ML20054E731

Testimony of Lecker Re Commission Questions 3 & 4.Human Responses to Radiological Emergencies Do Not Differ Materially than Response to Other Emergencies.Psychological & Behavioral Assumptions Valid.Related Correspondence

ML20054E731
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	06/07/1982
From:	Lecker S CONSOLIDATED EDISON CO. OF NEW YORK, INC., POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
To:
Shared Package
ML20054E727	List: ML20054E726 ML20054E731 ML20054E734 ML20054E748
References
ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8206140115
Download: ML20054E731 (18)

Text

r MTED C01utFSPO.N. DDiC5 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges:

Louis J. Carter, Chairman Frederick J. Shon Dr. Oscar H. Paris

---

x In the Matter of ) Docket Nos.

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, ) 50-247 SP INC. (Indian Point, Unit No. 2) 50-286 SP

)

POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK June 7, 1982 (Indian Point, Unit No. 3) )

---

x ,

i I

LICENSEES' TESTIMONY OF SIDNEY LECKER, M.D.

ATTORNEYS FILING THIS DOCUMENT:

l Charles Morgan, Jr. Brent L. Brandenburg MORGAN ASSOCIATES, CHARTERED CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY 1899 L Street, N.W. OF NEW YORK, INC.

Washington, D.C. 20036 4 Irving Place (202) 466-7000 Ne York New York 10003 1

f I

l l 8206140115 820607 PDR ADOCK 05000247 l T PDR i . .

M ..

7 e

i 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page-I. INTRODUCTION ...............,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 1 II. GENERAL ASPECTS OF BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE ................................ 3 '

III. l HUMAN RESPONSE TO RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCIES .............................. 6 IV. CONCLUSION ................................ 12 i

I l

}

i l

l l

I I

l 1

1

- l TESTIMONY I. INTRODUCTION Purpose of Testimony My name is Sidney Lecker, M.D. I am a board certified practicing psychiatrist with my office at 320 East 65th Street, New York, New York. This testimony addresses Commission Ques-tions 3 and 4 herein and relates to Board Contentions 3.2, 3.3, 3.7, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.7. The purpose of my testimony is to demonstrate:

(A) that human response to radiological emergencies j does not differ materially from response to non-radiological emergencies; (B) that psychological and behavioral assumptions underlying radiological emergency planning are valid; and i

(C) that the sociological conclusions of Dr. Russell Dynes regarding human response to radiological emergencies are supported by well-established psychological principles.

l t

I i

I Personal and Professional Qualifications A. General qualifications.

A copy of my resume is annexed hereto. While as my' resume indicates, I have been involved in scholarship and prac-

! tice in several areas of psychiatry, I am principally a child psychiatrist and have extensive experience in the area of human stress.

l I

b My experience spans a wide range, including teaching, 1

[publicinterestwork,privatepractice,andconsultingfor corporations. I have devoted considerable time to public lservicework,bothinsideandoutsideofgovernment. From 1972

) ,

I;,to 1974, I was the State of New York's chief child psychiatrist llandchildren'sserviceadministrator,holdingthepositionof q

I 1

Assistant Commissioner for Children's Service, New York State

' Department of Mental Hygiene. -

Il b

For the past'several years, I have been principally engaged in writing, research, and private practice. During this l ' period, I have also performed volunteer public interest consulting services for the Legal Aid Society and others, on behalf of the mentally retarded residents of the Willowbrook State School in Staten Island.

l

[ b

s b,

< l i

B. Experience in radiological matters.

I am among a very small group of professionals with any substantial experience in the area of human response to radiological emergencies. I became interested in this area of study several years ago in connection with my work on human stress. Because of my experience and reputation in this new field, I have had extensive contact with government officials,

(

[utilityexecutivesandplantworkers,publicinterestgroups,

{and the communities in areas surrounding nuclear power plants, l

jincluding Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and Diablo Canyon in California. Among the observation and consulting I have done has been my work connected with the Three Mile Island accident.

II. GENERAL ASPECTS OF BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE I

O Human response to an emergency does not depend on q!

the type of emergency involved. Rather, human beings respond j

psychologically to the stress caused by the emergency, not to l l I

the emergency itself. Hence, there are predictable human  !

lresponsescommontoanyemergency,whetheritbeaflood, rob-bery, or radiological accident.

Stress is caused by any type of change in a person's life or environment. As noted above, there are predictable human reactions to stress.

I i

l

A. Adults generally react to stress by respond-ing obediently to leaders and sources of authority, ar.d instructions, particularly in the event of an emergency.

As a general principle, people under stressful sit-uations require and seek leadership. Particularly in the ini-tial phases of a reaction to disaster, they become responsive to authority and idealize leadership. Studies also show that the presence of bystanders who define the situation as one in which people need help encourages pro-social behavior. The combination of strong leadership, a plan of action, and useful participation in creating a solution reduces individual stress.

Experimental studies in the Tavistock Human Relations litera-ture confirm that when groups are put under stress in circum-stances in which no leadership or structure is provided, the l group will quickly evolve a pattern of spontaneous leader-l- ship and followership in which the followers will receptively respond to the directions of those assuming the roles of leader, or to an established plan of action. Of course, the ; sponse is usually even more positive where there is an established leader to whom people can look to assume control.

B. Children generally react to stressful situations by (a) looking to adults who show leadership; and/or (b) productive use of optimistic anticipation.

Children generally react better than adults to e

l t

i stressful situations. This occurs for one or both of two  ;

reasons. I First, much as adults look to leaders in time of emergency, children look to adults.

Children look to adults (who often are, but need not be, their parents) with absolute optimism and confidence that the adults are capable of imple-menting an effective response. Knowing that children are depen-dent upon them, adults are further encouraged to follow appropri-ate instructions and carry out their responsibilities. l l

Children also, unlike adults, productively use op-i timistic anticipation to deal with the stress of an emergency.

Because of their inability to execute a solution themselves, 1 children use their creative imagination to anticipate a pleasant 1

solution to a crisis. Based upon my years of experience and

}

research as a child psychiatrist and my Three Mile Island work,

(

I I have no doubt that these principles would apply in the event of a radiological emergency at Indian Point or elsewhere.

Again, such reactions would occur regardless of the nature of the emergency, since they are responses to stress -

not to the particular type of emergency.

Studies of stress conditions during non-radiological evacuations have demonstrated that responses to stress during

- __ , _ . ___ l

I evacuations are generally consistent with the principles set forth in this section.

III. HUMAN RESPONSE TO RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCIES Human response to radiological emergencies does not differ materially from response to non-radiological emergen-cies. My conclusion is based not only on my testimony above, but on my work and research in connection with Three Mile Island and other radiological matters.

l I strongly disagree with each of the contentions in this proceeding which suggest that human response to radio-logical emergencies is somehow distinguishable. Such conten-tions are unsupported by psychological theory or empirical evidence. The contentions appear to contain three principal attacks on the asssumptions underlying radiological emergency planning: (1) that emergency workers cannot be depended upon to perform their tasks; (2) that the public will panic and not follow emergency instructions; and (3) that radiological hazards can be distinguished because of their " invisible" character. None of these arguments, however, has any merit.

l l Emergency Workers Can be Expected l

To Perform Their Tasks Emergency personnel and others with defined roles t

1

l 1

l can be expected to fulfill their roles in a radiological eme rgency. This is true for the traditional emergency workers such as police and fire fighters, as well as other persons with roles in a radiological emergency response such as teachers and bus drivers.

A. Traditional emergency workers.

Little need be said about the responsiveness of traditional emergency workers such as police and fire fighters.

These personnel have chosen their professions because they seek, rather than fear, crisis mastery. They know that their jobs may at times be unpleasant and involve risks, yet they willingly accept such tasks because of their desire to aid the public and play a useful and much-appreciated role. Just as a fire-l l

man will not hesitate to rush into a burning building to save a life, so too can emergency workers be expected to enter the zone requiring evacuation in a radiological emergency. The experience during the Three Mile Island accident certainly bears this out.

Indeed, an interesting finding during the Three Mile Island accident was that off-duty plant personnel entered the area' to offer their help, rather than remaining outside or departing the area. They too, it seems, preferred the security of their I

designated roles more than they sought to put distance between themselves and the plant.

l l

L. .

I l

B. Other emergency workers.

Personnel with defined roles in an emergency plan can be expected to perform such roles in a radiological emer-gency. This applies to non-traditional emergency workers such as bus drivers, as well as traditional emergency personnel.

During an emergency, increased pressure falls upon personnel of all types to conform with pro-social behavioral patterns. This well-known principle stems from two factors.

Il First, having a defined role makes one feel pctent 6

and useful as opposed to being in a state of helplessness l-q that might otherwise occur in the emergency. Second, the I f fact that this is a "public" emergency and one's behavior l is known to others has been found to enhance pro-social re-sponses.

Thus, a bus driver who knows that many others are dependent upon him for emergency aid is likely to perform his assigned task with alacrity. Similarly, a school teacher charged with the custody of his school children can be expected

! to follow instructions for care of those children. My observa-tions at Three Mile Island indicate that the teachers there did exactly that. There was no evidence of any staff or teacher panic, but only evidence of teachers remaining at their posts and an orderly evacuation.

m I

For these reasons, I have little doubt about the reliability of personnel assigned tasks under the emergency plan.

The Public Will Not Panic and Will Follow Instructions As I stated earlier, people have very predictable re-actions to stress, regardless of its cause. The principal re-l action is a greater level of dependency on order and authority, d

v j Because of this desire for order, instruction and leader ' 's, the public would turn to whatever sources existed during a radiological emergency to relieve their stress. In the case of Indian Point, as much as certain individuals may l i

lnormallycriticizetheGovernor, their County Executive, the I

u

]emergencyplanningbrochure,ortheemergencyplans, they would 3 lturntosuchsourcesoforderandinstructiontofulfilltheir psychological needs in an emergency.

Public panic cannot be expected to occur as long as some form of order exists, such as the emergence of a leader or the presence of an emergency plan. Moreover, as Dr. Dynes has correctly pointed out, even in the absence of such leadership, j there is no historical evidence of panic during any of the many mass evacuations which have taken place. There is a well-established psychological principle underlying this result, i

i known as " isolation of affect." People accept the reality of an emergency without drastic emotion, instead withholding

" payment of their emotional dues" until safety has bcan achieved. A common example is the exhaustion felt after a stressful encounter.

Panic is avoided because panic is an emotional reac-tion.

The human body responds physically and psychologically to an emergency by deferring emotional release until the per-ceived danger has subsided.

An important point regarding both the public and emergency workers is that their own predictions as to how they would respond to a radiological emergency are of limited value.

i I assign little credence to predictions that bus drivers will not show up or people will ignore the plan, even when such predictions are made by the individualo themselves.

Once an emergency sequence begins, the human mind and body mobilize, and an entirely new attitude emerges. Even the most ardent critics of an evacuation plan can be expected to follow that plan, if for no other reason than because it exists.

Put another way, if the emergency plan is the established blue-print for response to an emergency, people will turn to it when l

the emergency occurs.

I

t l

I l

It is nearly impossible, without rigorous simulation such as aircraft pilot training, to forecast an aberrant response i

by an individual to an emergency in the absence of such an emer-gency. On the other hand, empirical post-emergency evidence and the mainstream of psychological scholarship show repeatedly that the public and emergency workers have reacted in an orderly, obedient manner, and have not panicked. 1 I

I Thus, the level of confidence people presently have in I'

the emergency plan has no bearing on their reaction during an actual emergency.

l, The " Invisibility" of the Threat Does hl Not Enhance Fear or Create Panic i

The principal distinction apparently raised by the intervenors between radiological and non-radiological emergen-l

'cies is that radiation cannot be detected by the human senses.

Again, I have never seen a shred of empirical evidence in sup-port of this distinction. I il l

If anything, the fact that the threat is impercept- {

ible should reduce fear, rather than enhance it. As an example well known to psychiatrists, a surgical patient is far less afraid of prolonged anesthesia than he is of the surgeon's knife, despite the fact that the anesthesia is much more dangerous. But the more visible threat, the knife, is the greater fear producer.

I find it simply incredible -- as a matter of psycho-logy or even common sense -- to assert that a firefighter would be more afraid to enter a potentially contaminated area with a dosimeter than he would be to enter a b?azing building in danger of imminent collapse.

IV. CONCLUSION Available evidence leads to the conclusion that human response to radiological emergencies would not differ materially from response to non-radiological emergencies. Hence, the human response assumptions underlying radiological emergency planning are valid.

I i

! BONEY LECKER. N1.D.

320 EAST GSTM STREET MW YOft( P4W YC8t( 10021 (31313e62220 i

o .

i l DATE & PLACE OF Montreal, Quebec BIRTH:

May 24,1937 CITIZENSHIP: U.S.

SOCIAL SECURITY NO:

300-42-1170 N.Y. MEDICAL LICENSE: 114708 FEDERAL 'NARCCTICS LICENSE (DEA)  : A L 5490127 EDUCATION:

B.S. McGill University, 1958- Honors Blochemistry l M.D.,McGill University, 1962 POSTGRADUATE TRAINING:

Internship: Jewish General Hosptial l Montreal, Quebec, 1962-63 Residency:

University of Cincinnati, Dept. of Psychiatry McGill University Diploma Course in Psychiatry PROFESSIONAL BOARD and Child Psychiatry CERTIFICATIONS: College of Physicians and Surgeons, Quebec,1967 Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Canada -1973 American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology in General Psychiatry - 1971 # 11290 American Board of Psychiatry and Necrology in Child Psychiatry - 1975 # 837 ACADEMIC AND/OR PRO-l FESS 10NAL EXPERIENCE: Lecturer, Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, McGill 1968-70 Lecturer, Faculty of Education, MacDonald College of McGill University (1969-70)

Assistant Professor, Dept. of Psychiatry and Child Study Center, Yale University 1971-72

( Assistant Professor. Psychiatry, Mt. Sinai

! School of Medicine of THE C.U.N.Y. 1972 present l

l

~ ~

0THER PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: Censultcnt, Tha Commission of Inquiry into th2 Non-Medical Uso of Drugs (Ccntd )

Consultant, New York State Division for Youth s

Consultant, The 'ortage Fe ogram for Drug Dependencies (Montreal)

PAST & CURRENT CL!NICAL APPOINTMENTS: Director, Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Lakeshore General Hospital, Point Claire, Quebec.

1967-1969 Assistant Psychiatrist - Montreal Children's Hospital.

1967-1971 Assistant Commissioner for Children's Service New York State Department of Mental Hygiene 1572-1974 Attending Psychiatrist, Mt. Sinal Medical Center on Staff of Good Samaritan Hospital 1972 Founder and President of Corporate StressControl Services, Inc.

A corporate mental health service organization HONORS & AWARDS:

Sir William Mac Donald Scholarship - McGill, 1955 Graham-Petrie Scholarship - McGill,1956 University Scholarship - McGill, 1959 MEMBERSHIP lN PRO-FESS 10NAL SOCIETIES:

Fellow of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS:

LECKER,S. ,et al, "Brief intervention: A Pilot Walk-in Clinic in Suburban Churches."

_The Canadian Psychiatric Association Journal, Vol. 16,1971.

LECKER,5., Coping with Drug Abuse, A Comniureity Social Action Approach.

Canada's Mental Health- S upp l enen t No. (4, March-April.1970.

LECKER,S., Coping with Drug Abuse, An Indigenous Multi-disciplinary Clinic for Youth. _ Canada's Mental Health - Supplement No. 64 March-April 1970.

LECKER,S., Adolescence - A Cultural Dilemma.

Vol V, No. I- Spring 197C McGill Journal of Education.

- SCIENTIFIC

. PUBLICATIONS-(C:nt.)

i l

LECKER,S., Changes in the Youth Culture, The Doctor's Role. j Guest Editorial, international Journal of Surgery, Sept. 1971. Vol56, No.3 LEC KE R, S. , innovative Services for Youth, Tape, Behavioral Science Tape Library,1972 LECKER S., Family Factors, Interpersonal Competence and Drug Addiction.

The Addiction Therapist, Vol.1,No.2 - Spring 1975 LECKER,S. , et al, New Approaches to Adolescent Psychotherapy, A Therapuet ic System Approach. The Pediatric Clinics of North America 20: 883, November 1973 LECKER,S., Family Therapies. Treatment Methods of Mental Disorders. (Chapter)

A Handbook, Edited by Benjamin Wolman, published by Van Norstrand Reinhold 1976.

LECKER S. , and BOYNTON, G. , Psychological Ef fects of Abortion (Chapter)

Psychological Aspects of Obstretrics and Gynecology, published Medical Economics Company ME Book Division, Editor Benjamin Wolman.

BOYNTON,G. and LECKER, S., Psychological Aspects of Miscarriage and Stillbirth.

Psychological Aspects of Obstrectrics and Gynecology. Published by Medical Economics Company ME Book Division, Editor Benjamin Wolman.

LECKER, S., The Natural Vay to Stress Control, (Book), Grosset & Dunlap,1978 LECKER, S., The Money Personality, (Book) Simon and Schuster, March 1979 LECKER, S., Who Are You (Book) Simon and Schuster, May, 1980 LECKER, S. , Family Ties (Book) Vyden Books, December, 1980 PAPERS 1964- Quebec Society of Crimonology " Criminal Acting-Out as Part of a Depressive State". (Multiple co-authors - Junior author).

1965- Fifth International Criminological Congress "The Role of Guilt and Shame in the Genesis of Criminal Behavior."

1975- Paper, 31st international Congress on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Bangkok, Thailand, February,1975 " Family Factors,

!nterpersonal Competence and Drug Addiction".

1975- Paper, National Drug Abuse Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, AprII, 1975: "Therapeut!c Community: A Generation Later".

1976- Therapeutic Communities of America, Washington, D. C.

" Sexual Problems in the T.C."

J .

GUEST LECTURES 1960- Yole Univarsity, D2p3rtment of Psychictry - Child g GIVEN: Study Ccnter "Th2 Devalepment of o Child-Csntered Comunity Psychictry Prcgrcm."

' 1969- Allan Memorial Institute

~

" Community Psychiatry in a Middle Class Suburb."

1970- Allan Memorial Institute "An Indigenous Clinic for s

Youth in Montreal."

1970- University of Sherbrooke Medical School "An Indigenous Clinic for Youth in Montreal."

1971- University of Southern Ca11fornia, School of Medicine,

" Changes in the Youth Culture, The Doctor's Role."

1971- New Haven County Medical Association, "A Clinical Pathological Conference on Quebec Medicine."

1971- Montreal Medical-ChirugicL1 Society, " Youth, Our Medical Pariahs."

1971- Litchfield County Medical Association, "Can and Should a Health Care Scheme Be Socially Efficient."

1972- University of Southern California and California Regional Medical Programs, Area V, "Where it's At."

1972- Middlesex County Medical Association, " Health Care Dilemmas and Physician Responsibility."

1974- Lecture at Good Samaritan Hospital, " Child Abuse and Family Problems."

1978- Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry -- " Stress in the Corporate Setting." (Chicago) 1978- University of California Santa Cruz-

" Stress Control in Organizations." (Monterey) 1978- Autogenic Systems Seminar for Health Professionals --

" Stress Control in Organization." (San Francisco) 1978- Foundation for Accounting Education --

" Stresses of Corporate Life." (Cherry Hill)

COMMITTEES New York County Medical Society, Committee on Industrial Medicine Industrial Psychiatry Group l

l

- _. . . . .