ML20073R347

Motion Requesting Initiation of Studies on Human Response to Radiological Emergencies,Risks to Individuals Living Near Site & Difficulty of Evacuation in Emergency

ML20073R347
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	04/26/1983
From:	Potterfield A PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP, NEW YORK, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20073R287	List: ML20073R305 ML20073R326 ML20073R332 ML20073R347 ML20073R351 ML20073R353
References
ISSUANCES-SP, TAC-44117, TAC-44118, TAC-46259, TAC-46260, TAC-48851, TAC-48852, NUDOCS 8305030641
Download: ML20073R347 (8)

Text

i. .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM4ISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK ) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP j (Indian Point Unit 2) ) 50-286 SP z

)

POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YGRK )

(Indian Point Unit 3) ) April 26 , 1983 i

i AFFIDAVIT OP KAI T. ERIKSON AND AIBERT J. SOINIT IN SUPPORT OF UNION OF ENCERNED SCIENTISTS, NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROI;P, AND PARENTS CONCERNED ABOUT INDIAN POIhT l

l l

State of Cbnnecticut Cbunty of IkN Haven I,

Kai T. Erikson, Ph. D.

Professor of Sociology and American Studies, and Editor, Yale Review Yale University and I, e Albert J. $ 1 nit, M.D.

Sterling Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry, and Director, Child Study Center Yale University being duly sworn, state the followirg:

8305030641 830419 gDRADOCK 05000247 PDR EXHIBIT A

page 2

1. During March 1983, each of us separately appeared, gave testimony, and was cross-exantined before the Atmic Safety and Licensing Board on behalf of Parents Concerned About Indian Point, the New York Public Interest Besearch Group, and the Union of Cbncerned Scientists, intervenors in the ASIB's special investigation of Indian Point.

2. Each of us has read portions of the Indian _ Point Padiological Dnergency Besponse Plan (RERP), the public information booklet, " Indian Point Dnergency Planning and You," ard testimony and transcripts of cross-examination of sme other witnesses in the ASIB proceeding (including the direct testmeny and the cross-examinaticn of Drs. Russell Dynes and Sidney Iecker, witnesses for the licensees).

3. Each of us is aware of proposed revisions to the Westchester RERP which would result in setool children being subject to "early dismissal" instead of evacuation to reception centers outside the 10-mile Dnergency Planning Zone (EPZ) in the event of an accident at Indian Point.

4. It is apparent to each of us that the develognent and evaluation of off-site mergency plans for Indian Point has rested largely on theories and assumptions about h m an response to emergencies which, though applicable in part, do not provide a sufficient basis for predicting how the people arourd Indian Point are likely to respoM to a radiological accident at the plant-nor, therefore, for concluding that the plans will work as designed,

5. Indian Point mergency planners assume (1) that residents of the 10-mile EPZ will respond in prescribed and prelictable ways to instructions issued prior to and during a nuclear mergency, (2) that local officials and mergency personnel will fulfill the roles assigned to the in the plans,

page 3 i

and (3) that people living or working outside the 10-mile EPZ will res nd r I

amw iately r to ad hoc reassurances and instructions and will not omplicate i or inpede energency procedures for those closer to the plant.

6. Proponents of the "early dismissal" plan for school children assume i (1) that sending children hme during a radiological emergency is equivalent -

to releasing then during a snowstorm or when a school heating system breaks  !

down, (2) that rapid notification of responsible adults (parents or pre-designated surrogates) for each and every child is possible, (3) that a

) sufficient nunber of school buses can be rounded up at a moment's notice l

l during school hours, end (4) that, whetter by bus or on foot, all school children will arrive hme quickly, safely, and to a waiting adult.

! 7. Existing emergency plans have been based primarily on observation of human behavior in non-radiological energencies, remote in time and place 1

fran Indian Point. It is the judgenent of each of us that such data are ,

j relevant and applicable only in part, and cannot form a sufficient basis for

}

predicting how residents, officials, and energency personnel in the region surrounding Indian Point are likely to respond during a radiological energency.

8. 'Ihough there are sme similarities among different sorts of l emergencies, each is in sme respects different frm others. Studies of  ;

the accident at 'Ihree Mile Island, for example, indicare that a large proportion of the affected population behaved in ways that could not have been predicted fran a knowledge of the entire literature on non-nuclear disasters.

9. Each of us believes that there is ample reason to expect that the t

people at risk will respond to an accident at Indian Point in unique ways, L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -

1 page 4 influenced by site-specific, regional characteristics such as the nature of the local terrain, the ret. work of local roads, th: populaticr. density, etc.

10. 'Ihough the existing body of non-nuclear disaster literature can provide theories and leads, only studies of the persons now living within the region at risk frun Indian Point can supply the data needed to test the theories and predict the range of responses likely to occur to an accident at the plant. 'Ibese studies can be designed in such a way as to elicit, anong other things, information about how respondents have reacted to and behaved during other emergencies they may have experienced in the past.

11. No one research method is empletely reliable for predicting future behavior. When forecasting human response, a prudent behavioral scientist will gather and make use of all relevant and available information:

extrapolation of past trends and experience taken in conjunction with data collected by means of sophisticated survey and interview techniques.

12. 'Ihe techrology of survey research-including statistical sampling, interviewing, and cmputer analysis-has been highly developed over four decades of acadmic research and ccmnercial application. The success and value of this technology is generally recognized and routinely utilized by government, acadmia, the press, and business-including the nuclear power industry. Cbn Fdison and the Power Authority have th mselves ocmnissioned and made use tf several sample surveys.

13. It is the professional judgment of each of us, therefore, that a series of survey and interview stulies should be performed in the region potentially affected by an accident at Indian Point in order, first, to test the validity of mergency planning assuuptions, and second, to provide

page 5 F

the site-specific information essential for realistic energency planning.

Irvka, it is the view of each of us that mergency planning for Indian Point should have begun with such studies, and that adequate and workable j plans cannot be attained until a proper human response data base exists.

14. In the absence of the data such studies would provide, each of us subnits that there does not now exist a proper or valid basis for concluding that the Indian Point emergency plans are " adequate to prctect public health'and safety."

15. Brief descriptions of the studies each of us believes to be necessary follow:

I. A survey of the information, attitudes, and inter 31ons of residents of the region, including but not limited

! to the 10-mile EPZ. 'Ihis stix 3y should include the kinds

! of questions asked in the Suffolk (bunty survey, the

> Westchester Cbunty survey conducted by Richard Altschuler, and parts of the survey done by Yankelovich, Skelly and

White in June 1981. One major objective would be to j predict the proportion of people,at various distances up to 50 or nore miles frm the plant, who would attempt to evacuate spontaneously under various circurstances.

II. A survey of the information, attitudes, and intentions of the sergency workers, including bus and ambulance drivers, both those living within the 10-mile EPZ and those who live outside but who are expected to partici-pate in an evacuation. This study should focus on the issue of whether they can and will fulfill the roles assigned to them in the plans, and possible obstacles

! to such participation. 'Ibe principal obstacle to be assessed would be the belief of sme that their primary and overriding obligatien is to the safety of their own families. Other factors to be explored would be their i

awareness of the availability of necessary training, l equignent, vehicles, monitoring devices, and the like.

1 1

III. A three-part study relevant to planning for the evacuation of school children. The first, attitudinal part, would study parents, teachers, and school administrators to ascertain their information, attitudes and beliefs regarding school evacuation to help predict their behavior in and l

1 i

page 6 preference for alternative plans: (a) to dimiss scnool children at the alert stage of an accident, (b) to evacuate chileiren direc:tly frm schools to reception centers, (c) to be prepared to htpleent either of the preceding plans depending on the courw of the accident, or (d) other possibilities which may merge frcm suggestions nvxle by the respondents out of their detailed knowledge of the concrete probles involved.

> 'Ihe second part of the school study would be a derographic

! study of households containing children focused on obtain-i ing factual data of the following kinds: (a) the nature of the fcmily situation during school hours (adult at hee or I

at work; where parents may he contacted and how; availability

! of relative or neigd or willing and able to take charge; car at hme or not; marbers of family outside EPZ whose

, childre attend school inside EPZ, and vice versa), (b) how i

the children termally get hme (walk, bas, other), and (c) how many children in each family attend which schools and

! knowledge of designated rel#caticn centers.

'Ihe third part of the study should include (a) a review of the actual past experience of each school in early dismissal situations, and (b) a feasibility test in a representative

> sample of schools to determi.~2 how many parents (or their surrogates) can be contacted without advance warning during j

a school day, and how long it takes to do so.

Eps in pediatrics, child develo; rent, and other relevant professions should be utilized at every step--in the design and implementation of the

( research, in the interpretation and reporting of the results, and in the l

ultimate application of the finds) to emergency plans for the schools.

n

16. It is the conclusion of each of us that until the above studies are conducted, the Atmic Safety and Licensing Board and the Nuclear Regulatory Chmiission lack a sufficient basis to determine either the workability of the Indian Point Radiological Dnergency Besponse Plan cr the adequacy at any given time of preparedness to protect the public in case of an accident at Indian Point.

0 ~

i j

' I<ai T. Erikson 1

{ Subscribed and Sworn to i *e before me this /Mday of April, 1983. ~ ~Alber1;]J."Solnit w AJL,A l i" 1 * ? % te m s

i AFFIDAVIT l STATE OF NEW YORK )

) SS:

COUNTY OF NEW YORK)

I

1. I, Robert R. Holt, first being duly sWrn, depose and say: I am Professor of Psychology at New York University; ray specialittes are i

clinical and social psychology. Before obtaining my Ph.D in psychology at Harvard University, I worked as an interviewer for the Ilmo Roper organizaticn and briefly ran a small independent polling organization, the New England Public Opinion Research Association. $ first post-Ph.D.

job was as a Study Director in the Division of Program Surveys, B. A. E.,

f in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (for ray publications in this field, i

! see Nos. 2, 6, and 25 in my bibliography, attached). After World War II, I learned clinical psychology at the Menninger Foundation in Topeka, Kansas, where I subsequently became Director of the Psychological Staff.

Since 1953, I have beer. at New York University, where I founded the i Research Center for Mental Health, and directed it for about fifteen years. A principal theme of ray scientific work has been the prediction of hutaan behavior, on which I have published several papers and a book, Methods in Clinical Psychology, Vol. II: Prediction and Research, New York: Plenura (1978). During recent years, I have renewed my interest in ,

survey research. $ 1980 paper (no.118 in bibliography) reports results i

I  :

EXHIBIT B

prge 2 of a national survey done in collaboration with Daniel Yankelovich, for whose firm I have been a consultant concerning several other surveys.

2. My recent work has also brought me to the study of stress (see no.123 in my bibliography). I participated in the discussion of  ;

psychological stress in the vicinity of the Three Mile Island nuclear power plants, held by the MITRE Corporation in McLean, Virginia, and was f asked to prapare a commentary on that discussion presenting my theory of i the impact of radiological accidents on psychological health. This  !

commentary was submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and appears  !

j in NUREG/CP-0026 (no.122 in bibliography). I also made a thorough study i of the relevant research on human response to the TMI accident, and most  !

t

recetly was invited to present a survey of that material at the .

International Forum on Nuclear Energy in Middletown, Pa., March 28-30, 1983.

! 3. I make this affidavit at the request of the Union of Concerned Scientists and the New York Public Interest Research Group Inc., to j

comaent on the utility of sample surveys as means of predicting human behavior in general, and of predicting the responses of people to an l l

I accident at Indian Point in particular. I have been given to read the

testimony presented in this proceeding on these subjects by Drs. Lecker and Dynes.

4. Surveys typically collect several types of data:

a) factual information that can be directly reported (for example, "Have you received an information brochure about l t

Indian Point?");

i l

t I

I page 3 b) knowledge possessed by the respondent, indicating his or her degree of acquaintance with relevant data (for example, "What are you supposed to do if you hear a siren warning of an accident at Indian Point?");

c) beliefs (for example, "Have you received a dangerous dose of radiation?");

d) attitudes (for example, "How much trust do you have in statements about ndClear power made by Con Edison?");

e) values (for example, "Which is more important, a man's duty to his job, or to his family?");

f) statements of intention (for example, "What do you plan to do to prepare your family for a possible evacuation of this area?"); and, g) stateuents of probable future behavior under hypothetical circumstances (for example, "What would you do if there were an accident at Indian Point and people within 5 miles were advised to stay indoors with windows shut?")

5. It should be evident that no sharp dividing lines can be drawn between these classes of questions, or the kinds of data they provide.

Moreover, tne aoove listing is not exhaustive or definitive. My point is to illustrate some of the many kinds of data that can be obtained from surveys, and to suggest some of the different ways in which they are useful in a scientific attempt to predict behavior.

6. Consider the issue of greatest interest, behavior at the time of a possible accident serious enough to require the evacuation of a given I