexico, Department of Continuing Education (1965-1968), and as Director of that same program (1968-1976). In these positions I developed curricula and conducted workshops for public officials in subjects related to civil preparedness including shelter management and civil preparedness planning. I was also personally involved in writing school disaster and emergency operations plans for all of the schools in the State of New Mexico.
I received an Associate of Arts degree from Northwest Community College, Powell, Wyoming (1958), and Bachelor of Arts and Master of Arts degrees from Colorado State College in 1960 and 1961 respectively. I have also attended a post-master degree course at the University of New Mexico. I have completed a number of courses relating to emergency planning for civil preparedness at the Civil Defense Staff College. From 1952-1956 I served in the United States Air Force where I received i training as a communications specialist.
t' f
I
s
- STATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF ALBERT L. LOOKABAUGH I, Albert L. Lookabaugh am presently employed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region VI, Denton, Texas as an Emergency Management Officer. I also serve as the Chairperson of the Regional Assistance Committee (RAC), the interagency committee which, among other things, reviews and comments upon Radiological Emergency Response Plans.
Prior to employment with FEMA I worked for its predecessor agency, the Defense Civil Preparedness Agency, Department of Defense (1966-1977)
(DCPA). While employed by DCPA I worked in both a management capacity, assessing the use of agency resources and funds, and as a Regional Field Specialist. In the latter capacity, my responsibilities included the development and implementation of emergency plans and the coordination of Federal, State and local emergency planning efforts.
I was also employed by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, as a special agent (1962-1966). During that period I worked extensively with State and local police and sheriff departments in investigating and coordinating multijurisdictional police efforts.
I received a Bachelor of Science Degree from Oklahoma State University in 1959. I received additional training in the Army (1959-1961), as a special agent, and have completed a number of courses related to emergency planning and preparedness.
-