ML20086L335
| ML20086L335 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 02/04/1984 |
| From: | Holt J PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP, NEW YORK |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8402080193 | |
| Download: ML20086L335 (20) | |
Text
~
/ 4 i 4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOCE TED U$iHC l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS: 84 FEB-7 P12:13 l
Nunzio'J. Palladino, Chairman , crm: ,y qc n p I Victor Gilinsky CCCd ila.;e dir .
Thomas M. Roberts MG
, James K. Asselstine Frederick M. Bernthal In the Matter of )
) !
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK )
) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP (Indian Point, Unit 2) ) 50-286 SP
)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK )
) February 4, 1984 (Indian Point, Unit 3) )
)
COMMENTS ON ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMISSION REGARDING INDIAN POINT On October 24, 1983, Recommendations to the Commission (Recommendations) were issued by an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) convened to address seven questions regarding Indian Point propounded by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in its Memorandum and Order of January 8,1981. The Recommendations come more than four years after the filing of a petition by the Union of Concerned Scientists which prompted this inquiry into the safety of the two nuclear plants at Indian Point. 25 Miles north of New York City, Indian Point is the nation's most densely populated reactor cite.
These Comments on the Recommendations are submitted in response to 4
Commission order dated November 7, 1983.
~
!- 8402080193 840204 PDR ADOCK O$000247 Q PDR n
r 'q INTERVENORS - p;gs 2 Intervenors offer the following response not in the belief that it will dissuade a Commission majority from its apparent commitment to the continued -
operation of Indian Point Units 2 and 3. Nor do we submit these comments in the hope that this Commission could somehow be persuaded to overrule Recommen-dations characterized by tortured reasoning and a consistent refusal to draw ineluctable inferences, and in some cases, a demonstrated inability to consider testimony contrary to the deeply rooted predilictions of the Board. Rather, we submit these comments to remind this Commission, for a last time in the context of this special investigatory proceeding, of the extremely high stakes involved at Indian Point; to question significant procedural matters attendant to a " discretionary ajudication investigative in nature"; and to raise some methodological issues which arise from the Board's conduct of the investigatien and are inherent in its Recommendations.
In this context, then, Intervenors comment upon five issues relating to the Recommendations and to the hearing process that gave rise to them.
- 1. The decision by the Commission, as interpreted by the Board, that no party should bear the " burden of persuasion," effectively placed the burden on those opposed to continued operation of Indian Point; (Recommendations, Footnote 4 at 7, 8)
- 2. The Board failed to conduct a full and complete investigation and made certain findings that were based on little or no evidence, in or out of the, record.
- 3. On a number of crucial issues, the Board failed to arrive at conclusions which logically followed fron its own findings of fact. The Board sidestepped its responsibility to recommend shutdown in the face of obvious findings of inadequate safety and acceptable costs.
INTERVENORS - prge 3
- 4. The Board imposed evidentiary standards which effectively precluded Intervenors from presenting probative and credible evidence and infor-mation on a number of significant issues. The Board refused to con-sider relevant information vital to the outcome of this investigation.
- 5. By relying heavily, both during the hearings and in its conclusions, _
on the prospect of future improvements in emergency planning and preparedness, the Board avoided reaching the conclusion that because Indian Point is currently not in compliance with emergency planning regulations, it should be shut down.
THE BOARD IMPROPERLY PLACED THE BURDEN OF PERSUASION ON OPPONENTS OF INDIAN POINT In its charge to the Board, this Commission ordered that "no party will have the burden of persuasion. . . ; if evidence on a particular matter is in equipoise, the Board's recommendations may be expected to reflect that fact."
(CLI-81,13 NRC 1, 5 n. 4 (1981), as revised, CLI-81-22,14 NRC 610 (1981) .
This statement allowed the Board to avoid deciding those issues where the evidence appeared in balance and to avoid difficult judgements. This matter is significant beyond the specifics because the result of equipoise in the evi-dence is necessarily to allow the continuation of the status quo, that-is; no regulatory intervention in the licensing and operation of the two Indian Point reactors. In reality, an application of the "no burden" rule effectively shifted the true burden to those opposing continued plant operations. When faced with insurmountable or unrebutted evidence unfavorable to the licensees, the Board improperly used the " inconclusive" tag to justify a recommendation of continued operation. (See for example, Recommendations at 179-80, Letters of Agreement with Reception and Congregate Care Centers; 187-88, Public Notification;
\
INTERVENORS - page 4 192-93, Emergency Communications; 200-201, Protective Response.)
There is some suggestion that the Commission did not intend its guide-line on " burden of persuasion" to be used as a shield behind which the Board could shrink from its responsibilities. On the contrary, the Commission specifically stated that the Board was not bound by certain of the normal limitations of 10 CFR Part 2 in order to facilitate and further the Board's inquiry and to insure that recommendations would be made. (Recommendations, Footnote 4 at 7.) This guidance was not heeded by the Board, and was, in fact, defeated by the Board's repeated assertfons that the evidence was in-conclusive.
The frustration felt by Intervenors regarding this point stems from the fact that on a number of issues where the Board determined the evidence to be
" inconclusive," additional evidence was offered by those parties which the Board failed to admit or to pursue. (See Parents Concerned About Indian Point Motion for Extension of Time to Submit Testimony on Contention 6.2 of April 12, 1982, Attachment A. Extension of time to permit Dr. Alice Stewart and Dr. Berry Brazelton was denied by the Board. See also, denial of Dr. Arthur Zelman, -
Tr. 12408, and Dr. Robert Holt, Tr. 14450.)
One of the Board's most blatant failures to pursue evidence critical to the resolution of the Commission's emergency planning questions is shown by the Baard's refusal to allow Intervenors to conduct cross-examination on the draft Argonne National Laboratory verification analysis, or to expand the evidentiary record on this matter. The Argonne verification analysis supports and confirms much of the testimcny of Intervenor witnesses that emergency procedures, training, and resources were inadequate. Furthermore, it contains signficant and relevant evidence on some of the emergency planning matters which the Board labeled
/
INTERVENORS - pxgs 5
" inconclusive." Because the Argonne verification analysis represents one of the few attempts made by FEMA to verify that what is stated in the written emergency plans exists in fact, the Board's failure to ensure its inclusion in the record is especially egregious.
THE BOARD FAILED TO CONDUCT A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION Intervenors assert that the Board failed to conduct a thorough investi-gation in a number of crucial areas and made findings based on little or no evidence. The most glaring example of this is the Board determination regar-ding sheltering capability. The sheltering issue is absolutely crucial to an informed recommendation regarding the adequacy of emergency planning. Shel-tering may be the sole viable protective action in situations in which cvacua-tion is not possible, such as a rapidly developing accident or extremely adverse weather conditions. (Recommendations at 258.) In light of its finding that there are meteorological conditions during which evacuation would be impossible, had the Board also found that there was not adequate sheltering capability, it would have been left with no conceivable basis upon which to conclude that
" adequate protective actions can and will be taken in the ev,,cnt of a radio-logical emergency at Indian Point." (See, for example, Recommendations at 276.)
The findings in this area are not based on the evidence and could not be so predicated, because there was nc> probative evidence upon which the Board could base findings that sheltering is "an adequate alternative protective re-sponse." (Recommendations at 276.) In fact, the Board points out that
...although the State had not made a specific study of the sheltering capability of the EPZ, it assumed the EPZ contained enough dwellings and other buildings to provide adequate pro-tection for the population. (Recommendations at 309.) (Emphasis added)
\
INTERVENORS - page 6 The Commission is being asked to accept a crucial Board finding based ,
upon che unexamined assumptions of New York State. The Board could not be relying on FEMA judgements for its conclusions on the adequacy of sheltering, since the record shows, and the Recommendations concede, that FEMA had. con-ducted no analysis of sheltering capability and was relying upon the comforting but unsupported supposition that "The decisionmakers should have some reasonable understanding of the types of dwellings in the area." (Recommendations at 310.)
Intervenors outrage at a finding by the Board that adequate sheltering capability exists based upon these flimsy assumptions and suppositions is heightened by the Board's refusal to allow cross examination of government witnesses who might have shed some light on their actual understanding of the types of dwellings in the area. (Tr. 5159-5163.) Elsewhere representatives of the "decisionmakers" admitted that they have no specific information as to the type of house existing in Rockland and Westchester Counties, and again, cross examination in this area was curtailed. (Tr. 11358-59.)
The evidence does not support a finding that sheltering would be adequate
'in this area. The Board could have instituted its own inquiry into sheltering capability in the area affected by Indian Point. It was not free, however, to fill in the void in the record by speculation.
In the Indian Point' investigation, Intervenors repeatedly requested the Board to inquire into certain matters. (See, for example, attached motions.
Intervenors' Joint Motion Requesting the Board to Ensure the Completeness of the Record on Commission Questions Three and Four, April 25, 1983, Attachment B, and UCS/NYPIRG Motion Requesting the'ASLB and the NRC to Commission Studies on Human Response to Radiological Emergencies at Indian Point, April 26, 1983, At-tachment C. Both of these motions were denied at Tr. 15188.) In many such
INTERVENORS - pIge 7 instances, the Board's failure to look beyond what was brought into the hearing room and admitted into evidence resulted in findings of " inconclusive,"
even when it was apparent that there was another, albeit undeveloped, side to the issue.
{
Another example of the Board's failure to conduct a thorough investigation is apparent in its conclusion on the issue of whether or not a radiological accident at Indian Point, under certain specific meteorological conditions, could result in radioactive material being deposited in New York City. (Recommen- j dations at 69.) The Board noted the lack of evidence on this matter,'but again failed to pursue the facts. It is precisely because of the proximity of the l Indian Point reactors to New York City that these proceedings were ordered in i the first place. While conceding that ". . .it is possible that winds could I
transport such (radioactive) material from Indian Point to the City in the event of an accident," the Board remained passive on the keystone question of the ,
possible exposure to radiation of those who live and work in New York City.
The Commission charged its Board to investigate. This imperative neces-sarily includes a mandate and a responsibility to do more than to sit passively and wait for the parties to lay the evidence at it feet. For this reason, if for no other, this Commission should not accept the Board's recommendations regarding safety at Indian Point.
THE BOARD FAILED TO CONFORM ITS CONCLUSIONS WITH ITS FINDINGS OF FACT In many instances, the Board made findings of fact that were advocated by those who oppose the continued operation of the Indian Point reactors, yet it refused to draw the logical and necessary conclusion and to make the recommenda-tions that incluctably follow from those findings.
r- 3
-INTERVENORS - page 8 In its consideration of Commission Question 6, the Board concludes that
". . .the cost penalty for eliminating Indian Point is substantial. . ." (Recommen-
- dations at 397.) The Board states that the increase to Con Edison customers (the majority of whom live in New York City)' will be 1.87%. (Recommendations at 398.) This is, in fact, a cost similar to that projected by a number of par-ticipants in the hearings, and specifically, nearly equaly to that projected by witnesses sponsored by the elected representatives of New York City, and described as totally acceptable in the proposed findings of the New York City Council Members.
The determination that the cost of shutdown is " substantial" is necessarily based on the Board members' personal notion cf what the word means in the con-text of New York City. This is a determination that these Board members are singularly unqualified to make, especially in the face of assertions by the elected representatives of those who will pay the cost, Members of the New York City Council, that the increased safety is well worth the minimally in-creased costs.
In its findings on the emergency planning questions, the Board states, "As of the close of the record, emergency planning at Indian Point was inadequate in that the present plans did not meet several of the sixteen mandatory stan-dards of 10 CFR 50.47 (b) and were not in conformance with NRC/ FEMA guidelines."
(Recommendations at vi.) Indeed, throughout its findings, the Board notes that emergency planning and preparedness at Indian Point is inadequate or in-complete. (See, for example, Recommendations at 172, 287, Rockland County; 185, Notification to E:nergency Workers; 187-188, Public Notification; 192, Communica-tions with Support Personnel; 195-196, Public Education and Information; 200-202, Protective Response;. 211-212, Radiological Emergency Response Training; 260, Meteorological Conditions, 266-267, Evacuating Schoolchildren; 283-286, Pro-
INTERVENORS - pags 9 l
I I -
tecting the Mobility Impaired.) Intervenors cannot comprehend how, in the face of its own compelling findings, the Board nevertheless failed to con-clude that the Indian Point plants should be shut down.
THE BOARD IMPOSED EVIDENTIARY STANDARDS ON INTERVENOR TESTIMONY WHICH EFFECTIVELY EXCLUDED INFORMATION VITAL TO THE OUTCGME OF THIS INVESTIGATION The Board went out of its way to insult the " quality of Intervenor witnesses." The Board stated:
Although the Intervenors presented a plethora of witnesses, only a few had any expertise to offer. To a great extent the remain-der of their testimony had little, if any, probative value.
In addition, upon review of the proposed findings, we find that the Intervenors strung together citations to individual testi-mony, each of which related only to a very narrow point with respect to a particular county plan; and Intervenors then of-fered the string citation in support of a broad generalized criticism of all the emergency plans and of preparedness. (Recom-mendations at 173.)
The Board also asserted that Much of the testimony offered consisted of the opinion testi-mony of lay witnesses on matters in which they had no particu-lar competence. Indeed, much of the prefiled testimony we found unhelpful and ruled inadmissible. (Ibid.)
Using this approach, Intervenors could hypothetically have called every parent residing within the 10-mile emergency planning zone; each could have testified to the inadequacy of emergency planning regarding his/
her own children and to his/her own likely behavior in the event of an accident.
Each would have failed to qualify as an expert and each would have been deemed to have no particular competence. Further, if Intervenors had, in proposed findings, cited each one, this Board would have ignored the whole as less than the sum of its parts.
In fact, Intervenors' evidence was the best evidence available on the
)
_ _ _ _ - - - _ I
.- - . - _ _ _ ~ -._ . .
INTERVENORS - p!gs 10 realities of emergency preparedness as opposed to paper promises. Intervenors submit that if these proceedings, especially Questions 3 and 4, are to be con-
- sidered more than a sham, the Commission must consider the evidence submitted by parents, other cit.izen-residents, and by employees and officials of the four-county area who are the best experts on how they and their families are likely to respond. in the evert of a radiological emergency at Indian' Point; the best experts on local road conditions and school programs; and the best experts on a; myriad of other subjects relevant to evacuation and emergency planning.
In addition to elevating the opinions of " experts" above those of the people with personal factual knowledge, the Board consistently discreditied every observation sworn to by Intervenor witnesses as " nonrepresentative."
We are dealing here with more than a minor procedural or evidentiary point.
Each " isolated observation" relating to a "very narrow point with respect to a
~
particular; county plan" was repeated or reiterated, though in different ,
language and from a different point of view, by other witnesses in the same and i
j in other counties. There can be little doubt that the cumulative effect of the 4 many " isolated observations," when objectively evaluated, support the broad
- generalized criticism of emergency preparedness in the vicinity of Indian Point. ,
In fact, we know of no other case in which such a broad spectrum of local wit-nesses came forward to testify to the inadequacy of emergency planning and preparedness.
Nowhere in the record is the Board's evidentiary myopia as obvious as on the issue of human response to an accident at Indian Point. While accepting the
- ' testimony of Licensee witnesses as the " conventional wisdom," the. Board rejected I
I'
- the testimony of behavioral scientists sponsored by Intervenors as " unorthodox, r-b
-#**- -rv-- + _ , ,, .,--,-,---,-__.,-m-g--.,,..,-,s._,, . . - , . - -e-,.-,,m, . 1, -r- --
- y . .,7_.-ee,-4.,. --,_o.r#e w--, --_,y.-y.-p 97.,m- - --,-m-e--or.%,,3, -c ., ym w
7_ _
INTERVENORS - prga 11 (lacking) empirical support, and contradicted by the equally credible opinion ,
of Licensees' witnesses." (Recommendations at 221.) Apparently the Board was prepared to give credence only.to testimony that fit the set of preconceptions constituting " orthodox" NRC dogma that people will respond no differently to 4
nuclear accidents than to hurricanes, floods, and fires. Actually, Intervenor testimony that people have a special dread of nuclear dangers and may . react i
differently _ to them than to more familiar visible perils, was the data-based
- judgement of scientists recognized by their peers as the best in the country; e.g., Kai T. Erikson, President-Elect of the American Sociological Association,
.and Albert J. Solnit, M.D., Directo'r and Chief Psychiatrist, Yale University l
Child Study Center.
The claim that Intervenor testimony lacked " empirical support" directly contradicts the record: the Intervenors' witnesses cited all available data on
' human response to nuclear. accidents, including the unprecedented phenomenon of ,
widespread " shadow evacuation" at Three Mile Island. The Licensees' witnesses, on the other hand, merely extrapolated from experience with non-nuclear accidents.
Granting that there is a dearth of site-specific evidence on probable human response to an accident at Indian Point, a fact in no way contravened by the un-
- supported opinions of Licensee witnesses, Intervenor witnesses testified that what data jha exist suggest that planning assumptions may be crroneous. These
- data--results of telephone surveys in Westchester County; testimony of many key I
officfals, residents, and emergency workers; and the highly relevant scientific survey of Suffolk County (the "Shoreham Study")--support the arguments of Inter-
~
venor witnesses, are congruent with the data from Three Mile Island, and demon-l strate th'e urgent need for a larger and more systematic survey of the counties around Indian ~ Point.
t n'-
INTERVENORS - p gs 12 If the Board had been truly interested in conducting an investigation or in expanding "the only available data base for emergency planning assumptions" (Recommendations at 221), it would have ordered the studies advocated by the In-tervenor witnesses. Although Intervenors did not have and will never have the resources to provide the Board with the additional empirical evidence it apparent- l ly required, their witnesses did provide the Board with guidance on how to ob-tain that evidence. (See UCS/NYPIRG Motion Requesting the ASLB and the NRC to Commission Studies on Human Response to Radiological Emergencies at Indian Point, !
April 26,.1983, Attachment C, Af fidavits of Erikson, Solnit, and Holt.) It is difficult for Intervenors to have faith in a Licensing Board that on the one hand states, "We do not believe the Indian Point planners should be satisfied with an assumption" (Recommendations at 221) and on the other hand completely rejects the testimony of experts who challenge the untested human response assumptions of emergency planners.
THE BOARD'S FAILURE TO RECOMMEND SHUTDOWN IS INCONSISTENT WITH ITS CONCLUSION THAT EMERGENCY PLANNING AT INDIAN POINT IS INADEQUATE A major part of the Board's charge in the' Indian Point investigation was to evaluate emergency preparedness in the region surrounding the Indian Point reac-tors. As noted in the Recommendations, there are inherent limitations and con-straints in a time-bound investigation of emergency planning, particularly in the case of Indian Point where constantly shifting events occurring outside of the (Recommendations at 22.)
courtroom had a major impact on the facts in the investigation. Nevertheless, Intervenors insist that it was the Board's clear-cut resoonsibility at the close of l its investigation to make a determination, in accordance with Commission Question 3, as to whether or not emergency planning and preparedness at Indian Point conforms with NRC/ FEMA guidelines. Furthermore, it was the Board's duty to make a recom-
INTERVENORS - prge 13 sendation to the Commission comensurate with that determination. Regardless of difficulties which arose during the course of its investigation as a result of the passage of time, the Board was able to arrive at a conclusion that.emergen-cy planning and preparedness at Indian Point is inadequate and does not conform with NRC/ FEMA guidelines. Yet, despite that conclusion and all the specific findings upon which it was based, the Board failed to recommend to the Commission )
that the Indian Point plants should be shut down unless and until it can be verified that remaining problems have been eliminated, that emergency planning and preparedness is fully in compliance with NRC requirements, and that protec-tion of the public in the event of an accident at Indian Point can be assured. i l
Instead, what the Board did was exactly what other NRC representatives have done 1
repeatedly over the last three years, ever since Indian Point failed to meet the deadline for implementing acceptable emergency plans: the Board sidestepped current facts and relied on future promises.
Intervenors maintain that from the inception of this proceeding, to the close of the record, and to the present time, there has never been adequate l
preparedness at Indian Point. Indeed, one unadulterated conclusion emerges from the entire Indian Point investigation and all the events surrounding it The majority of this Commission, with the concurrence of its ASLB, apparently has no intention of standing behind its emergency planning regulations. By repeatedly allowing Indian Point to remain in operation in the face of obvious flaws in emergency planning, the Commission majority made it clear that there is no required level of preparedness for nuclear emergencies and that, like the Indian Point emergency plans, its regulations are mere words on paper. The Com-mission's decisions have, in effect, rendered emergency planning, not only at Indian Poing but at all reactor sites, an eternally " dynamic process" and therefore an empty one. The Commission has reaffirmed the notion that utilities
I INTERVENORS - p;gs 14 and local governments need only show movement towards compliance with emergency planning regulations. Commissioner Asselstine said it most appropriately; the Commission' majority made a " mockery of our emergency planning regulations."
(CLI-83-16, dissenting views of Cemmissioner Asselstine, at 4.).
CONCLUSION' More than nine months after the close of the special investigatory
' proceeding on Indian Point, Intervenors once again submit to this Commission that necessary improvements in emergency planning have not been implemented at Indian Point, and that there is no basis in the record for confidence that i
there will ever be procection for the people living and working in the region surrounding the Indian Point reactors. We offer the Commission. for the last '
time in this proceeding, just a few examples of the many glaring deficiencies which remain in emergency planning at Indian Point.
, Evacuation plans for schoolchildren. Planning for the evacuation of tens of thousands of schoolchildren in the EPZ continues to be one of the most flagrant defects in the Indian Point emergency plans. Yet, in spite of persistent criticisms of these _ plans from parents, teachers, school administrators, and many public officials,'and considerable evidence to support these criticisms, FEMA has never labeled this issue a "significant deficiency." Having been forced by parental and professional outcry to reject their initial inadequate approach, planners have purportedly adopted what is commonly referred to as the "early dismissal" or "go home" plan. This plan calls for the dismissal of all schoolchildren in the EPZ at the site alert stage of an accident. It is based on the premise that c
sending children home because of an emergency at Indian Point is no different L
i
l INTERVENORS - prg:e 15 1
than sending them home because of inclement weather--regardless of whether or not there are any adults at home to receive the children.*
In its Recommendations, the Board found that "the evidence concerning public understanding of the adequacy of plans to evacuate school children is contradictory and confusing" (Recommendations at 266, Empahsis Added), and further., that "the early dismissal plan may have increased public concern over the evacuation of school children rather than lessened it." (Recommendations at 267.) Intervenors agree with these observations but are appalled by the Board's seeming indifference to the importance of this issue and by its failure to make any substantive recommendations for resolution of this grave problem.
The record in this case proves beyond a doubt that considerable study is needed before realistic and acceptable school evacuation plans can be de-veloped. (See Attachment C.) Yet the Board appears to be suggesting that in order to " resolve" this issue and quell public concern, school evacuation plans need merely to be finalized on paper. (Recommendations at viii.)
The emergency plans for schoolchildren are in utter chaos, with three or more alternative procedures on the drawingboard. Parents, teachers, and local emergency personnel remain confuseu -.nd have received little or no infor-mation regarding protective measures for schoolchildren. (See, for example, Letter from Croton School Board to Chairman Palladino, Attachment D.)
A telephone curvey conducted by Westchester County during a recent drill of the early dismissal plan revealed that in more than 53% of the homes called there was no adult present. (See Comment on Recommendations of Parents Con-cerned About Indian Point, and the Westchester County survey, Attachment F.)
INTERVENORS - pigs 16 The treatment of this issue has been irresponsible from the start and children who live near Indian Point.are no better protected today than they have been all along. Intervenors insist that this Commission, once and for all, shed its blinders, confront the enormity of the school evacuation problem, and take Lamediate and decisive action on this matter.
Agreements with bus drivers. Repeatedly labeled by FEMA as a "significant deficiency," this problem has still not been resolved some eight months af ter the Commission voted to permit continued operation of Indian Point.
Agreements have been made with bus companies to provide buses, though it is not clear whether these are actual contracts or simply letters of intent i
to enter into contracts. Furthermore, some of these agreements have apparently expired. (See Letter of Intent, Attachment E.) Drivers have received an orientation on the effects of radiation but have not been trained in the specifics of the Indian Point emergency plans. There are stil).no written agreements with bus drivers and agreemenha with bus companies explicitly state that they "cannot guarantee to supply drivers for any or all such vehicles."
(See Attachment E.) Compensatory procedures which rely on utility employees to drive buses have not been tested.
Transportation plans have not been completed or approved. The original trans-portation plans upon which evacuation time estimates placed on the record by the Licensees are based, were rejected by both Westchester and Rockland Counties.
New plans were to have been completed by now but, not unexpectedly, they are late.
As Indian Point operates each day, most evacestion routes have not been approved, much less tested.
Planning in Rockland County. New York State's interim compensating plan for iRockland County has served to avert a threatened shutdown of Indian Point, but
f g-
~ lfl y
. .s
~.
. # +' -
.,.- INTERVENORS - page 17
.,a
- < ~ '-
u 6 has done little io .1mpronjed 16 vel cf preparedness in Rockland. The only
.- - s, r , , ,
+, # u t- . , _
" test" of this plaw, h' eld'in August 1983,'wasLextremely limited in scope, tested e . , , ,
. primarily communication;linAs,among : key State personnel, and contained virtually _
- a. . w i l '. - ,
no" element of surpristQ FEMA's. evaluation of everathis limited drill revealed 1
a' multitude of deficiencies, most of which would render a safe evacuation impossibl e'. Had a. thorough evaluation of the level of preparedness been
\;
/7.
c.onducted at this time, there can be no doubt that many more deficiencies vould
_v f
have been-. identified.
Rocklind County officials, with the assistance and review. of 'its Citizens Advisory.,
a Committee, have been rewriting the County's emergency plan since May r '
+
~
1982 when Rockland re'jected the utilities' emergency plans. As recently as
? -
. mid-December g 1983, Rockland's Director of Emergency Services reported that Rockland-County"s, plan was incomplete in the following areaa; medical services, y- v ,:
communications,' scliool evacuation, transportation, and public ~information and q .
education. '
- ) '
~)
The Rocklarid Co'unty fhgislature is presently considering how best to assure control of'its emergeacy planning de.stiny. The County may decide to rejoin theI-County planning effort in order to participate with Westchester, Orcnge,and Putnam in future emerdency planning drills. Should Rockland take
. that step, it should not be construed as either endorsement of the adequacy of emergency planning or approval of the continued operation of Indian Point.
? %~
s Public~ education and information. In e Recornendations, the Board states,
~" Annual dissem ation of a brochure is a reasonable way to make the information available and should~ eventually lead to public. awareness of emergency responses. . ."
.. e c (Recommendationsat195,EmphasisAdded.) Intervenors question _ae basis for the Board's optimism that the public will' eventually be sufficiently educated
^
- (and hope that an accident .wij6not occur *at Indian Point prior to that eventuality) . l
, ; ?) : ' -
'q
= a I wi e- - -
i INTERVENORS - pags 18 The emergency planning brochures first came out two years ago, in February 1982.
Since that time, there has been almost daily media coverage of the Indian Point issue with particular emphasis on emergency planning. Nevertheless, to this day, widespread confusion still exists about the meaning of the sirens, about procedures for evacuating schoolchildren, about evacuation routes and ERPAs, about the use of telephones, public transportation, and many other emergency planning details. Until FEMA conducts " acceptance testing" of the siren system and is able to verify that the public fully understands emergency procedures, public education and information cannot be assumed to be adequate.
Plans for non-institutionalized, mobility-impaired people. Nearly three years after plans were supposed to be in place, procedures are still inadequate to ensure the protection of mobility-impaired people. The Board agrees that ,
" planning for the non-institutionalized, mobility-impaired population in Westches-ter and Rockland has not been seriously undertaken." (Recommendations at 285.)
However, the Board makes no recommendation for resolution of this deficiency.
Training, equipment, and personnel.. Training and retraining the thousands of workers who would be required to implement the Indian Point emergency plans remains inadquate-and may be an insurmountable problem. Transportation, communi-cation, dosimetry, and other protective equipment remains grossly inadequate.
To date, no assessment or survey has been made of the actual numbers of ambulance, fire, transportation, Red Cross, health, welfare, or school personnel who would be available in a radiological emergency.
. s INTERVENORS - page 19
.- As the Commission deliberates on the Recommendations of its Atomic Safety-and Licensing Board and on the Comments of the parties in the Indian ,
Point investigation, Intervenors urge them to consider carefully the special significance of Indian Point. Indian Point is not merely one of eighty six licensed reactors in the Unite'd States. . It is the most pepulo'is nuclear plant site in the natio' , nby a large margin. When the Commission acts--or declines to act--on Indian Point, the entire nation takes' note. And, if the NRC does not enforce the strictest ' standards at Indian Point, how can p'eople l l
living near any other nuclear plant feel that their protection is of concern?
The Commission is well aware that the fate of Indian Point comes before .
l l
it again at a moment of crisis in the domestic nuclear power program. Plants I i a under construction are being cancelled one af ter another because of prohibi-tive . completion costs, insoluble . quality assurance problems, design flaws, and i
damaged equipment. - Licensed plants are not faring much better as discoveries j 1
o'f dangerously stressed and damaged equipment become commonplace and instances of worker exposure, equipment fraud, security violations, and operator error increase. I
- I
{ At the center of all this sits the NRC, the federal agency which (with l
- its predecessor) issued construction permits, approved designs, inspected
, L work-in-progress,. reviewed quality assurance programs, granted operating i
licenses, and inspected and regulated the day-to-day activities of all the j l troubled nuclear plants. The agency's past and present ccmpetence is obviously l
under a cloud at this moment. Congress vested in the Nuclear Regulatory Commis- l j' sion- the responsibility to guarantee the protection of the public from the i
l potential hazards of nuclear power. The public has had cause to wonder, of l.'
late, just how seriously that mandate is being heeded.
Indian Point 's failure, to this date, to comply with either the letter or L
l tha intent of NRC's emergency planning regulations has confronted the
< w -
..m. y , , , . - -g - - , . . . gc. +-w y-m wn,,.-n-, , , , _ . - , , , , ,-%. _ ,, 7.--.-,.-,.,m.~.#.,-,c--,.-- , , - ,y,,.,w,.,, , - - . .
INTERVENORS - page 20
. Commission--for nearly three years--with one of its most dif ficult and significant challenges: Does a Commission majority have the mettle to e
enforce its rules at the nation's most densely populated reactor site, or aill it continue to crawl through loopho.les in its rules in order to permit continued operation?
With the agency's credibility increasingly in question across the country, Indian Point presents the Commission with not just a challenge, but an opportunity to assert its authority on the issue of nuclear safeguards, its independence of the industry it regulates, and its commitment to rigorous enforcement to protect the public.
Submitted jointly by Intervenors New York Public Interest Research Group Union of Concerned Scientists Parents Concerned About Indian Point Westchester Peoples Action Coalition West Branch Conservation Association Rockland Citizens for Safe Energy Creater New York Council on Energy Friends of the Earth New York City Audubon Society Honorable Richard L. Brodsky and by Interested States County of Rockland Members of the Council of the City of New York February 4, 1984 7
f
- [ W Y(
Josd Holt NeV York Public Interest Research Group 9 Murray Street New York, New York 10007 (212) 349-6460 w...
- ATTACHMENT A UNITED STATES OF AERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CCNi!SSION j
l BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
. l
..Y
, In the Matter of )
)
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK ) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP (Indian Point Unit 2) ) 50-286 SP POWER AUT50RITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK A Pril 12, 1983 (Indian Point Unit 3) )
PARENTS CONCERNED ABOUT INDIAN POINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO SUBMIT TESTIMONY ON CONTENTION 6.2 Parents Concerned About Indian Point has complied with the Bcard's revised schedule for the rest of the special safety investigation by submitting the testimony of John R. Thornborough on contention 6.2.
Mr. Thornborough's testimony was included in Parents Response to Licensees' Motion to Compel Under Commission Question 6, dated March 24, 1983.
During the last few days, Parents has been able to secure the agreement of Dr. Alice Stewart, Dr. Berry Brazelton, and Dr. Daryl h Bohning to testify on the contention, "A benefit would accrue from the shutdown of Indian Point Unita 2 and 3 because the environment of children in the vicinity would be improved by a decrease in the release of radioactive material."
g , _ , - --.-w,- w p .-,t , - - . - . - - . .
Dr. Stewart is Senior Research Fellow at Birmingham University in England and an internationally recognized x-ray researcher. Dr.
Stewart and her colleagues in Creat Britain were responsible for landmark studies in Great Britain on the effects of ionizing radiation on infants in utero, including subsequent leukemia and cancer in childhood.
4 Dr. Stewart would testify on behalf of Parents Concerned About Indian Point that there is no threshold dose of ionizing radiation
~
below which no ill-effects occur; routine and accidental emissions from the nuclear reactors at Indian Point cannot be assumed to be harmless; the effects of ionizing radiation are delayed and may be masked in a population of hardy individuals; human cells are most vulnerable to the effects of ionizing radiation during embryonic and early childhood development when the cells are rapidly dividing; and children who live near the plants are exposed during thh period of greatest vulnerability.
Dr. Brazelton is currently Associate Professor of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, and Chief, Division of Child Development, Children's Hospital Medical Center, Boston, Massachussetts. Dr.
Brazelton's curriculum vitae is attached. Dr. Brazelton would testify on behalf of Parents that present medical knowledge about the effects of low-level radiation leads a prudent practitioner to advise against any unnecessary exposure to radiation, and this is especially true of children.
- k Because of the very busy schedule of these experts, and because 4
Dr. Stewart lives in England, it is impossible for them to appear before this Board any time except the latter part of May. Dr. Stewart and
Dr. Brazelton are willing to travel to Washington to give testimony at that time, and Parents respectfully requests that this Board modify the hearing schedule to the extent necessary to accomodate these witnesses.
We are not requesting that findings of fact on other issues 4
be delayed, but that a date be set ten days after the Board hears the testimony of the eminent experts offered by Parents as a deadline for findings of fact on contention 6.2, if the witnesses are scheduled af ter May 17, which is ten days before findings. of fact are due.
Dr. Daryl Bohning received his PhD in physics from Iowa State University and has done post doctoral work in physics at Rutgers University and post. doctoral work in bio-physics at Harvard. He has had ten years experience in environmental and biological research including research in the medical use of radioisotopes and other aspects of nuclear medicine.
He has recently completed a chapter for a book entitled Nuclear Almanac.
Dr. Bohning's contribution to the book is called " Radiation and Public Health: A Perspective."
Dr. Bohning will base his testimony on NUREG/CR 2227, NUREG/CR 1496, and NUREG/CR 1497. Each of these documents is an annual report, Radio-active Materials Released from Nuclear Power Plants, a compilation of
, reports by the Licensees to the Commission. Dr. Bohning will summarize the radioactive materials which will nc longer be released at Indian Pdint if the plants are closed down, and will critically assess the data
( compiled in the NUREGs. Parents was unable to give Dr. Bohning the
- material on which he will base his testimony until early April. Dr.
i Bohning's testimony will be available on Monday, April 18, and we request that his testimony be scheduled for Friday, April 22.
0 .
Page 3 ,
! Pat Pesner Parents Concerned About Indian Point
1 ATTACHMENT B LMITED STATES OF AERICA l NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONUSSION 4
l BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD,
' In the Matter of )
)
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK ) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP
) 50-286 SP (Indian Point Unit 2) .
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK l April 25, 1983 i (Indian Point Unit 3) )
INTERVENORS' JOINT MOTION PEQUESTING THE BOARD TO ENSURE THE COMPLETENESS OF THE RECORD ON COMMISSION QUESTIONS IHREE AND FOUR Intervenors acting jointly have identified several subjects on which the evidence received on emergency planning issues is incomplete, and requests the Board to keep the record open until these subjects have been addressed adequately.
First, Intervenors note that the issue of the adequacy of the commerciali telephone system within the emergency planning zone at Indian Point has arisen several times in this proceeding. Indeed, FEMA testified ir. June,1982 on this issue, in general, stating:
It can reasonably be expected that the telephone .
system could become overloaded in the even of an incident. This is why NUREG-0654 requires a back-up consnunication system and an effective alert and notification system via EBS so people will not be dependent on the phones.
FEMA direct testimony, June 22, 1982, response to Question 55.
Yet, since that time, a proposed revision in the evacuation plans for Westchester and, possibly, Rockland County, would necessitate the initiation of telephone chains to contact parents of school children
$ bb
destined to be returned to their homes on an early dismissal plan before a general evacuation would or could begin.. The emergency plans.for Indian Point still rely largely on telephone alerting and mobilization systems, including bus drivers in Rockland County, as noted by FEMA in its Post-Exercise Assessment of April,1983. There has been no ,,
evidence offered or received by the Board on the depth or breadth of the problem with the telephone system within the EPZ, despite the request of former Chairman Carter that such information be presented to the Board. (Limited Appearance Session, Thursday January 21, 1982, Civic Center, Peekskill, New York.)
Second, capabilities within the emergency planning zone around
' Indian Point to shelter the population in the event of a fast-moving accident at Indian Point have not been addressed by the NRC witnesses, despite the assertion of the Staff witnesses that sheltering might be (Testimony of Sheldon the preferred protective action in those cases.
On cross-examination, A. Schwartz, March 31, 1983, page 6.)
the witnesses acknowledged that no study of sheltering capabilities, site-specific to Indian Point had been undertaken or considered. (T.
l 12287-88 ; see, also, testimony of Davidoff, T. 11355-59.)
Third, the Licensees have failed to produce for cross-examination Mr. Harvey Harth, Director of the "Four-County Nuclear Safety Committee" to whom tear out cards for disabled and elderly persons were mailed in 1982 and will be mailed in 1983. The Board has heard repeatedly of ,
the failure of any agency or organization to respond to persons mailing in these cards, but still has received no explanation for this failure nor hope for the future. Intervenors requested the Board to subpoena Mr. Harth on March 24, 1983, when it became apparent from Westchester I
County witness Mr. Kaminsky that the fate of the returned tear-off g
i
r cards was not completely known by any witness other .than Mr. Harth.
(T. 11646-11650). figg also, testimony of Rockland b
County witness Don McGaire, T.10961-62, when intearenors. attempted, ,
s but were precluded, from learning the present status of the : tear-off carda in Rockland County.
Fourth, the West Branch Conservation Association , requests
, the Joard to issue a subpoena for the responsible persons at Let.:hworth Village and Helen Hayes Hespital, both within Rockland County an(1 the ten-mile emergency planning zone, so that the Board can lea.n about the absence of planning at these special facilities. (T. .).
Each of these special facilities houses a large number of handicapped ,
and ill persons, for whom planning has been inadequate. The persons responsible for those facilities are .not willing, because of their employment, to testify without subpoena. _
Fifth, the Board requested Westchester County to provide l
more complete statistics on the capability of Westchester County to remove road impediments, as reflected in the experience of the County in snowstorms over the past five or ten years. (T. 5769-5770).
Each of these five subjects represents an important component l
l in determining the capability of assuring the health and safety of residents and transients within the ten-mile EPZ in the event of l . a serious accident at Indian Point. In this investigative proceeding, l
l where no party carries the burden of proof, the responsibility of the Board to ensure the completeness of the record in these substantial ways and on these controversial subjects must be.. fulfilled.
l L
WHEREPORE, Intervenors requent the Board to trka the r.cestsary steps to ensure the adequacy and accuracy of the record on emergency planning, including the following:
a)' Require the Licensees and/or the NRC Staff-to present testimony concerning the commercial telephone system within the Emergency Planning Zone and particularly on its capability for handling phone calls during an emergen y; ,
b) Raquire the NRC Staff to provide to the parties and the Board information on the sheltering capabilities within the Emergency Planning Zone; c) Issue a subpoena requiring the presence of Harvey Harth before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on Friday, s April 29, 1983; d) Issue a subpoena for the responsible persons at Letchworth Village and Helen Hayes Hospital in Rockland County; e) Request further testimony from Westchester County regarding the ability of county employees to remove road impediments; f) Permit other parties, including intervenors, to submit affidavits or other rebuttal of additional information provided on these subjects; and, g) Delay the deadline for submission of final findings of fact on these subjects until the record is complete.
Dated: New York, New York April 25, 1983 A+tMeM For UCS, NYPIRC, WBCA, RCSE, AMANDA POTTERFIELD, ESQ. 8 Parents and WESPAC New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc.
9 Hurray St., 3rd Floor New York, New York 10007 212-349-6460 4-
\> .
A m CHMENT C UNITED STATES OF AE RICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION
(
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD m
o In the Matter of )
)
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK ) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP (Indian Point Unit 2) ) 50-286 SP l
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (Indian Point Unit 3) h') April 26, 1983 UCS/NYPIRG MOTION REQUESTING THE ASLB AND THE NRC TO COMMISSION STUDIES ON HUMAN RESPONSE TO RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCIES AT INDIAN POINT 4
In its January 1981 Order (CL ) defining the issues of concern to be addressed by the investigatory proceeding on Indian Point, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission stated:
The Commission is concerned with the total risk to persons and property posed by the Indian Point plante and the risk to individuals living in the vicinity of the Indian Point site, including that resulting from the difficulty of evacuation in an emergency. (Emphasis supplied.)
Order, at page 8.
The ASLB, in formulating contentions directed to the end of receiving
, evidence on the areas of concern to the Commission correctly admitted intervenors' proposed contention on human response to a. radiological emergency. Contention 3.2, as revised by the ASLB, reads:
The emergency plans for Indian Point Units 2 and 3 do not conform with NRC/ FEMA guidelines because the assumptions made therein with respect to
( human response factors during a radiological emergency are erroneous. Hence the estimates of evacuation times and of the feasibility of timely evacuation for certain areas are incorrect.
~
o i:
(
The Board's reasoning for its decision to reformulate and reinstate contention 3.2 in its February 7,1983 order (Gleason, J., dissenting),
is instructive. At page 6, the Board ruled:
d We believe that the Intervenors have successfully argued their point with respect to the relevance of Contention 3.2 to determining the degree of -
conformance of the emergency plans with NRC/
FEMA guidelines and with respect to the unique importance of human factors assumptions in the Indian Point emergency plans. Moreover, the testimony that we have already heard on human facotra from the counties and from FEMA, and that which has been offered by the Licensees, convince us that we should proceed to thoroughly ventilate this subject.
Human response factors are uniquely important' to Indian Point because
~
the high population density in the vicinity of the plants would exacerbate consequences resulting from the failure of human i
factors assumptions to hold in a radiological emergency. This dense population, coupled with the geographical, meteorological and roadway features of the area will adversely affect human responses in a radiological emergency.
The recognition of the importance of this issue to a consideration of the adequacy of emergency planning at Indian Point did not solve the problem of presenting the best available evidence on the subject to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. Intervenors attempted three approaches: testimony of the residents and emergency workers ,
themselves ab6ut their anticipated responses to en accident at Indian Point; testimony of social science professionals about their opinions on the nature of. radiological emergencies as opposed to natural disasters and the consequences of the unique characteristics of a radiological
(
emergency on human response; and testimony about surveys commissioned in Suffolk County, New York, designed to predict the probable response 9 2
( of residents and emergency worker's to a radiol 6gical emergency at the Shoreham facility.
The Licensees' evidence consisted of the testimony of a sociologist b
and a psychiatrist directed to prove that the response of residents and emergency workers at Indian Point would parallel that of persons involved in natural disasters occurring over the past fifty years i and that the concededly unique characteristics of a radiological -
emergency would not aEfect those responses.
The Board admitted into evidence theetestimony of the Licensees'
~
witnesses and of some of the Intervenors' witnesses; admitted the Suffolk County survey for a limited purpose, and rejected the evidence of residents and emergency workers at Indian Point about their anticipated response to an emergency there.
I None of the evidence accepted by the Spard adequately answers the question posed by Contention 3.2 and by the Countission: what can i planners expect from the residents and emergency workers at Indian Point in time of crisis?
- i Judge Shon noted the inadequancy of the testimony presented by the Licensees on the subject when he addressed the Licensees' witness Dr. Lecker about his experience with employees at the TNI. plants: T
, Dr. Lecker, I hate to prolong this, but it occurs to me that there is another, perhaps more subtle, dichotomy among people and that is this:
l There are people who accept radiation and nuclear radiation, I mean, not necessarily solar radiation, but nuclear radiation, who accept it as simply another hazard which one can deal with with the proper equipment.
k There are, on the other hand, apparently a large number of people, I don't know what ch%
f J
[.
( fraction of the population they constitute, who view this hazard as something so horri-fyingly and subtly different from anything else, that they can't conceive of anyone getting near such stuff.
Generally speaking it is the first group ,
. of people who work in nuclear emergency plants, because if you belong to the second group you wouldn't be there. .
But most of the questions I have heard the intervenors ask, and most of the suggestions they make, are postulated on the idea that the second group, the group that believes that radiation is, as I think William O.
Douglas said, the most awesome force ever released upon mankind, if that group of people is, as the intervenors think, a substantial majority among the population, you don't find them working in nuclear power plants, so your example is not relevant.
But there is a scene that operates to say most of those people are outside the fence.
4 Here they are confronted by this thing that they most fear. Is it possible that there is a substantial body of thought?
T. 11997-98.
Because the record is not complete on this important contention, the TJnion of Concerned Scientists and the New York Public Interest Rea,earch Group, Inc. request the Board to remedy the situation by undertaking the following:
a) . Coimission a study or studies designed, with the greatest possible expertise, the ,
particulars for which are set forth.in the affidavits of Drs. Kai T. Ericson and Albert Solnit, annexed hereto as Exhibit A; b) . Request the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to extend the time for filing of the Board's
' final recommendations on Contention 3.2
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A - _______ _ _ _
f I
(.
pending the receipt of the study results.
The utility of conducting such a study or studies, as outlined in s
the affidavit of Dr. Rob 6rt R. Holt, annexed as Exhibit B, includes the gathering of information on the state of public awareness of emergency procedures such as tuning into an EBS station upon the sounding of the sirens, an area of deficiency noted by FEMA in its post-exercise assessment of April 1983, the identification of problems of parents with the newly proposen and inadequately researched plan for early dismissal of school children, and the scientific prediction of the responses of emergency workers and residents to an accident at Indian Point requiring evacuation or sheltering. A survey of the i residents and emergency workers around the Indina Point site will eliminate the speculation, and guesswork, which now comprise the record in this proceeding on this issue.
The Board has the authority, and the duty, to take measures to ensure a complete and responsive record on all important issues of concern to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In this special c
investigative proceeding, where no party 'arries the burden of going forward or of persuasion, the need for remedial action by the Board to fill the gaps lef t by the parties, is even more compelling.
The NRC has the responsibility to represent the public interest
-in this matter as in all matters of safeguarding public health and safety from nuclear hazards. Power Reactor Development Co. v.
International Union of Electrical Radio and Machine Workers, 367 U.S.
(
396, 404, 81 3. Ct.1529,1533, 6 L.Ed.2d 924 (1961) . As the U.S.
0 3 Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said of the Federal Power
( Commission under similar circumstances:
This role does not permit it to act as an umpire blandly <
calling balls and strikes for adversaries appearing before it; the right of the public must receive active and affirmative protection at the hands of the Commission.
Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission, 354 F. 2d 608, 620 (2d Cir.1965) . ,
In this case, NYPIRG/UCS has raised and strongly pressed the issue of the likelihood of breaches of duty by key persons responsible for portions of the emergency response plan. NYPIRG/UCS has also presented evidence from a survey supporting the likelihood of such breaches at another nuclear plant in New York State, the Shoreham plant. The Licensees argue that the evidence from Shoreham is not valid at Indian Point. To our minds, it does not seem likely that human nature is i appreciably different in Westchester and Rockland Counties than it is on Long Island. However, the truth will not be known unless a similar survey is conducted in the Indian Point area to determine if the same situation applies. UCS/N'ZPIRG, however, is not in a financial position to underwrite such a survey at Indian Point. Because of the obvious importance of this question to the ultimate issue in this proceeding, we believe the Board should exercise its sua sponte authority to order that such a survey be conducted at the Commission's expense. As the court said in Scenic Hudson, supra, "The Commission must see to it that the record is complete. The Commission has an affirmative duty to inquire into and consider all relevant facts." Ijl .
In another FPC case, relied on by the Scenic Hudson court, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit criticized the FPC k for refusing to consider an alternative and for failing to take the
g .
(
initiative in seeking information. Michiaan Consolidated Gas Co. v.
Federal Power Commission, 283 F. 2d 204 (D.C. Cir. 1960). The court observed that "the proposal appears prima facie to have merit enough ro w
l have required the Commission at some stage of the proceeding to consider it on its own initiative as an alternative..." Id. at 224. On rehearing the court added: "In viewing the public interest, the Commission's vision is not to be limited to the horizons of the private parties to the pro-ceeding." ,I_d,. at 226.
In the instant situation, this Board's vision should not be limited to the horizons dictated by UCS/EYPIRG's financial constraints. The relevance of the possibility that officials will not perform their duties as expec-ted during a nuclear emergency is too obvious to require explanation. If the Board does not take the initiative in seeking information on this topic, it will perforce reach its conclusions in this case without all the relevant facts. In order to make the record complete in this case, the Board should order that a survey be conducted of the relevant officials in the Indian Point area to determine how they say they would act in a nuclear emergency.
Without this knowledge, the Board can have no confidence in the efficacy of the emergency response plans in question here.
WHEREFORE, UCS/NYPIRG request the Board to:
a) Commission a study or studies on human response to a radiological
. accident at Indian Point, designed with the greatest possible ex-pertise, the particulars for which are set forth in the affidavits of Drs. Kai T. Ericson and Solnit, annexed hereto as Exhibit A; k
(
b) Request the Nuclear Regulatory Comunission to extend the time for filing of the Board's final recouenendations on Contention 3.2 pending receipt of the study results. ,
Dated: New York, New York April 26, 1983 t
AMANDA POTTERFIELD, ESQ.F New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc.
For UCS and NYPIRG 9 Murray St., 3rd Floor New York, New York 10007 m
UNITED STATES OF AERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONilSSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )
)
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK ) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP l
(Indian Point Unit 2) ) 50-286 SP
)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
}
(Indian Point Uni' 3) i April , 1983 AFFIDAVIT CF KAI T. ERIKSCN AND AIBERP J. SOINIT IN SUPPCRP CF UNICN OP 00tGRNED SCIENTISTS, NEW YORK PUBLIC INIEREST RESEAIOf GOUP, AND PARENIS CDtERNED ABC17f INDIAN TOINT State of Cbnnecticut Cbunty of New Haven I, &*
Kai T. Erikson, Pa. D.
Professor of Sociology and Anerican St,rlim, and Blitor, Yale M ew Yale University and 1, s Albert JA Solnit, M.D.
Sterling Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry, and Director, Child Sttdf Center i Yale Univelsity being duly sworn, state the following:
n page 2
- 1. During March 1983, each of us separately amaared, gave testinmy, and was muse cumuined before the Atcznic Safety and ric=== Lng Board on behalf of Parents Concerned About Indian Point, the New York Pnhlic Interest.
Research Group, and the Union of @ncerned Scientists, intervenors in the d
ASIA's special investigation of Indian Point.
- 2. Each of us has read portions of the Indian, Point Paaininginal Dnergency Response Plan (RERP), the pihlin infornation booklet, " Indian Point Sim weacf Pla W, and You," and testinmy and transcripts of cross-examination of sczne other witr*=*a in the AcIB prhing (including the -
direct testinmy and the cross-examinaticn of Drs. Pi==all Dynes and Sidney Iecker, witnesses for the licensees).
- 3. Each of us is aware of g.vgraed revisions to the Westchester RE:RP which wouM result in school. children being subject to "early aiami= cal" instead of evacuation to reve rion centers outside the 10-mile Emu.vercf Planning Zcne (EPZ) in the event of an am idant at Indian Point.
- 4. It is apparent to each of us that the development and evaluation of off-site aT=u.vercy plans for Indian. Point has re.mi.ed largely on theorie.c and asstmptions about hinnan response to wmyacies which, though applicable in part, do not provide a sufficient basis for predicting how the people around Irdian Point are likely to resp.nd to a raainingical an-idant at the plant--nor, therefore, for cmcluding that the plans will work as designed. .
- 5. Indian Point emargency planners assume (1) that residents of the 10-mile EPZ will respcad in prescribed and predictable ways to instructions issued prior to and during a nuclear erm ye cy, (2) that local officin1m and eruyerf personnel will fulfill the roles assigned to than in the plans,
, . . . . . . .a page 3 and (3) that people living or ==+i5 outside the 10-mile EPE will respond
-pruriately to ad hoc reassurances and ir-L.wi. ions arid will not couplir=+=
or ingede energency s - i....e fee those closer to the plant.
- 6. Fivr.- .is of the "early di==i==1" plan for adiool children ====a (1) that sending children haue during a radiolagie=1 energency is equivalent to releasing then during a snoustoon or wtan a school heating system breaks down, (2) 1. hat rapid notification of responsible adults (parents or pre-designated surrogates) for each and every diild is possible, (3) that a sufficient rn=har of school buses can be rotnidad up at a noment's notice during school hours, and (4) that, whether by bus or on foot, all school children will arrive hane quickly, safely, and to a waiting adult.
- 7. Existing energency plans have been hamari prinarily on hrwation of human behavior in non-radial @em1 energencies, runote in time and place from Indian Point. It is the judgement of each of us that such data are relevant and appliembla only in part, and cannot. form a sufficient basis for predicting how ranidarits, offi'ei=la, and energency personnel in the regicn j surrounding Indian Point are likely-to re.apc=4 during a radiological energency.
( 8. 'Ihough there are sane similarities among different sorts of emergencima, each is in same rwi different frun ci.t-rs. Shrliaa of the mar idant at 'Ihree Mile Island, for emmple, irrlicate that a large sur i.zion of the affected pepi1= tion 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 anple raaanri to rapact that the people at risk will rr rmd to an annidartt at Indian Point in unique ways,
.g w
._m page 4 influmnood by sit; r;--Mic, regional characteristics such as the nature of the local terrain, the network of local roads, the pr=plation density, etc.
. 10. 'Ihough the existing body of nongelaar disaster literature can provide theories and leads, only sevliaa of the persons now living within ,
the region at risk frtza Indian Point can supply the data naariari to test the theories and predict the range of responses likely to occur to an arri<iant at the plant. 1hese shvitaa can be designed in such a way as to elicit, anong other tbings, infonnation about how I+-4ents have reacted to and behaved during other energencies they may have experiW in the past.
- 11. No one research method is ocspletely raliabla for predicting future behavior. Men forecasting laman response, a prudent behavioral scientist will gather and make use of all relevant and avai1=hla infonnation:
em-@lation of past trends ard experience taken in conjunction with data collected by means of sophisticated survey and interview techniques.
- 12. 'Ihe technology of survey rmd. including statistical sanpling, interviewing, and ocmputer analysis-has been highly developed over four
<ieariaa of earisunic research and ocaunercial application. 'Ibe si- and
- value of this technology is generally reev
- ,uized and routinely u+4112ed by governnent, emisunia, the press, and business-irelivling the nuclear power industry. Con 161(ann and the Power Auilwity have thennelves cannissioned and made use of several sample surveys.
- 13. It is the professional judgment of each of us, tr u ofere, that a ,
- series of survey and interview sturiiaa should be perfonned in the region poi.entially affected by an areiriant at Indian Point in order, first, to test the validity of energency planning assutpticas, and seund, to provide t---~ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
page 5 the sit;
.--ific information emmential for realistic emergency p1==4ag.
Indeed, it is the view of each of us that amargency plaming for Inifan Point should have begm with such shdian, and that adequate and 6 plans cannot be attained stil a proper luneen rempanse data base exists.
- 14. In the absence of the data su& shdian would provide, each of us submits that there does not now exist a proper or valid basis for concluding that the Indian Point emergency plans are " adequate to pubed.
pihlir health'and safety."
- 15. Brief descriptions of the sh diaa each of us believes to be necessary follow:
I. A survey of the information, attihdam, and intetions of residents of the regicn, incliMing but not limited to the 10-mile EPZ. 'Jhis study should include the kinds of questions asked in the Suffolk (bunty survey, the Westchester (bunty survey conducted by Richard Al+w4=ila%
and parts of the survey done by Yankelovich, Skelly and mite in June 1981. One major objective would be to predict the swdon of people,at various distances up to 50 or more miles from the plant, We would att._,n.
to evacuate r.d.usausly under various ciremstances.
II. A survey of the information, attitudes, and intentions of the emergency wcu.kars, including bus and *1=v.e 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 then in the plans, and pnamihla obstacles to such par +ici = tion. 'Jhe principal obstacle to be maaa==ad would be the belief of see that their primary cnd overriding ahli= tion is to the safety of their own fanilies. Other factors to be explored would be their awareness of the availmhi_lity of ziammaag training, equipment, vebirlan, numitoring devices, and the like.
III. A three-part study relevant to plaming for the evacuation of school children. 'Jhe first, attitudinal part, samld study parents, teasers, and school admird.ctrators to aamartain their information, attih daa and haliafs regarding school evacuation to help predict their behavior in and
_ _____ ______ _ ________ ___. i
- 3, . ,.
o .
page 6 prefereree flor alternative plans: (a) to di==i== achool children at the alert stage of an arv idarst, (b) to evacuate daildren directly frun adiools to reosption contars, (c) to be prepared in :buplement either of the pr=rudimJ plans depending on the course of the =<v 4A=nt, or (d) other PiM14 ties Wirst may energe froni suggestions mark by the respondents out of their detailed knowledge of the concrete penhl== involved.
She neocnd part of the school study would be a " _; -A ic study of households ocmtaining chiMren fnm==d on chtain-ing factual data of the following kinds: (a) the nature of '
the family situation during actiool hours (a6 ult at hcme or at work Wiere parents may be contacted and how; avatimhility of relative ce neighbor willing and able to take charge; car at hczne or not; ==hws of i'mily outside EPZ whose children attend school inside EPZ, and vice versa), (b) how the daildren n'-11y get hczne (walk, bus, other), ani (c) how many children in each family attend which schools and knowledge of designated re1# cation centers.
1he third part of the study should include (a) a review of the actual past experience of c=ch school in early di==immal situations, and (b) a feasibility test in a se: Mtive aanple of schools to detennine how sany piu a.- (ce their surrogates) can be azitacted without advance = ming during a school day, and how long it takes to do so.
Ekstis in pediatrics, child deval.- 4., and other relevant professions should be utilized at every step-in the design and impleneritation of the m rch, in the intm y&= Mtion and t w Ling of the results, and in the ultimate application of the f to energency plans for the schools.
- 16. It is the carelmirm of each of us that tmtil the above stixlies are conducted, the Atcznic Safety and Licensing Board and the 1erlaar Regula.xy Oantaission lack a sufficient basis to chterndne either the workability of the Indian Point Itadimirmi'=1 F.umyacf Response Plan or the adequacy at ar:y given time of preparedness to re t. the P Alin in case of an arv-irkt t at Indian Point. -
Kai T. Erikson Sdweribed and Sworn to /
before me this /Tn *day d of April, 1983. M .'Solnit
- =y r%
LU W
(
) SS:
C0'JNTY OF NEW YORK)
- 1. I, Robert R. Holt, first being duly sworn, depose and say: I am Professor of Psychology at New York University; my specialities are clinical and social psychology. Before obtaining my Ph.D in psychology at Harvard University, I worked as an interviewer for the Eino Roper organization and briefly ran a small independent polling organization, the New England Public Opinion Research Association. My first post-Ph.D.
Job was as a Study Director in the Division of Program Surveys, B. A. E.,
in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (for my publications in this field, 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.
1 Since 1953, I have been at New York University, where I founded the Research Center for Mental Health, and directed it for about fifteen years. A principal theme of my scientific work has been the prediction of human behavior, on which I have published several papers and a book, Methods in Clinical Psychology, Vol. II: Prediction and Research, New York: Plenum (1978). During recent years, I have renewed my interest in
~
survey research. My 1980 paper (no.118 in bibliography) reports results EXHIBIT B
prgs 2 l s of a national survey done in collaboration with Daniel Yankelovich, for I
whose fire 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 Islan( nuclear .
Power plants, held by the MITRE Corporation in McLean, Virginia, and was asked to prepare-a comunentary on that discussion presenting my theory of the impact of radiological accidents on psychological health. This
, comunentary was submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and appears in NUREG/CP-0026 (no.122 in bibliography). I also made a thorough study of the relevant research on human response to the TMI accident, and most recently 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 comment on the utility of sample surveys as means of predicting human behavior in general, and of predicting the responses of people to an accident at Indian Point in particular. I have been given tc 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 Indian Point?");
(
P
,;} -
pig 3 3 fd .
y{f)l 4 b)
Oj '
knowledge possessed by the respondent, indicatin r igj
-:y'. degree of acquaintance with relevant data (for exa ,
n "What are you supposed to do if you hearrning a siren of wa p&
en accident at Indian Point?");
9 c)
A$
ig beliefs (for example, %ve you received a dangerous of i: y radiation?");
d)
'Ni attitudes (for example, "How much trust do you have in
- e 31 statements about nuclear power made by Con Edison?
?
e)
- d]A values (for example, "Which is more important, a m
't to his job, or to his family?");
3 f)
] statements of intention (for example, "What do you plan 9 ,
do to prepare your family for a possible evacuation of j
s i! area?"); and,
} g) l statements of probable future oehavior under hypothetical circumstances (for example, "What would you do if th 1{ 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 lineswncan be dra between these classes of questions, or the kinds provide.
of data the i Moreover, the above listing is not exhaustive ore. definitiv My point is to illustrate some of the many kinds of data thata can ned from be obt i surveys, and to suggest some of the different ways in which the useful in a scientific attempt to predict behavior.
6.
~
Consider the issue of greatest interest, behavior at the time a possible accident serious enough to require the evacuation l
. - - , - - . - - . ~ _ . . - - - - - - . _ - - - .
paga 4 l
', s i region.
6rdt possible way to go abgut it is to ask people directly to
(
predict what they wuld do, for exemple, if asked to evacuate.
Ordinarily, a psychologist or sociologist does not take the responses et face value, translating'them directly into his own predictions. In
,' s .
predicting elections,;for nxa.mple, the forecaster often does not report n ,.
the raw. percentages,
/ but takes into account the degree of a respondent's -
declared intention t'o vote, the strength of feeling for and against the candidates, and tre ds over time (which may' affect the interpretation of tAe S undeMded vote). .
Similarly, in attempting to predict how well an
.I evacuation plan cotid'be carried out,ine probably would want to use information of,all /
,the. kinds just described, and not simply rely on the
- respondents' oin predictions.*
a <
7.
As to the validity of information gained from surveys, it is difficult to giida[ simple answer, since the kinds of information are so
,~
variegated.
,j -
Sam 61e ' surveys kre in many respects like a, census, except that they use statistical sampling techniques to draw representative small groups of a population of interest, from whose responses predictions can be made accurately about an entire population. The technology of sampling is' highly developed and amazingly precise. Even
~
.; $ 40 years ago, whea I was conducting surveys cf the American public's '
2 n J ;- buying of war bonds for the U.S. Treasury Department, we were able to tj -
draw samples of about 1,000 respondents and project from their answers I the amount of bonds sold in a nation-wide drive to within a few
~
"The most common tack to increase the predictability of behavior from attitude has been the 'other vagfables' approach. In addition to the central attitude, measures are hiso obtained of related and conflicting attitudes and of the individual's perception of, pssibly situational constraints" (Kiesler & Munson,1975).
t
+
eW p
e
pago 5 percentage points. Tne basic technique of probability sampling is to I
give every member of a population an equal chance to be included. That can be done so accurately that the degree of precision attained is a simple function of the number of persons in the sample.
- 8. In recent years, methodological research has shown that a population can be sampled to a degree of adequacy satisfa:: tory for most purposes by taking a sample of telephone numbers, since 975 of households in the U.S. now have telephones. The validity of data obtained by this cost-effective method has proved to be equal to that from face-to-face interviews.
- 9. When it comes to obtaining demographic infomation, like the number of families having children in school, the numbers of persons in an area who own cars or who live alone, there simply is no better way to find out than to ask people, as a census dc,es. The amount of lying or dissimulation on most items of infomation that are not self-incriminating is truly negligible. There can hardly be any doubt that emergency planning could be carried out more effectively in the presence of full infomation of this relatively objective kind than without it.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Census does not provide a great deal of the kinds of information needed. For example, the census does not tell how many persons in the EPZ do not have a fluent grasp of spoken or written English; hence, we do not know how many people would be unable to read the infomation brochures distributed by the licencees or to understand emergency instructions given in English over the EBS. The only feasible way to estimate the size of the problem is a sample survdf.
(
. pass C 10.
Likewise, there is no better way to ascertain a person's beliefs than to ask him or her directly. Values and attitudes can to some extent be inferred indirectly from observations of behavior, but few psychologists would rely wholly on such observations if it were possible to ask questions. ~
11.
Statements of intention, especially intentions to buy or save. .
. are considered such a valuable basis for econor.ic prediction that both the government ano industry have invested a good deal of money in annual surveys of spending and saving behavior.
The best known are those conducted for many years under the direction of the late George Katona at the University of Michigan's Survey Research Center, which began during the years when Katona and his colleagues worked at the'Divison of Program Surveys in Washington. I had the privilege of working with Dr. Katona on the first of these studies.
- 12. If the question is asked, "How well can overt behavior be predicted from attitudes?" an answer is given by Cialdini, Petty and Cacioppo (1981) in the authoritative Annual Survey of Psychologv. They write: "The attitude-behavior problem has continued to generate a great deal of research, but no longer are researchers questioning g attitudes predict behaviors, they are investigating when attitudes predict l behaviors. ... attitudes have a great deal of predictive utility." The '
research of Ajzen and Fishbein (1977) in particular shows that poor results in past studies are largely attributable to a failure to zero in '
on the particular behavior precisely enough. Thus, one could not predict .
very accurately how many people would evacuate an area in case of a
.~
2 page 7
.i
~j ' specific accident scenario on the basis of answers question to a general about attitude toward nuclear power.
.f(
..a Asking something like, "What would
/}
you do--go about your usual business, stay indoors
, or leave the area--in 101 case of an accident at Indian Point?" would permit somewh t
,: a more accurate ji;! prediCion because it would match the behavior in terms of what Ajzen and
(.' Fishbein call action (the specific act of evacuating)
. and context (that
.' of an accident at Indian Point), but is still vague and time, on target and the context lacks specificity.
y The Suffolk County survey is exemplary in this respect, for (in tenas of context) e s out a it sp ll series of precise accident scenarios, and inons follow-up it questi clarifies target (where the respondent wouldans). go and by wnat me Only the time referent is necessarily unspecified; it i s doubtful that it would have made much difference if the question ue had incl d d like this: something
" Suppose that Shoreham were to start noperations next m e
and13.three weeks later there were an accident..."
In short, it means nothing to invoke a vague concept of
" authenticity," when research has zeroed in on the specific aspects of behavior that must be invoked in a question to maximi ze predictability.
Indeed, when there is a good match between attitude que ti s ons and the behavior being predicted as to action, target
, context, and time, it is possible to predict behavior in situations the respondent experienced. not yet has 1he objection by Drs. Lecker and Dynes toample the use of s surveys to aid in emergency planning on the ground a on is that the situ ti too hypothetical thus lacks cogency.
t
paga 8
- 14. Tne Suffolk-Shoreham study gives a good example of the i difference made by specificity concerning the hypothetical situation. In the first scenario presented, respondents were asked to imagine that as a result of an accident at the Shoreham nuclear plant, persons within 5 miles of the plant were advised to remain indoors; 40% of those surveyed .
living witnin that area said that they would evacuate, plus 40% of those living from 6 to 10 miles from the plant. When the scenario closely matched the actual accident at TMI (pregnant women and pre-school children asked to evacuate within 5 miles, those from 6 to 10 miles advised to remain indoors), the percentages indicating they would leave the region went up to 57 and 52. These rather closely match the actual figures obtained by Flynn (1979) in a telephone survey at TNI: within 5 miles, 60% evacuated and from 6 to 10 miles, 44%. (In the next more remote zone, the figures are 305 for Shoreham and 32% for TMI--a close correspondence, even though the areas were not defined in exactly the same way.) Note also that Houts el al. (1981) report "approximtely 60 percent" of the respondents in their telephone survey of the 5-mile zone haa evacuated. It is striking that the Suffolk results from the TMI-like scenario more closely match the actual TMI results than they do the results from their own, slightly less severe, first scenario.
- 15. The THI data are noteworthy also for the degree to which the two 6
G
~
p:go 9 independent telcph:ne surysys replicate ene ansther, though they were l done at slightly different times.
( Even the reasons given for leaving showed great agreement:
Flynn Houts Situation seemed dangerous 91 % 82%
~
Information on situation was confusing 83% 78%
. To protect children 61 % 50%
To protect pregnancy 8% 85 To avoio confusion of forced evacuation 765 68%
Pressure from someone outside familly 28% 22%
Trip planned before incident SS 7%
Other (free response)* 11 1%
- No other reason, not even 'It was a nice spring weekend for a trip,'
occurred often enough to be tabulated in either survey.
- 16. It is true that the less time elapsed between the survey and the benavior to be predicted, the better the prediction (Davidson & Jaccard, 1979;~ Schwartz,1978). The implication is that surveys like the Suffolk County study need to be done frequently. I would advise an annual survey in the Indian Point area; if the results of the second study are very close to those of the first, and if relevant conditions in the area do not change markedly, a third stu@ could be deferred somewhat.
- 17. It might be added that a considerable bo@ of research has
. validated Fishbein and Ajzen's (1975) theory that the best predictor of in. .. . . .
p:go 10 behavior is the actor's intention to perform the behavior. It has been I
successfully applied to predicting family planning behavior (Davidson &
Jaccard,1979; Vinocur-Kaplan,1978), use of alcohol by adults (Kilty, 1978) and adolescents (Schlegel, Crawford & Sanborn,1977), and voting on a nuclear power plant initiative (Bowman & Fishbein,1978).
- 18. The principal alternative theory attracting current research effort in this field is that of Triandis (1977,1980). It uses a combinat'io<. of a person's intentions, habits (often measured by a record of past behavior), psychological arousal, and facilitating conditions in the environment. Though so;ae research supports this theory, in the only direct comparison of predictions based on the two approaches, the Fishbein-Ajzen theory proved superior in predicting students' church attendance (Brinberg,1979). Note that even in this alternative theory (that of Triandis,1977), predictions are based on the past behavior in I'
the same situation of the particular persons in question, not that of other people in other situations, as is advocated by Dr. Dynes. It would be impossible to apply the Triandis theory to predicting evacuation behavior at Indian Point, since there is no history of such previous behavior by the persons involved on which to build.
- 19. Let us consider, by contrast, the procedure urged by Drs. Dynes and Lecker--one could hardly dignify it by calling it a theory--namely, that the future behavior of people during a raciologir.a1 emergency at Indian Point can be best predicted on the basis of the behavior of other people at othe_r, places in different types of emergencies taking place some years ago. It relies upon three obvious fallacies.
(
, pass 11
- 20. First, it ignores the major role of the situation in detemining I
behavior, which has been thoroughly established in a large body of recent psychological research stimulated by the radical situationalism of l Mischel (1968). In my unpublished review of TMI research I have
, identified no less than six ways in which responses to an important aspect of the situation--the radiological nature of the threat--brought about behavioral findings unprecedented in previous disaster research.
21 . Second, it assumes that people everywhere are the same, in all relevant respects, but especially that they have a unifom dominant response to stress, which is to become confonning and dependent upon constituted authorities. The literature to the contrary is so enormeus that it would be tedious indeed to document more than a representative fraction of it. Surely the extraordinary diversity of human responses to stressful situations like emergencies is well known (see, for example, Goldberger & Breznitz,1982; Janis & Mann,1977; Menninger,1963; Grinker
& Spiegel,1945; Hamilton,1979). A substantial subdiscipline in psychology for many years has been devoted to the study of individual differences (see, for example, Anastasi,1958; Tyler,1956). A great deal of the work done at the Research Center for Mental Health has been focused on important dimensions of individual difference called cognitive styles (Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton & Spence,1959). We have demonstrated over and over that people of contrasting cognitive styles
, react to precisely the same situation in diametrically opposite ways (see, for excaple, Klein, 1954; 1970). Likewise, a large part of the literature of abnormal and clinical psychology, like that of psychiatry,
(
1
p go 12 is devoted to elucidating the extremely variegated ways in which people
( break down under various types of stress (see, for example, Holt,1968; Janis, Mahl, Kagan & Holt,1969). Dr. Lecker's unifornitarian stance is not supported by any serious scientific literature known to me.
- 22. The third fallacy is to assume that the American people have not .
changed in any important respects during the past few de ades. It happens that one of the most striking and consistently reported long-term trends in American public opinion ever reported is the steady erosion of public faith in authority figures. Long reported in various journals of public opinion, it is now the subject of a full-length book, by Lipsit &
Schneider (1983). In Appendix I, I present some representative data from a variety of reputable polling firms, which document this trend. All aspects of "the establishment," from governmental institutiocs like the Congress and Supreme Court to the mass media, big business, labor unions, and toe universities, have lost the trust and faith of the public over the past 20 years. It is not difficult to understand why people would have been disillusioned about the credibility of duly constituted authorities when the President of the United States was shown up to have deliberately lied and covered up the Watergate affair, and when so many figures in a previous administration were shown in the Pentagon Papers to have behaved in a similar way abcut the war in southeast Asia.
- 23. It is difficult to understand how anyone who lays so much stress on the role of faith in authorities and leaders in an emergency could .
shrug aside as of no importance such massive evidence of widespread attitudinal change over time. One manifestation of it in human response
,' p:ss 13 during emergency is the looting and other forms of public disorder during
( the New York City blackout of 1977. Dr. Dynes himself has written about looting as a new phenomenon of public behavior. It can hardly be disregarded as a portent that the growing mood of alienation in America l
- will make it considerably less certain that the public will believe what authorities and experts tell them in case of an accident at Indian Point.
and that they will comply with instructions. These data help us to understand the surprising new phenomenon of shadow evacuation at Three Mile Island. In this instance, people did not follow the course of behavior indicated by the authorities when at least 150,000 of them outside the 5-mile zone (where a limited evacuation was recommended) decided on their own to leave the area.
- 24. In relation to Dr. Lecker's repeated statement during his cross examination that in an emergency at Indian Point, people would turn trustingly and obediently to the constituted authorities because of the existence of an emergency plan, certain data from the studies of Altschuler (1982) and Yankelovich, Skelly and White (1981) are especially important. They agree in finding thatmost people in the EPZ do not trust Con Edison, and that very substantial minorities indicate that they would give little credence to statements by PASNY, the NRC, or elected governmental figures. These are clear warning signals that many people will not behave in the traditional fashion of publics in nonradiological emergencies of bygone years, and that the smoothly coordinated, lockstep evacuation presumed by the licensees' consultants will be seriously disrupted by unpredictable and rebellious behavior of substantial numbers of people.
(
pag 2 14
- 25. Given this state of affairs, it is even more urgent that a i thorough and adequately funded study of the entire affected area be conducted by a finn of impeccable reputation for objectivity, such as Yankelovich, Skelly & White, along the lines of the Suffolk County survey.
State of New YorR
County of New YorR SWORN T BEFORE ME ;*f ,
n?tsd DAY OF. b d
~.
Robert R. Holt i %
myf" ,
~e. m 1
REFERENCES
(
A Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin,
, 1977, 84, 888-918.
Altschuler, R. J. Ready or Not: Public Preparedness for an Accident at at Indian Point. New York: NYPIRC,1982.
Anastasi, A. Differential psychology. (Third edition.) New York:
Macmillan,1958.
Bowman, C. H. & Fishbein, M. Understanding public reaction to energy proposals: An application of the Fishbein model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1978, 8, 319-340.
Brinberg, D.
An examination of the determinants of intention and behavior: A comparison of two n.odels. Journal of Applied Social Psycholog, 1979, 9, 560-575.
Cialdini, R. B. , Petty, R. E. , & Cacioppo, J. T. Attitude and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 1981, 32, 357-404.
Davidson, A. R. & Jaccard, J. J. Variables that moderate the attitude-behavior relation: Results of a longitudinal survey. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979, 37, 1364-1376.
Fishbein., M. & Ajzen, I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and reasearch. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley,
, 1976.
Flynn, C. B. Three Mile Island telephone survey. NUREG/CR-1093.
Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comunission,1979.
(
Gardner, R. , Holzman, P.S. , Klein, G.S. , Linton, H., & Spence, D.P. Cog-( nitive control . Psychological Issues,1959,1. Monograph No. 4.
Goldberger, L. & Breznitz, S. (eds.) Hand >ook of stress. New York:
Macmillan/ Free Press,1982.
Grinker, R. R. & Spiegel, J. Men under stress. Philadelphia: Blakiston, , ,
1945.
Hamilton. V. ' Personality' and stress. In V. Hamilton & D. M. Warburton (eds.) Human stress and cognition. New York: Wiley,1979.
Hol t, R. R. Revised edition of D. Rapaport, M.M. Gill, & R. Schafer's Diagnostic psychological testing. New York: International Universities Press,1968.
Houts, P. S. , Miller, R. W. , Tokuhata, G. K., Ham, K. S., di Sabella, R. M., & Goldhaber, M. K. Health-related behavioral impact of the Three Mile Island nuclear incident. (Parts I--III). Hershey, PA: ,
i Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine,1981. '
Janis, I. L. , Mahl, G. F. , Kagan, J. , & Holt, R. R. Personality:
Dynamics, development, and assessment. New York: Harcourt, Brace !
and World,1969.
Janis, I. L. & Mann, 1. Decision-making: A psychological analysis of i
_ conflict, choice,and conunitment. New York: Free Press,1977.
Kiesler, C. A. & Munson, P. A. Attitudes and opininns. Annual Review
{
of Psychology, 1975, 26, 415-456.
Kilty, K. M. Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of drink- ,
ing behavior. Journal of Studies of Alcohol, 1978, 39. 1178-11 94.
Klein, G. S. Need and regulation. In M. R. Jones (ed.) Nebraska symposium on motivation: 1954. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press,1954.
(
Klein, G. S. Perception, motives, and personality. New York: Knopf,
( 1970.
Lipsit, S. M. & Schneider, W. The confidence gap: Business, labor, and government in the public mind. New York: Free Press,1983.
Menninser, K. A. (with Mayman, M. & Pruyser, P.) The vital balance. New York: Viking,1963.
Mischel, W. Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley,1968.
Schlegel, R. P., Crawford, C. A., a Sanborn, M. D. Correspondence and mediational properties of the Fishbein model: An application to adolescent alcohol use. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1977, 13, 421-430.
Schwartz, S. H. Temporal instability as a moderator of the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978, 36, 715-724.
Triandis, H. C. Interpersonal behavior. Monterey: Brooks / Cole,1977.
Triandis, H.-C. Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: 1980. Lincoln: Ur.iversity of Nebraska Press,1980.
Tyler, L. E. The psychology of inditidual differences (second ed.) New York: Appleton-Century-Crof ts,1956.
Vinocur-Kaplan, D. To have--or not to have--another child: Family plan-ning attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology . 1978, 8, 29-46.
Yankelovich, Skelly and White, Inc. Final Report--Results of Emergency Planning Survey Around Indian Point Power Plant. Unpublished report, New York,1981.
1 1
APPENDIX 1
( Measures of confidence in institutional representativeness, trustworthiness and accountability.
- 1) "The government is run by a few big interests looking out themselves." ,
1958 1980 AGREE 185 76%
- 2) "The government in Washington cannot (only some of the time /none of the time) be trusted to do what is right."
1964 1980 AGREE 25% 71%
- 3) Feel tnat "quite a few of the people running the government don't seem to know what they're doing."
1958 1980 AGREE 28% 63%
(SOURCE: Center for Political Studies, Institute for Social Research University of Michigan Election Studies)
- 4) "Most public officials (people in public office) are not really interested in the problems of the average man."
1980 AGREE 73%
DISAGREE 27%
(SOURCE: National Opinion Research Center; General Social Surveys,1980) ,
- 5) "As far as people in charge of running (READ EACH ITEM) are-concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them?"
(
- 6) "Do you tnink public officials have been honest in telling the people I all they know about the danger from the Three Mile Island accident, or was the danger greater, or less than they said?"
1979 More danger than they 55%
said Told all they knew 20%
Danger was less than they said 8%
No opinion 17%
(SOURCE: CBS/New York Times Poll; April,1979)
- 7) "How much trust do you have in what the government tells you about the risks of nuclear power?"
1978 A great deal 16%
Some 42%
Very little 42%
- 8) "How much trust do you have in what the opponents of nuclear power tell you about the risks of nuclear power?"
1978 A great deal 8%
Some 51 %
Very little 41%
(SOURCE: Bureau of Social Science Research, for Resources for.the Future; July /Aug.,1978)
(
CONFIDENCE IN INSTITUTIONS .
1 981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1 973 1972 1 971 1966
, Medicine 37 34 30 42 43 42 43 49 57 48 61 73 Higher educational institutions 34 36 33 41 37 31 36 40 44 33 37 61 The U.S Supreme Court 29 27 28 29 29 22 28 34 33 28 23 50 The military 28 28 29 29 27 23 24 29 40 35 27 61 The White House 28 18 15 14 31 11 X 18 18 X X X The executive branch of the fed. government 24 17 17 14 23 11 13 18 19 27 23 41 Television news 24 29 37 35 28 28 35 32 41 X X X Major companies 16 16 18 22 20 16 19 15 29 27 27 55 Congress 16 18 18 10 17 9 13 16 X 21 19 42 lhe press 16 19 28 23 10 20 26 25 30 18 18 29 (X = not asked)
SOURCE: Harris Survey: Trends in Confidence in Institutions; 1981/f85; as of Oct. 22, 1981)
Curriculum Vitae ROBERT R. HOLT Personal Information Born in Jacksonville, Florida, December 27, 1917 Address: 20 East 8th Street, New York, NY 10003 Married; 4 children Education Princeton University, B. A., 1939 (Highest honors)
Harvard University, M.A., 1941 Harvard University, Ph.D., 1944 Attended courses and seminars for several years in the Washington School of Psychiatry and the Topeka Institute for Psychoanalysis (1944-53)
Certification Diploraate in Clinical Psychology of the American Board of Examiners in Professional Psychology, 1952 Certified Psychologist, New York State, 1958-present Honors / Fellowships / Awards Phi Beta Kappa, 1938 Sigma Xi, 1943 Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford, Calif., and Special Research Fellow, National Institute of Mental Health, 1960-61.
Research Career Award, National Institute of Mental Health, 1962-present.
Great Man Award, Society for Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment, 1969.
Psychologist of the Year Award, New York Society of Clinical Psycholo-gists, 1973.
Williara V. Silverberg Memorial Lecturer, American Academy of Psycho-Analysis, December 1973.
. Award, Distinguished Contributions to Clinical Psychology for 1974.
Division of Clinical Psychology, Division 12 of the American Psy-chological Association, August, 1974.
Sandor Rado Memorial Lecturer, Columbia University Institute for Psycho-analysis, 1978.
Philips Distinguished Visitor, Haverford College, Nov. 20-21, 1980.
l l
Holt--2 l Positions Held 1941-44 Research Assistant, Harvard Psychological Clinic, Cambridge, MA 1941-44 Tutor and Teaching Fellow, Hervard and Radcliffe, Cambridge, MA .
1944-46 Study Director Division of Program Surveys, B.A.E., Wash., DC 1944 Instructor American University. Wash., DC 1946-49 Clinical Psychologist, Winter V.A. Hospital, Topeka, Kansas .
1946-50 Clinical Assistant Professor, University of Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas 1947-49 Associate Psychologist The Menninger Foundation. Topeka, Kansas 1949-53 Senior Psychologist, Research Department. The Menninger Foundation, Topeka, Kansas 1949-53 Lecturer. Topeka Institute for Psychoanalysis, Topeka, Kansas 1951-53 Director of Psychological Staff. The Menninger Foundation (Also served as Acting Director, Department of Research, June-September, 1952; June-September, 1953) 1953-58 Associate Professor of Psychology, Graduate School of Arts and Science, New York University ,
1953-63 Director, Research Center for Mental Health, New York University '
1953-60 Part-time private practice of diagnostic testing, New York, NY 1956-61 ' Member, Fellowship Comittee, Foundations Fund for Research in Psychiatry 1958- Professor of Psychology, New York University 1963-69 Co-Director, Research Center for Mental Haalth, NYU 1963-65 Member, National Institutes of Healtn, Mental Health Fellowship Review Panel 1964-68 Member, NYU Arts and Science Research Fund Comittee 1967-68 Visiting Professor of Clinical Psychology, Harvard University 1968-69 Member, NIMH Mental Health Extramural Research Advisory Comittee 1969- Senior Staff Member, Research Center for Mental Health, NYU 1969-72 Member, Board of Trustees Psychological Service Center, New York Society of Clinical Psychologists 1970-74 Member, NYU Institutional Grants Comittee '
1975-76 Member, NYU Arts and Science Research Fund Comittee 1976-77 Member, NYU Center for Humanistic Studies
- 1981- Member, NYU Human Subjects Committee 1982- Member, NYU Graduate Curriculum Comittee Professional Society Participation -
American Psychological Association: Associate, 1941-51; Fellow, 1951-present (Divisions 8 and 12). -
Member, Advisory Comittee on Psychological Bulletin and Psychological Monographs, 1954-55.
Member, Council of Representatives, 1954-56, 1961-63.
Representative, World Federation for Mental Health, 1954-56.
Holt--3 APA Division of Clinical Psychology (Division 12): President-elect.
1961-62; Past-President, 1962-63 Committee on Examinations in Clinical Psychology: Member, 1947-48; Chairman, 1948-49 Comittee on Nominations and Elections: Member, 1948-50, 1954-58; Chairman, 1956-57, 1962-63 Comittee on Publication Outlets in Clinical Psychology: Chairman, 1949-52 Executive Comittee: Member-at-large, 1951-53; Member and Council Delegate, 1954-57, 1960-63 Comittee on Divisional Reorganization: Member, 1961-62 Organizing Comittee, Conference on an Idealized Training Program for Psychotherapists: Chairman, 1961-63 Awards Comittee: Member, 1964-65 Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues: Member, 1941-60; 1961-present Comittee on Atomic Education: Member, 1948-50 Comittee on Arms Control and Disarmament: Member, 1961-64 Topeka Psychoanalytic Society: Associate Member, 1947-54 Society for Projective Techniques and Rorschach Institute Inc.:
Fellow, 1948-58 Comittee on Membership: Member, 1949-51 Executive Comittee: Member, 1949-53 Comittee on Ethics: Member, 1954-58 New York Chapter: Executive Board Member, 1954-55 American Association for the Advancement of Science: Member, 1949-62; Fellow, 1962-present Council for the Advancement of the Psychological Professions and Sciences:
Member, Board of Governors, 1971-74 New York State Psychological Association: Member, 1955-1972 Comittee on Peace: Member, 1961-62 Comittee on Mental Health Clinic 1.icensure: Member, 1962-63 Comittee on Response to Social Issues: Member, 1969-71 World Federation for Mental Health: Associate, 1956-63 American Association of University Professors: Member, 1958-present Psychonomic Society: Member, 1960-70 Association for the Psychological Study of Sleep: Member, 1961-71 Congress of Scientists on Survival: Interim Council Member, 1962-63 Federation of American Scientists: Member, 1962-present Council on Research in Bibliography: President, 1965-73 Peace Science Society (International): Member, 1965-present Environmental Research Fund: Member, Board of Scientific Advisors, 1971-present Society for General Systems Research: Menber,1976-present
O Holt--4 Editorial Experience The TAT Newsletter Editor, 1946-52 Journal of Social Issues, Member, Editorial Advisory Board, 1949-51 Journal of Projective Technioues, Member Editorial Advisory Board, !
1949-60 '
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Consulting Editor, 1955-60 Journal of Psychological Researches (Macras. India), Editorial Board, l 1956-66 ~
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, Member, Editorial Board, 1957- l present '
Psychological Issues, Member Editorial Board, 1958-present )
American Imago, Member, Board of Consultants, 1963-present i Handbook of Clinical Psychology, Member Editorial Board, 1963-65 '
Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Science, Member, Editorial Board, 1969-77 I Core Information Series: Psychology, Member Editorial Advisory Board, ,
1974-75 . l Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, Member, Editorial Advisory Board, '
1978-present i Journal of Mental Imagery, Member Editorial Advisory Board, 1981-present Imagination, Cognition and Personality: The Scientific Study of '
Consciousness, Member, Editorial Advisory Board, 1980-present Review of Psychoanalytic Books, Member, Editorial Board, 1980-present International Forum of Psychoanalysis, Member, Advisory Board, 1982-present Consultantshihs
, Consultant to Research Department Menninger Foundation. 1953-60 Trainir.) Consultant, New York Area Vaterans Administration, 1953-64 Consultant to Bank Street College of Education Advisory Connittee for Teacher Selection Project, New York, NY, 1953-58 Consultant to Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology, New York, NY, 1957-58 Chairman, Conaittee of Consultants Mental Health Book Review Index, j 1958-73 l Consultant to New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1958-59 Consultant to Psychology Panel of the Armed Forces--NRC Comittee on Bio-Astronautics, 1959-60 Consultant to Pregnancy Research Project, Beth Israel Hospital, Boston, MA, 1959-60 ,"
Consultant to Department of Psychiatry, City Hospital at Elmhurst, Queens,
, NY, 1960-61 Consultant to Milledgeville State Hospital, Milledgeville, Georgia, .
1962-63 1
Consultant to PANE (People Against Nuclear Energy), Middletown, PA, 1981-present
Bibliography ROBERT R. HOLT
- 1. Holt, R. R. level of aspiration as ego defense. Psychological Bulletin, 1942, 39, 457 (Abstract).
- 2. Sanford, F. H., 4 Holt, R. R. Psychological determinants of morale.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1943, 38, 93-95.
- 3. [ Holt, R. R.] Contribution to Cha In E. G. Boring and
. Marjorie Van de Water (Eds.),Psychology pter XIII. for the fighting mar..
Washington, DC: 1he Infantry Journal, 1943.
- 4. Holt, R. R.
Effects of ego-involvement upon levels of aspiration.
Psychiatry, 1945, 8_, 299-317.
- 5. Holt, R. R. 14 vel of aspiration: Ambition or defense? Journal of Experimental Psychology,1946, H, 398-416.
- 6. Maccoby, E. E., & Holt, R. R. How surveys are made. Journal of
, 45-57. Re Social Issues, tions in T. Newcomb1946, 4 ,2_E. Hartley Eds.),(printed Readings with minor modifica-in social psychology. New York: Holt, 1947.
- 7. Holt, R. R. The TAT Newsletter, from Vol. I, No. 1 (September, 1946) to Vol. V, No. 4 (Spring 1952. Vol. III, No. 1, through Vol. V, No. 4, reprinted in Journal of Projective Techniques (Rorschach Research Exchange), f rom 1949, y, to 1952,15.
- 8. Holt, R. R. Motivational factors in levels of aspiration. Stannaries of theses 1943-45. Cambridge: Harvard University, 1947.
Pp. 603-607 (Abstract).
- 9. [ Holt, R. R.] The didactic curricultmi. Bulletin of The Menninger Clinic, 1947,_11_, 123-134 (Special issue on training in clinical psychology).
- 10. Bellak, L., 4 Holt, R. R. Somatotypes in relation to dementia praecox. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1948, 104 713-724.
Reprinted in G. W. Lasker 4 F. P. Thieme (Eds.)," Tea,rbook of physical anthropology, Vol. 4, 1948. New York: 1he Viking
'und, 1949.
- 11. Holt, R. R. The assessment of psychiatric aptitude from the TAT.
American Psychologist, 1948, 3, 271 (hstract).
- 12. Holt, R. R. Some statistical problems in clinical research. Educa-tional and Psychological Measurement, 1950, 10 609-627.
Reprinted in 5. J. Beck 4 H. B. Molish (Eds.T, Reflexes to intelligence, entitled "What price quantification." New York:
Basic Books, 1959.
I Holt--2
- 13. Holt, R. R. An approach to the validation of the Szondi test through a systematic study of unreliability. Journal of Projective Techniques, 1950, 14 435-444. (Abstract in American Psychologist, 1949, { ,269.) 1 1
- 14. Luborsky, L. B., Holt, R. R., 6 Morrow, W. R. Interim report of the research project on the selection of medical men for .
psychiatric training. Bulletin of The Menninger Clinic,1950, l M,92-101.
- 15. Holt , R. R. H e accuracy of self-evaluations: Its measurement and some of its personological correlates. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1951, 15,95-101. (Abstract in American Psychologist, 1947,2,276-277.)
- 16. Holt, R. R. The n ematic Apperception Test. In H. H. 6 G. L.
Anderson (Eds.), An intioduction to projective techniques.
New York: Prentice-Hall, 1951. Pp. 181-229.
- 17. Holt, R. R. Part III--Psychological tests. In G. Devereux, Reality and dream. New York: International Universities Press, 1951. Pp. 377-413.
- 18. Holt, R. R. An inductive method of analyzing defense of self-esteem. Bulletin of The Menninger Clinic, 1951, ,15, 6-15.
- 19. Holt, R. R. Chapter 10 [ untitled; an analysis of TAT and MAPS test]. In E. Shneidman et al., Thematic test analysis. New York: Grune 6 Stratton, 1951. Pp. 101-1).8.
- 20. Holt, R. R. Our fears and what they do to us. Menninger Quarterly, 1951, 6, 9-16.
- 21. Holt, R. R., 6 Luborsky, L. Research in the selection of psychia-trists: A second interim report. Bulletin of he Menninger Clinic, 1952, 16_, 125-135.
- 22. Holt, R. R. He case of Jay: Interpretation of Jay's hematic
, Apperception Test. Journal of Projective Techniques _, 1952, M,457-461.
- 23. Holt, R. R., Chotlos, J. W., 6 Scheerer, M. Publication problems in psychology. American Psychologist, 1953, 8_, 235-242.
- 24. Holt, R. R. Implications of some contemporary personality theories for Rorschach rationale. In B. Klopfer, M. D. Ainsworth, W. G. '
Klopfer 6 R. R. Holt, Developments in the Rorschach technique, Vol. I. Technique and theory. New York: World Book Co., 1954.
Pp. 501-560.
1- ._ -
l Holt--3
- 25. Holt, R. R. Problems in the use of sample surveys. In R. Kotinsky
& H. L. Witmer (Eds.), _Coinnunity programs for mental hecith l
Cambridge. Harvard University Press, 1955. Pp. 325-358.
- 26. Holt, R. R., 6 Luborsky, L. 'Ihe selection of candiates for psycho-analytic training: On the use of interviews and psychological
- tests. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1955, 3_, 666-681.
- 27. Holt, R. R. Rejoindet to Mayzner's review of Schafer's " Psycho-analytic interpretation in Rorschach testing." Psychology Newsletter, 1956, 7, 47-50.
- 28. Holt, R. R. Gauging primary and se.ondary processes in Rorschach responses. Journal of Projective Techniques, 1956, 20, 14-25.
- 29. Luborsky, L., 6 Holt, R. R. The selection of candidates for psycho-analytic training: Implications from research on the selection of psychiatric residents. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Psychopathology, 1957, 18, 166-176.
- 30. Holt, R. R. Clinical and statistical prediction: A reformulation and some new data. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 56 1-12.
1958, E , abnormal behavior:Selected study Reprinted in M. Zax readings. 6 G.
New Stricker (Eds.),~The--
York:
Macmillan, 1964; 2nd ed., 1969. Also in I. N. Mensh (Ed.),
Clinical psychology: Science and profession. New York: Mac-millan, 1966. Also In E. 1. Megargee (Ed.), Research in clinical assessment. New York: Harper 6 Row,1966. Pp. 657-672.
- 31. Klein, G. S., Spence, D. P., Holt, R. R., & Gourevitch, S. Cognition without awareness: Subliminal influences upon conscious thought.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 57 Abstract in American Psychologist, 1955,10,,380.T,255-266.
- 32. Holt, R. R. Formal aspects of the TAT--A neglected resource. Journal of Projective Techniques, 1958, 22 163-172. Also in Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series in the SoHa,l Sciences, P-481,1966.
- 33. Goldberger, L., 6 Holt, R. R. Experimental interference with reality contact (perceptual isolation): Method and group results.
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1958, 127,99-112.
)
- 34. Holt, R. R., 4 Luborsky, L. Personality patterns of psychiatrists (2 vols.). New York: Basic Books, 1958.
- 35. Holt, R. R. Researchmanship, or how to write a dissertation in clinical psychology without really trying. American Psychologist, 14, 151.
1959, wry. New York: Van Reprinted in R.1963.
Nostrand, A. Baker Also(Ed.), Psychlogy reprinted in the in Psygram, 1978, 18(1), 34-35 (South African Psychol. Assn., Johannesburg).
Holt--4
- 37. Holt, R. R. A comment on the Wiener-Nichols controversy, Journal of Projective Techniques, 1959,,23, 377-378.
- 38. Holt, R. R. Discussion remarks on "Further observations on the Poetz1 phenomenon--A study of day residues" by Charle Fisher.
Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 1959, 28, 442.
1
- 39. Holt, R. R. , 4 Goldberger, L. Personological correlates of reac-tions to perceptual isolation. USAF WADC Technical Reports,1959, No.59-735, 46 pp. .
- 40. Holt, R. R. (with the collaboration and assistance of Joan Havel, Leo Goldberger, Anthony Philip and Reeva Safrin). Manual for the scoring of primary process manifestations in Rorschach responses (7th ed.). New York: Research Center for Mental Health, New York University,1959(nimeographed). (Later drafts in 1962,1%3 and t
1969.)
l 41. Holt, R. R., 4 Goldberger, L. Research on the effects of isolation on cognition functioning. USAF WADC Technical Reports,1960, No.60-260, 22 pp.
l 42. Holt, R. R. , 4 Havel, J. A method for assessing primary and secondary I process in the Rorschach. In M. A. Rickers-Gysiankina (Ed.),
l Rorschach psychology. New York: Wiley, 1960, pp. 263-315.,
- 43. Klein, G. S., 4 Holt, R. R. Problems and issues in current studies of subliminal activation. In J. G. Peatman and E. L. Hartley (Eds.),
Festschrift for Gardner Murphy. New York: Harper,1960. Pp. ;
75-93.
)
- 44. Holt, R. R. Discussion remarks on "The effect of dream deprivation l l and excess: An experimental demonstration of the necessity for l
dreaming" by William C. Dement and Charles Fisher. Psychoanalytic Quarterly,1960, y, 608.
- 45. Holt, R. R. Recent developments in psychoanalytic ego psychology and their implications for diagnostic testing. Journal of Projective Techniques, 1960, 24, 254-266.
- 46. Holt, R. R. Cognitive controls and prima 7 processes. _ Journal of !
Psychological Researches, 1960, 4, L -112.
- 47. Pine, F., & Holt, R. R. Creativity and primary process: A study of -
adaptive regression. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, ;
1960, 61, 370-379.
_ l
- 48. Goldberger, L., 4 Holt, R. R. Experimental interference with reality contact: Individual differences. In P. Solomon et al. (Eds.),
. - --- - . - . . - .. - - - . - . - ..- - . - - - - .. -------A
Holt--5 Sensory deprivation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1961.
Pp. 130-142. l
- 49. Holt, R. R. The nature of TAT stories as cognitive products: A psy-
. choanalytic approach. In J. Kagan 4 G. lesser (Eds.),
Contemporary issues in thematic apperceptive methods. Spring-field, IL: C. C. Thomas, 1961. Pp. 3-43.
- 50. Holt, R. R., 4 Goldberger, L. Assessment of individual resistance to sensory alteration. In B. E. Plaherty (Ed.), Psychophysiological aspects of space flight. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961. Pp. 248-262.
, 51. Holt, R. R. Clinical judgment as a disciplined inquiry. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1961, 133, 369-382. Bobbs-Merrill l Reprint Series in the Social Sciences, P-480,1966.
- 52. Goldberger, L., 4 Holt, R. R. Studies on the effects of perceptual alteration. USAF ASD Technical Reports, 1961, No.61-416, 20 pp.
- 53. Goldberger, L., 4 Holt, R. R. A comparison of isolation effects and their personality correlates in two divergent samples. USAF WADC Technical Reports,1961, No.61-417, 46 pp.
- 54. Holt, R. R. The president's column. Newsletter, Division of Clinical Psychology, APA, 1961,14_(4), 5; 1962, Mll),1-2; M(2), 4-5; M(3),6-7.
- 55. Holt, R. R., 4 Proshansky, H. Roles for psychologists in promoting peace. SPSSI Newsletter, June 1962, 1-4.
l 56. Holt, R. R. A critical examination of Freud's concept of bound vs.
i free cathexis. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Associa-l tion, 1962, M , 475-525.
I
- 57. Holt, R. R. Indiviudality and generalization in the psychology of personality. 30 377-404. Trans-lated into Italian: Journal of Personality,1962, Individualita e genera 1 Tz~z,azione nella psi-cologia della personalita. Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata, l
Gi no-Agosto 1963. Reprinted in F. H. Sanford & E J.
N.57-58(Eds Capaldi , Advancing psychological science, Vol. I: Philo-sophies, methods, and approaches. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1964.
Also reprinted in E. Southwell 4 M. Merbain (Eds.), Personality:
Readings in theory and research: A book of readings. New York:
Prentice-Hall, 1966. Als'o", Bobbs-Merill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences, P-482, 1966. Also abridged under the title, "The logic of the romantic point of view in personology," in T. Millon (Ed.), lheories of psychopathology. Philadelphia: W. B.
Saunders, 1967. Pp. 315-322. Also reprinted in J. O. Whittaker (Ed.), Recent discoveries in psychology. Philadelphia: W. B.
Saunders,1972.
i Holt--6 Revised version: In R. S. Lazarus 4 E. M. Opton (Eds.), Per-sonality: Selected readings. Ptmguin Modern Psychology UPS 9. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books,1967. Pp.
38-65.
- 58. Holt, R. R. A clinical-experimental strategy for research in per- -
sonality. In S. Messick 4 J. Ross (Eds.), Measurement in per-sonality and cognitien. New York: Wiley, 1962.
- 59. Holt, R. R. Two influences on Freud's scientific thought: A frag-ment of intellectual biography. In R. W. White (Ed.), he study of lives. New York: Atherton Press, 1963. Pp. 364-387.
- 60. Holt, R. R. New directions in the training of psychotherapists (Edi-torial). Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1963, 1,8, 8 677-79.
- 61. Holt, R. R. Forcible indoctrination and personality change. In P.
Worchel 6 D. Byrne (Eds.), Personality change. New York: Wiley, i
1964 Pp. 263-3)8. ,
- 62. Holt, R. R. Imagery: he return of the ostracized. American Psy-chologist, 1964, 19, 254-264. Reprinted in E. P. Torrance 4 W.~ F. White (Eds.T Issues and advances in educational asy-chology: A book of readings. Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacoci,1969.
Also abridged in B. L. Kintz 4 J. L. Bruning (Eds.), Research in psychology: Recdings for the introductory course. Glenview, IL:
Scott, Foresman, 1970. Pp. 314-320.
- 63. Holt, R. R. He emergence of cognitive psychology (book essay).
Journal of the American Psychoc.nalytic Association, 1964, 1_2,,
650-665. ,
- 64. Holt, R. P.. A review of some of Freud's biological assumptions and their .8nfluence on his theories. In N. S. Greenfield & W. C.
lewis (Eds.), Psychoanalysis and current biological thought.
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1965. Pp.93-124.
- 65. Holt, R. R. E'xperisental methods in clinical psychology. In B.
Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of clinical psychology. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1965. Pp. 40-77.
- 66. Holt, R. R. Ego autonomy re-evaluated. International Journal of 46 151-167. Reprinted with critical -
Psycho-Analysis,1965, evaluations by S. C. Mi TTe,r, A. Namnum, B. B. Rubinstein, J.
Sandler 4 W. G. Joffe, R. Schafer, H. Weiner, and the author's rejoinder (see No. 71 below), International Journal of Psy-chiatry, 1967, 3, 481-536.
- 67. Holt, R. R. Freud's cognitive style. American Imago, 1965, _2_2, 2 163-179.
v Holt--7
- 68. Holt, R. R. Psychotherapy as an autonomous profession: An alter-native to the Clark Committee's proposal. In Preconference
- saterials prepared for the Conference on the Professional
' Preparation of Clinical Psychologists. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association,1965. Also in E. L. Hoch, A. O. Ross, 4 C. L. Winder (Eds.), Professional preparation of clinical psy-chologists. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1966.
- 69. Holt, R. R. A brave beginning to an enormous task. Critical evalua-tion of "A methodological study of Freudian theory" by A.
Kardiner, A. Karush, & L. Ovesey, International Journal of Psy-chiatry, 1966, 2, 545-548.
- 70. Holt, R. R. Measuring libidinal and aggressive motives and their "
controls by means of the Rorschach test. In D. Ievine (Ed.),
Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1966. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1966. Pp. 1-47. Reprinted in P. M. Lerner (Ed.),
_ Handbook of Rorschach scales. New York: International Universi- -
ties Press 1975.
- 71. Holt, R. R. On freedom, autonomy, and the redirection of psycho-analytic theory: A rejoinder. International Journal of Psy-chiatry, 1967, 3_, 524-536 (see also No. 66 above).
- 72. Holt, R. R. (Ed.). Motives and thought: Psychoanalytic essays in memory of David Rapaport. Psychological Issues, Monograph 18/19. -
New York: International Universities Press,1967.
- 73. Holt, R. R. David Rapaport: A memoir (September 30, 1911-December 14, 1960. In R. R. Holt (Ed.), Motives and thought (No. 72 above). Pp. 7-17.
- 74. Holt, R. R. ne development of the primary process: A structural view. In R. R. Holt (Ed.), Motives and thought (No. 72 above).
Pp. 345-383.
- 75. Holt, R. R. Beyond vitalism and mechanism: Freud's concept of psychic energy. In J. H. Masserman (Ed.), Science and psycho-analysis, Vol. XI: Concepts of ego. New York: Grune 4 Stratton, 1967. Pp. 1-41. And in B. Wolman (Ed.), Historical roots of contemporary psychology. New York: Harper 4 Row, 1968. Pp.
196-226. Abstract in Psychiatric Spectator, 1967, 4, 16-17 (Sando: publication).
- 76. Holt, R. R. Discussion: On using experiential data in personality assessment; Sympositan: n e role of experiential data in person-ality assessment, Journal of Projective Techniques and Person-ality Assessment, 1967, 31J 4), 25-30.
- 77. Holt, R. R. Diagnostic testing: Present status and future prospects.
J,ournal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1967, 144, 444-465.
E 6Ad
=
/ ,
h
~
3 b- - - 2 L -
/'
d i
E '
z -- Holt--8 r
- ll -
6 i
- 78. Holt, R. R. (Ed.). Revised edition of Diagnostic psychological 5 testing by D. Rapaport, M. M. Gill 6 R. Schafer. New York: 1 International Universities Press, 1968. d w
i 79. Holt, R. R. Freud, Sigmund. ._ International encyclopedia of the 34 g social sciences (Vol. 6). New York: Macmillan and The Free Fess,1968. Pp. 1-12. $a r i:
E - 80. Holt, R. R. As:essing personality. Fitt IV of I. L. Janis, G. F.
= T Mahl, J. Kagan 6 R. R. Holt, Pers.enality: Dynamics, development, i R and assessment. New York: }L E 0I1Ft, Brace 6 World, 1969. Pp. 2 E 575-801. J
-j
- 81. Holt, R. R. Kubie's dream and its impact upon reality: Psychotherapy $g as an autonomous profession. Journal of Nervous and Mental Dis-s ease ,,1969, 149, 186-207. j f ~
{- 82. Holt, R. R. The lasting value of the unconscious, or~ Rabkin fails to 3 Peirce Freud. Critical evaluation of "Is the unconscious neces- '
y +' sary?" by Richard Rabhin. International Journal of Psychiatry, ar- -
1969, 8, 585-589. ]g E . -
?
I 7 83. Holt, R.'R. - 6t another look at clinical and statistical prediction: 1:
y r, Or, is clinical psychology worthwhile? American Psychologist, =
1970, 25_, 337-349. l
- 84. Holt, R. R. On the interpersonal and intrapersonal consequences of d
_ expressmg or not expressing anger. Discussion of paper, "Experi- g
{
y mental investigations of hostility catharsis," by L. Berkowitz. g Journal of Consulting and' Clinical Psychology, 1970, 3,5, 8-12. g c
- 85. Holt, R. R. Artistic creativity and Rorschach measures of adaptive "
b . regression. In B. Klopfer, M. M. Meyer & F. B. Brawer (Eds.), 3 g "
Developmerat_s in th6 Rorschach techni_que, Vol. IIh Aspects of -
g- personality structure. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, =:
1970. Pp. 263-320..
g r
] -
{ 86. Holt, R. R. Freud's two images of man., " Western Psychologist Mono- :
-^
er graph Series, 'No. 2, 1971, 5-25. y ;
E . -
7 N ( 87. Holt!R.R. Some neglected assumptions and problems in psychology's d
=-
_ E"~information crisis. American Psychologist, 1971, 26, 331-334. .
J 3 et a ,
g
_' i 88. Holt, R.;R. Asse_ssina personality; New York: Harcourt Brace Jovano- ~
vich,1971 (paperiack reprint of Part IV, No. 30 aboyc).
~
E 89. Holt R. R. (Ed.).. New horizon for psychotherapy: Autonomy as a pro-3 .
mm fession. New York: International Universities Press,1971.
{ '
sa .
e a
{ ] ,,
g E <
E :
ma- - .
-. . _-. -. . - _ _ - = - . - - .
O Holt--9
- 90. Holt, R. R. Summary and pros >ect: 'Ihe dawn of a new profession.
In R. R. Holt (Ed.), New Torizon for psychotherapy (see No. 89 above), pp. 312-411.
- 91. Holt, R. R. In memoriam: George S. Klein. Psychological Issues, 1971, 7(3), v-vil .
- 92. Barr, H. B., Langs, R. J., Holt, R. R., Goldberger, L., 4 Klein, G. S.
LSD: Personality and experience. New York: Wiley, 1972.
- 93. Holt, R. R. Freud's mechanistic and humanistic image of man. In R. R. Holt 4 E. Peterfreund (Eds.), Psychoanalysis and Contempo-rary Science, 1972, 1_, 3-24.
- 94. Holt, R. R. On the nature and generality of mental imagery. In P. W.
Sheehan (Ed.), The function and nature of imagery. New York:
Academic Press, 1972.
- 95. Holt, R. R. Should the psychotherapist prescribe the pills?
Preferably not! International Journal of Psychiatry,1972, p(4),82-86.
- 96. Holt, R. R. Methods of research in clinical psychology. Morris-town, NJ: General Learning Press,1973.
- 97. [ Holt, R. R.] Personality. In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Dictionary of behavioral science. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.,
1973. P. 275.
- 98. Holt, R. R. On reading Freud. Introduction to Abstracts of the Standard Edition of Freud. New York: Jason Aronson,1974.
- 99. Holt, R. R. Book review: Loevinger, Jane, 4 Wessler, Ruth.
Measuring ego development, Vol. 1: Construction and use of a sentence completion test. Loevinger, Jane, Wessler, Ruth, 4 Redmore, Carolyn. Vol. 2: Scoring marc.21 for women and girls.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970. In Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1974, 158, 310-318.
100. Holt, R. R. In retrospect: Response to the Distinguished Contri-butioc Award, Division 12, APA. Clinical Psychologist,1974, H(1),~5-6. -
101. Holt, R. R. The current status of ?sychoanalytic theory. Behavioral Sciences Tape Library. Imonia, NJ: Sigma Information, 1974.
102. Holt, R. R. Clinical and statistical measurement and prediction:
How not to survey the literature. JSAS Catalog of Selected Docu-ments in Psychology, 1975, 5, 178. MS No. 837.
103. Holt, R. R. The past and future of ego psychology. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 1975,44(4),550-576.
't. %,
Holt--10 104. Holt, R. R. Drive or wish? A reconsideration of the ps !
theory of motivation. Psychological Issues,1976, 9(ychoanalytic 4, Whole No. l 36),158-197. -
105. Holt, R. R. Freud's theory of the primary process--present status.
Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Science, 1976, 5, 61-99.
106. Holt, R. R. A method for assessing primary and secondary process in the Rorschach. In M. A. Rickers-Ovslankina (Ed.), Rorschach Psy-chology (rev. ed.). New York: Krieger, 1977. '
107. Holt, R. R. The emerging Introduction field of sociobibliography: to L. Afflerbach he collected & M. Franck e.ssays (Eds.), o F Ilse Bry. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1977.
108. Holt, R. R. Methods in clinical psychology: Assessment, prediction and research (2 vols.). New York: Plema,1978.
109. Holt, R. R. Ideological and thematic conflicts in Freud's thought.
In S. Smith (Ed.), he hisean mind revisited: Essays in honor of Karl A. Menninger. New York: International Universities Press, 1978. .
3 110. Holt, R. R. He death and transfiguration of metapsychology. (he Sandor Rado Lecture, April 20, 1978) Reported by D. D. Olds in the Bulletin of the Association for Psychoanalytic Medicine, 1978, M(1),21-25.
111. Holt, R. R. heory, no; method, yes. (Review of Co>ing and defend- ,
ing: Processes of self-environment organization >y Norma Haan) '
Contemporary Psycaology, 1978, E(3), 139-141.
112. Holt, R. R. Review of Language and insight by Roy Schafer. Psycho-analytic Quarterly, 1979, g(3), 496-500.
}'
113. Holt, R. R. Freud's impact on modern morality. D e Hastings Center Report _, 1980, 19,(2), 38-46.
114. Holt, R. R. Was Freud really a psychologist? (Review of Freud's early >sychology of the neuroses: A historical perspective by Kenneth levin) Contemporary Psychology, 1980, g (2), 128-129.
115. Holt, R. R. Review of The scientific evaluation of Freud's theories '
and therapy by S. Fisher and R. P. Greenberg. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1980,168(7),445.
116. Holt, R. R. Loevinger's measure of ego development: Reliability and national norms for short male and female forms. Journal of Per-sonality and Social Psychology, 1980,39(5),909-920. .
4
. . - - -p.--m y r-er------+ w --
e-- -.-,m--e,w ww-r- .--wwg nw,- - -e, ---,w,- ,wwp-y*g v.-ww,g- m-- g-9 .-:-s-,.---*,--a.mw-i-c +g.-w-a,g-p.,y.------ --,--gyyygge
s Holt--11 117. Holt, R. R. Review of Symbol and neurosis: 91ected papers of Lawreree S. Kuble. Jot nal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 1980, H(3), 703-704.
118. Holt, R. R. The great analyst re-analyzed. (Review of Freud:
Biologist of the mind. Beyond the psychoanalytic legend by Frank J. Sulloway) Contemporary Psychology, 1981, 26(2), 95-96.
119. Holt, R. R. The death and transfiguration of metapsychology. Inter-national Review of Psycho-Analysis, 1981, 8(Part 2), 129-143.
120. Holt, R. R. A note on philosophy and the history of psychology's concern with imagery: Commentary on Ernest R. Hilgard's "Isagery and imagination in American psychology." Journal of Mental Imagery, 1981,5(1),38-40.
121. Holt, R. R. Review of Freud, the man and the cause by Ronald W.
Clark. Review of Psychoanalytic Books, 1982, IJ2), 3-13.
122. Holt, R. R. Comment on psychological stress worksho In P. Walker, W. E. Fraise, J. J. Gordon 6 R. C. Johnson (Eds.)p., Workshop on psychological stress associated with the proposed restart of Three Mile Island, Unit 1. NUREG/CP-0026 MIR-82W26. Washington, DC:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1982. Pp. 76-89.
123. Holt, R. R. Occupational stress. In L. Goldberger % S. Breznitz (Eds.), Handbook of stress. New York: Macmillan/ Free Press, 1982.
124. Holt, R. R. Come migliorare la ricerca descrittiva in psicologia clinica [ Improving descriptive research in clinical psychology).
Psicologia Clinica (Rome), 1982,1,(1). (By invitation) 125. Holt, R. R. Family secrets (Review of M. Balaary, Psychoanalyzing psychoanalysis: Freud and the hidden fault of the father). The Sciences,1982, E(8), 26-28.
Publications in press Holt, R. R. The manifest and latent meanings of aretapsychology. 'Ihe
. Annual of Psychoanalysis, in press.
Holt, R. R. Freud's impact upon modern morality and our world view.
In A. L. Caplan 4 Bruce Jennings (Eds.), Darwin, Marx, and Freud.
New York: Plenum, in press.
Holt, R. R. Freud, the free will controversy, and prediction in personology. In R. A. Zucker, J. Aronoff 6 A. I. Rabin (Eds.),
Personality and the prediction of behavier. New York: Academic Press, in press.
I Kai T. Erikson Department of Sociology Born in Vienna, Austria,1931 Yale University U.S. citizen (derivative,1937)
. New Haven, Connecticut Married,. two children EDUCATION 1949-1950 University of California, Berkeley ,
1950-1953 Reed College (B.A.)
1953-1955 University of Chicago (M.A.)
1955-1963 University of Chicago (Ph.D.)
POSITIONS
'1954-1955 Research Fellow, Family Study Center, University of Cfticass
. 1955-1957 Social Science Technician, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Walter Reed Army Medical Center (while on active duty, U.S. Army) 1959-1963 . Instructor to Assistant Professor, Departments of Psychiatry and Sociology, University of Pittsburgh 1963-1966 Associate Professor, Departments of Psychiatry and Sociology, Emory University 1966- Associate Professor to Professor, Department of '
Sociology and American Studies Program, Yale ,
University 1968-1969 Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford, California 1969-1973 Master, Trumbull College, Yale University (Chair, Council of Masters, 1970-1973) 1974-1977 Chair, American Studies Program, Yale University 1979- Editor, The Yale Review m .. _ . _ - _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ - _ _ _
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS Books 7 Wayward Puritans: A Study in the Sociology of Deviance (New York John Wiley, 1966)
Everything in Its Path: Destruction of 'Crummunity in the Buff alo Creek Floo_d (New York: Simca s Schuster,1976)
Articles "The Confirmation of the Delinquent," Chicago Review, Winter, 1957 (with Erik H. Erikson)
" Patient Role and Social Uncertainty 8 A Dilemma of the Mentally Ill," Psychiatry, 20:263-274, 1957 "The Functions of Deviance in Groups," Social Problems, 7s98-107, 1959 (with Robert A. Dentler) .
" Impressions of Soviet Psychiatry ' See Travel Notes,"
Psychiatric Communications, 5:1-12, 1962
" Notes on the Sociology of Deviance," Social Problems, 9:307-314, 1962 "A Retum to Zero," American Scholar, 36:134-146, 1966 "A. Cement on Disguised Observation in Sociology," Social Problems, 14:366-373, 1967
" Sociology and the Historical Perspective," American Sociologist, 5:331-338, 1970
" Introduction," In Search of Consnon Grounds Conversaticms with Erik H. Erikson and Huey P. Newton (New York: Norton, 1973)
" Loss of Communality on Buf falo Creek," American Journal of Psychiatry , 133:302-306, 1976 "On Teaching Sociology," New England Sociologist, 1:35-40, 1979 5 "A Report to the People of Grassy Narrows," in Christopher '
Vecsey and Robert W. Venables, editors, American Indian Environments: Ecological Issues in Native American History (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press,1900) (with Christopher Vecsey) 6
t
.).
SELECTED PUBLICATIONS (continued)
Book Reviews .
American Journal of Sociology American Scholar '
American Sociological Review Contemporary Sociology New York Times Book Review Transaction Yale Law Journal MONORS McIver Award, American Sociological Association, 1967 Sorokin Award, American
- Sociological Association,1977
{
Nominee, National Book Awards, 1977 PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS American Sociological Association (President-Elect 1983-84)
Society for the Study of Social Problems (President, 1970-1971)
Eastern Sociological Society (President, 1980-1981)
January 1983
)
SS 046-26-4125 CURRICULUM VITAE t Albert J. Solnit, M.D.
107 Cottaae Street Apt. 4C ,
New Haven; Cci:necticut 06511 Director, Yale University Child Study Center. July 1966 .
Sterling Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine and Child Study Center; and Professor, Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale University.
Date and Place of Birth:
- Los Angeles, California August 26, 1919 Married:
Martha Benedict. 1949.
Children:
David, b. in 1951 .
Ruth, n. in 1955 Benjamin, b. in 1957 Aaron, b. in 1961 '
Academic
Background:
University of California B.A. in Medical Sciences. May, 1940.
Teaching Assistant in Anatomy. July, 1940-June, 1941.
M.A. in Anatomy. May, 1942 (from research work performed in 1940-41 and a thesis on the influence of sex hormones on the skeletal metabolism of rats.)
M.D. October, 1943 (University of California, Berkeley and San Francisco. .
Yale University Master of Arts. November, 1964. Honorary Degree.
. Postgraduate Traininc:
Long Island College Hospital. New York:
. Rotating Internship. January, 1944-October, 1944.
Assistant Resident in Pediatrics. October,1944-June, . 1945.
Resident in Pediatrics and Communicable Diseases:
University of California Division, San Francisco Hospital, July, 1947-June, 1948.
L. .
2 i
Department of Psychiatry and Mental Hygiene, Yale University
. School of Medicine:
Assistant Resident. July, 1948-June, 1949. -
Senior Resident and Instructor in Psychiatry. July, 1949-June, 1950. .
Child Study Center. Fellow in Child Psychiatry. -
J uly , 19 5 0-June , 1952.
New York. Psychoanalytic Institute. Graduated in June, 1955.
Military Experience :
Ward Psychiatrist, Schick Genera.1 Hospital, Clinton, Iowa.
August, 1945-October, 1945.
Student. School of Military Neuropsychiatry, Mason General Hospital, Bren twood, N. Y. October, 1945-January, 1946.
Psychiatrist. Schick General Hospital. January, 1946-March, 1946.
Neuropsychiatrist. Fort Logan, Colorado. March, 1946-May, 1946.
9 Psychia tris t. Fort Warren, Cheyenne, Wyoming. May, 1946-July, 1946.
Instructor in Psychiatry. School of Aviation Medicine, Randolph Field, Texas. July, 1946-November, 1946.
Consulting Psychiatrist, Flicht Surceon and Pediatrician
. (to dependents of Air Force Personnel) , Eschborn Air Base, Rhine-Main Air Base, Wiesbaden Air Force Hospital, Germany. t November, 1946-June 1947.
Licensure :
California - 1943.
Connecticut - 1949.
Certification:
American Board of Psychiatrv and Neuroloov, in Psychiatrv. 1951.
American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, in Child Psychiatry.
1960.
Certified as a Qualified child Analyst by the New York Psychoanalytic Institute. 1962.
J Academic Accointments: (
Yale University School of Medicine and Yale Child Study Center:
Instructor in Pediatrics and P,sychiatry. July 1952-53. ,
Assistant Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry.
- July 1953-June 1960.
Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry.
July 1960-64.
- Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry. July 1964-October 1970.
Chief Psychiatrist. Yale Child Study Center. July 1964 .
Director, Yale Child Study Center. 1966 .
Sterling Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry. 1970 .
Yale University:
Fellow. Branford College. 1967 .
Chairman. Center for the Study of Education, Institute for Social and Policy Studies. May, 1971-73.
World Health Organization Visiting Professor of Psychiatry and Human Development. The University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel. 1973-74.
O Smith College:-
School for Social Work. Clinical Assistant Professor, ,
1976 .
Honors: Honorary Degree, Master of the Arts, Yale University, 1964.
Awarded the Fifth Annual Mount Airy Gold Medal for Distinction and Excellence in Psychiatry. Mount Airy Foundation, Denver, Colorado. March 1, 1975.
Attending Physician in Pediatrics and Psychiatry, Yale-New Ha.'en Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.
The William C. Menninger Award for distinguished contributions to the science of mental health. Menninger Foundation. March 1979.
- The Agnas Purcell McGavin Award of the American Psychiatric Association. May 1980.
- Alumni-Faculty Association Distinguished Faculty Teaching Award 1980.
University of California (San Francisco & Berkeley). May 1980.
Washington Council of Child Psychiatry Award for Outstanding Leadershi:
and Contributions to the Mental Health of Children. May 1980.
3a Hof. ors - Special Lectures Beata Rank Memorial Lecture. Symposium on "The Contributions of
- Child Psychoanalysis to Basic Psychoanalytic Education. Boston, MA. 197:
Fifth Annual Mount Airy Foundation Lecture: "The Adolescent ,
and His Family," Denver, Colorado. March 1, 1975.
Hilda Lewis Memorial Lecture: "Least Harmful to Children,"
Association of British Adoption Agencies, London, England.
December 10, 1975.
Second Mary Susan Brubaker Memorial Lecture: "The Challenge of Deficit in Early Childhood," University of Connecticut School of Social Work, West Hartford, Connecticut. April 22, 1976.
Alvah Newcomb Memorial Lecture: " Children's Rights in the Changing Family," Evanston Hospital, Department of Psychiatry, Section of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Evanston, Illinois.
March 17, 1977.
Annual Taboroff Memorial Lecture: "The Challenge and Conflicts of Child Placement /' University of Utah College of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah. April 26, 1977.
Twelfth Annual Freud Lecture of the Psychoanalytic Association of New York: "The Role of Aggression in the Formation of Object Relations," New York Academy of Medicine, New York,
.New York. May 16, 1977.
6th Annual Gustav Bychowski Lecture: "The Meaning of Parenthood" Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, June 12, 1978.
9th International Congress - International Association for Child i Psychiatry and Allied Professions: " Change and Continuity for children and Their Parents" in Melbourne, Australia, August 1978.
9th International Congress - International Association for Child ,
Psychiatry and Allied Professions: " Ego Development in Disturbed 2 Children" in Melbourne, Australia, August 1978.
. /
First Annual Andrew Rackow Memorial Lecture: " Problems of Development in Adolescence." Abington Hospital Mental Health Center, Phila, PA, September 1980.
New York Univerbity, April 1, 1982.
Paul Schilder Memorial Lecture.
4 i
Committees:
Yale University School of Medicine Medical Library Committee. 1958-1961.
, Student Af fairs Committee. 1961-1968.
Committee to Recommend Improvements in Method of Instruction in History Taking. 1963- .
Curriculum Committee for the First Pre-Clinical Year. 1963-1965.
Chairman. 1965-66.
Board of Permanent Of ficers. 1964- .
Executive Committee. .1964- .
Yale-New Haven Medical Center, Committee for the Improvement of the Care of Children. 1964- .
Committee 'of Department of Psychiatry to Evaluate the Undergraduate Curriculum Program in Psychiatry. 1965 .
Faculty Advisor. The Community Health Visitor Program. 1966 .
Committee on Conmunity Health Services. 1967-1969; Chairman. 1970-1973.
University Council on Medical Services. 1968 .
Chairman. Medical School Governance Committee. 1969-1970.
Chairman. Medical School Council, 1970-1973.
i Chairman. Curriculum Committee. 1970-1973.
Appointments and Promotions Committee, Department of Psychia try . 1971 .
Council Member. Joint Committee on Planning and Priorities. -
1972 .
Trus tee . Associates of Yale Medical Library. 1971-1975.
Member. Advisory Committee. Behavioral Sciences Study Center.
1972 .
Member. Admissions Committee. 1973- .
S Committees:
Yale University Yale Upward Bound Program's Faculty Advisory Committee. 1969- .
(Chairman, 1971).
President's University-Wide Advisory Committee. 1969.
University-Nide Governance Commission. 1970- .
Institution for Social and Policy Studies:
Member. Advisory Committee on Education. 1969-71; Member.
Interim Governing Board. 1970; Governing Board. 1971-1973 Chairman. Center for the Study of Education. 1971-1973; Faculty Member. Seminar: " Teacher Development on the Job."
Center for the Study of Education. 1970-1971.
Committee on Publications. Yale University Press. 1971 .
Yale College Committee for the Teacher Preparation Program.
1971 .-
Member. The :Tational Humanities Institute Advisory Council.
1975 .
Chairman. Clinical Advisory Committee, Yale Psychiatric Institute. 1976- .
Member. Priorities Committee of the Legal Services Organization, Yale Law School. 1977 .
Chairman. Board of Directors. Yale Psychiatric Institute.
1977 .
Member, Advisory Committee, Yale School of Medicine Faculty Practice Plan. 1980 .
Member, Advisory Committee, Faculty Practice Plan. Yale School of Medicine, 1980 .
Member, Pre-Medical Advisory Committee, Branford College. June 1980 .
Member. Ad Hoc Planning Committee for the Yale Psychiatric Institute; School of Medicine. February 1981.
6 Professional and Scientific Activities (and Outside Committees) {
The Western New England Institute for Psychoanalysis. 1958- :
c Training and Supervising Analyst and Member of the Education Commit tee . 1962 .
l New York Psychoanalytic Institute. 1962- ; Training and l Supervising Analyst. 1966- . I Advisory Council. Erikson Institute for Early Childhood
. Education. 1966- .
The Center for Advanced Psychoanalytic Studies, Princeton, New Jersey. 1963- .
Conference on Psychiatry and Medical Education and Secretary of the Preparatory Commission I on Philosophy and Goals.
1966 .
Organizing Committee and Secretary, Group II, Pre-Congress Conference on Psychoanalytic Training. International Psycho- e Analytic Association , Copenhagen. July, 1967.
Task Force V. Joint Commission on Mental Health of Children.
1967- . Consulting Editor, Reoort of Joint Commission on Mental Health of Children.
The American Psychoanalytic Association:
Board on Professional Standards. 1967; Chairman, Committee on Child Analysis. April, 1964-68: Member, Coordinating Committee ,
Executive Committee. 1969- : Member, Editorial Board, Journal of the American Psychoanalvtic Association. 1972-74: Member, committee on Liaison wica Proressional Organizations . 1971- ; Member, Committee on Psychoanalytic Education. 1971 .
Patient Management Problems Committee of the American Psychiatric Association and National Board of Medical Examiners. 1968- .
l Chairman. Organicing Ccmmittee, Pre-Congress Conference on Psycho-analytic Training. International Psycho-Analytic Association, Rome. July, 1963.
Joint Committee to Study Problems Relatina to the Moral, Ethical and Legal Aspects of Clinical Investication Involving Children and to Formulate Recommendations and Guidelines . (The Society for Pediatrics Research, The American Pediatric Society, The American Academy. of Pediatrics, The Association of Medical Scho61 Pediatric Department Chairmen, and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.)
7 Study Commission on Criteria for Selection of Applicants for ,
Psychoanalytic Training. International Psycho-Analytical Associa-tion. 1969.
Scientific Advisor. The Center for Preventive Psychiatry, White Plains, New York. 1970- .
Heinz Hartmann Award Committee. 1970- .
Member. Sponsoring Committee for Corresponding Members.
Israel Psychoanalytic Society. 1971- .
Member. American Professional Advisory Committee of the Jerusalem Mental Health Center. 1971 .
Member. Nominating. Committee. Association for Child Psycho-analysis. 1971 .
Member. Advisory Committee on Community Mental Health. 1972- .
Member. Advisory Board. Action for Children's Television, Newtonville, Mass achuse tts . 1973- .
Member. Board of Directors. Human Services Institute for Children and Families, Inc., Washington, D. C. 1973 .
Membership Chairman. Association for Child Psychoanalysis. 1974- .
Me mbe r. American Psychiatric Association's Committee I, Clinical Experiential Evaluation. 1974- .
Member. Task Force on Pediatric Education. American Academy of Pediatrics. 1976- .
Membe r. Program Committee for the Jerusalem Congress, 1977.
International Psycho-Analytic Association. 1976.
Member. Program Monitoring Team, Connecticut Valley Hospital, -
Department of Children and Youth Services. 1976- .
Member. Exploratory Subcommittee of the Nominating Committee.
The American Psychoanalytic Association. 1976-78.
Member. Professional Advisory Committee. The P.esearch Center for Human Sciences. Hebrew University. 1976 .
Member. State of Connecticut Advisory Council on Children and Youth Services. 8.13.76 .
Member. Endowment Committee. American Academy of Child Psychiatry.
1977 .
7a i
Chairman. Program Committee. International Psycho-Analytical Association. 31st Congress. July, 1979. New York, N. Y. ,
Member. New England Academic Advisory Committee for Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. 1977- .
. Member - National Advisory Committee; The Center for the Study of Families and Children, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn. 1978-
~
Member - Board on Maternal, Child, and Family Health Research of the Assembly of Life Sciences. Washington, D.C. 1976 .
Liaison Representative. American Academy of Child Psychiatry.
1978-1980.
Member. Panel of Child Welfare Resource Information Exchange.
National Center for Child Advocacy, Children's Bureau, Administration for Children Youth, and Families. 1978-Member - Medical Advisory Council. Tourette Syndrome Association, *
- Bayside, New York. 1978-Member - Advisory Board, Children's Literature An Interestina Journal, t 1979-Member - Task Force on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Standards, Connecticut Justice Commission, 1979.
Member - Board of Directors of American Associates, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Inc. 1979-Member - Professional Advisory Committee of the Margaret S. Mahler Psychiatric Research Foundation. 1979-Member, International Psycho-Analytic Association. Vice-Pres. 1979 .
Fellow, Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Science, Washington, D.C., 1979-Member, Committee on Endowment. American Academy of Child Psychiatry. Aug. 1979-Oct. 1981. .
Member, Task Force for Foster Children, Connecticut Child Welfare Association, Aug. 1979.
Member, Education Committee, Western New England Psychoanalytic Society. 1979 . .
N._?_.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7b Member. Multidisciplinary Committee, " Health and Behavior: i A Research Agenda." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. Washington, D.C., 1979 .
1 Member. Board of Directors, National Center for Clinical Infant Programs. Wasyington, D.C., 1978 . .
Member. Committee for the Freud Center at the Hebrew University, American Friends.of The Hebrew University. New York, 1980 . .
Member. Physicians for Social Responsibility. Cambridge, MA. 1980 .
Member. Essay Prize Judging Committee. The Gerald H. Pearson Prize.
The Philadelphia Association for Psychoanalysis. June 1980 .
Member. Consultant Task Force on Academic Psychiatry. American Academy of Child Psychiatry. June 1980 .
Member. Board of the Organizing Committee of the World Association for Infant Psychiatry. Sectember 1980.
Member. Advisory Board. National Legal Resource Center for Child Advocacy and Protection. American Bar Association. October 1980. i Member. Advisory Board. Resource Center, American Bar Association.
November 1980 . '
Member. Statewide Advisory Board. Department of Human Resources, State of Connecticut. May 1981-June 1982.
Member. Board on Mental Health and Behavioral Medicine. Institute of Medicine. National Academy of Science. July 1981- February 1983.
Member. Nominating Committee. International Association for Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Allied Professions. 1981 .
Member. World Association for Infant Psychiatry (WAIP). Oct. 1981 .
Member. National Advisory Committee. "The Ounce of Prevention Fund." State of Illinois, Dept. of Children & Family Services &
Pittway Corporation. April 1982 .
Member. Study Panel on the Future of Services to Children and Their -
Families. The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation. May 1982.
i
8 Editorial Activities i
. Member. Editorial Board. CHILDREN TODAY. Office of Child Development. 1965- .
~
Member. Editorial Board. Hampstead Psychoanalytic Publications.
Member. Editorial Board. PSYCHIATRY IN MEDICIME. Inte rnation al
- Journal of Medical Psychology and Psychiatry in the General Hospital. 1969- .
American Editorial Committee Member. The Israel Annals of Psychiatrv and Related Disciolines. 1969-Managing Editor. The Psychoanalytic Study o# the Child.
1971 .
Member. Advisory Editorial Board. Internagional Fncyclcnedia of Psychiatry , Psychoanalysis and Psycholocv. 1>/2-e<- ,
Member. Editorial Board. Journal of the American Acadenv of Child' Psychiatry. 1975- 79.
Member. Editorial Board. The !!illside Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. Journal of the Hillside Hospital, Glen Oaks, N. Y.
'1977- .
~ Member. Editorial Board. The American Journal of Psychiatry.
Journal of the American Psychiatric Association. 1974-Member. Editorial Board. Journal of the American Orthocsychiatric Association. March 1978-1982.
Member. Editorial Board, GENERAL HOSPITAL PSYCHIATRY, Psychiatrv, Medicine and Primarv Care. November 1978.
Medber. Advisory Board. Children's Literature. 1979 .
Member, Editorial Advisory Board, ACT (Action for Children's Television)
Book on Young Adolescents and Broadcasting. 1980 .
Member, Editorial Board. Journal of Preventive Psychiatry. June 1980 .
Member, Editorial Board. Psychiatric Journal of the University of Ottawa.
July 1980. ,
Editorial Activities 8a
' Member. Committee on Knowledge Sources (Literature Review) American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 1981 .
Member. Editorial Staff. Public'ation of the Association for Child Psychoanalysis. 1981-Member. Editorial Board. Monograph Series, Volume of the International' Psycho-Analytical Association. June 1981 . -
i l
r e
e 9
5 I
i i.,- i
l 9
Committees (Loca l)
. Member. Advisory Medical Committee. Poster School, New Itaven. 1964- . l Member. Advisory Committee. Visiting Nurses' Association,.
New flaven. 1965- .
Member. Board of Managers. Dixwe11 Community House, New Itaven.
1965- .
Member. New llaven Community Health Research Advisory Council of Community Progress, Inc., and the South Central Connecticut Regional Mental !!calth Planning Council. 1965 .
Chairman. Subcommittee on Health for State of Connecticut, White Ilouse Conference on Children and Youth Planning Committee.
1970- .
Member. Advi sory Council for Children and Mental Health.
Connecticut State Department of Mental Health. 1969- .
Member. National Advisory Council of HOSPICE. 1974-75.
Member. Subcommittee 2 " Identification of Service Needs ,"
Department of Children and Youth Services, State of' Connecticut.
1974-75.
Member. Professional Advisory Board, BenHaven School, New Haven.
1976- .
Member. Committee on Safety Programs , South Central Connecticut Chap te r. American National Red Cross. 1976- .
Chairman. Advisory Council. Department of Children anc Youth Services, State of Connecticut. July, 1977- .
e
10 Membe rships American Psychiatric Association. Member, 1950; Fellow, 1966 .
New York Psychoanalytic Society. Associate Member, 1955; Member, 1956- .
American Psychoanalytic Association. Member, 1957- ;
President-elect, 1968-70; President, 1970-71.
American Orthopsychiatric Association. Member, 1957- .
Western New England Psychoanalytic Society. Member, 1957- ;
Se cre ta ry , 1959-61; Vice-President, 1961-63; President,.
1967-68.
Western New England Institute for Psychoanalysis. ' Member, 1958- ;
Member, Board of Trustees,- 1958-64; Vi ce-P r es iden t , 1960-61; President, 1963-64.
American Academy of Child Psychiatry. Member, 1960- ; President- '
ele ct , .19 6 9-71; President, 1971-73.
The Association for Child Psychoanalysis. Membe r , 1965 ;
President,. 1968-70.
American Pediatric Society. Member,,1965 .
The Connecticut Council of Child Psychiatrists. Member, 1967- .
American Academy of Pediatrics. Fellow, 1968 .
Fellow, 1968 .
American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Society of Professors of Child Psychiatry. Member, 1969- .
-International Association for Child Psychiatry and Allied Professions. Secre tary-General, 1970-74; President, 1974-78.
The International Society on Family Law. Member, 1975 .
Israel Psychoanalytic Society. Corresponding Member. 1977- .
,. ,y- -~ , - . - - , - - - . . - , , , - - - .
11 Cons ultan t
- ~
. Children's Bureau, D9partment of Health & Human Services, Washington, D.C.
Connecticut Child Study and Treatment Home (residential treatment center f or disturbed children) , Hamden, Connecticut.
1957 .
North Haven Public School System. 1957- .
The Greenwich Center for Child and Family Service , Inc. 1960- .
New Haven Public School System. 1962- .
Highland Heights (residential care center for children),
New Haven, Connecticut. 1962-63.
Charlotte Hungerford Hospital. Torrington, Connecticut. 1963- .
Clifford Beers Child Guidance Clinic. 1963- . .
New Haven Pre-Kindergarten School Program. 1964- .
National Research Council, Assembly of Life Sciences , Division of Medical Sciences, Board on Maternal, Child, and Family Health Research. 1974- .
Cons ult an t . Pre-Congress Conference on Training. International Psycho-Analytical Association .
. NIMH, Mental Health Study Center, Division of Mental Health Service Program. 1974- .
. Advisory Committee on National Issues. The American Psychoanalyt!.c Association. 1979 .
Consultant. John Merck Fund (John Merck Program, Western Psychiatric Institute, University of Pittsburgh. July 1980.
Advisor. Women's Zionist Organization of America, Inc. Hadassah Medica:
Organization. 1981-Consultant. Project - "Toward Preventing the Development of Hostility in Children." Medical College of Pennsylvania and Hospital. June 1981 .
11 a
- Member, Ethics Committee. American Academy of Child Psychiatry. 1981-84.
Advisory Board. Department of Human Resources. State of Conn.
Member.
~ 1981 .
Member. Advisory Board. Opportunity House,'Inc. 1981-Member. Building Fund Raising Committee. American Academy of Child Psychiatry.- ,ay 1982 - .
[
6 e
we.- . i
11 b Interviews (Television, Radio, etc.)
(with Judi Marks) Teen, Monthly Magazine, Vol. 24, No. 8. 1980 D
8 9 I
e e
e
'e e
,12 P
Principal Publications BOOKS Modern Perspectives in Child Develoonent. In Honor of Milton J. E. Senn, M7D. A. J. Solnit, M.D. and S. A. Provence, M.D., -
Co-editors. International Universities Press , October, 1963.
The Pediatric Management of the Dying Child. Part II:
A Study of the Child's Reaction to the Fear of Dying.
A. J. Solnit, M.D. and Morris Green , M.D.
The Adolescent in a Suicidal Crisis: Collaborative Care on a Pediatric Ward. Melvin Lewis , M.D. and A. J. Solnit, M.D.,
in Modern Persoectives ... (s'ee above) .
Some Relations of Constitution, Environment and Personality as Observed in a Longitudinal Study of Child Develoonent.
Case Report. Samuel Ri tvo , M.D. , Eveline Omwake, M.A., .
Audrey T. McCollum, M.S., A. J. Solnit, M.D. and S. A.
Provence, M.D,, in Modern Perspectives ... (see above) .
t Essays in Honor of Heinz Hartmann. Editors: E. Loewenstein, L.
Newman, M. Schur and A. J. Solnit. Psychoanalysis - a General Psychology. New York: International Universities Pres's, 1966.
Problems in Child Behavior and Develoncent. Milton J. E. Senn, M.D. and A7 J. Solnit, M.D. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1968.
'Beyond the Best Interests of the Child. J. Goldstein, A. Freud, A. J. Soinit, M.D7 Iiew York: The Free Press, November 1973.
Barnets r'$tt-eller rbtten till barnet? J. Goldstein, A Freud, A.J. Solnit, M.D. Stockholm: Svensk upplaga Bokforlaget Natur och Kultur. (Swedish translation of Beyond the Best Interests of the Child)
Thesis .
The Influence of Pror;esterone on the Skeletal Metabolism of .
Young Female Rats. M. A. Thesis. University of California Library, Berkeley , California.
Before the Best Interests of the Child. J. Goldstein, A. Freud and A.J. Solnit. New York: The Free Press. '
- November 1979.
y . , - _ . - - - - . .
-14
- 11. Mourning and the Birth of a Defective Child. A. J. Soinit, s M. D. and Mary Stark, M.S.S. The Psychoanalytic Study of l the Child. Vol. XVI. 1961.
- 12. It Isn' t Fair - Treatment of a Blind Child. E. Omwake , M. A.
and A. J. Solnit, M.D. The Psychoanalytic Study o# the Child.
Vol. XVI. 1961
- 13. Use of Hospitalization for the Diagnosis of Family-Child Dis turban ces . Panel Chairman and Discussant. American
.Orthopsychiatric Association Annual Meeting, February, 1960. The American Journal of Orthoosychiatrv. Vol. XXXII.
No. 3. April, 1962.
- 14. Trauma and Fixation in Early Childhood. Presented at Panel dn Classical Forms of Neurosis in Infancy and Early Childhood. American Psychoanalytic Association. Fall, 1961 Meeting. Panel reported by E. B. Kaolan, M.D. Journal of the American Psychoanal.ytic Association. Sep tembe r , 1962.
- 15. Publication resulting f rom uork cn Committee: Booklet -
Mental Disorders - A Guide to Con trol *% thods . Scotenber, 1962. 132 pages. Anerican Public Health Association, Inc. ,
Prepared by the Program Area Connittee on Mental Health, New York.
' 16 . -Treatment of Children with Brain Damage and Associated School Problems. J. Do ris , Ph.D. and A. J. Solnit, M.D.
Journal of American Acadenv of Child Psychiatrv. Vol. II.
No. 4. October, 1963.
- 17. Reactions to the Threatened Loss of a Child - A Vulnerable Child Syndrome. Morris Green, M.D. and Albert J. Solnit, M. D. Pediatrics. Vol. 34. No. 1. pages 58-66. July, 1964.
- 18. A Tribute to Heinz Hartmann. The Psychoanalvtic Quarterly.
Vol. XXXIII: pages 475-484. October, 1964.
- 19. You Can' t Raise a Child by the Book. Film.
- 20. The' Dying Child. Annotations. Albert J. Solnit, M.D.
Developmental "edicine and Child Neuroloay. 7.
pages 693-704. 1965.
- 21. Who Deserves Child Psychiatry? A Study in Priorities.
Albert J . Solnit, M.D. Journal of The American Academy of Child Psychiatry. Vol. V. No. 1. pages 1-16.
January, 1966.
e
1 1 m.
~
'" 15 .
'22. An Exploratory Study of Accidental Ingestion of Poison in Young Children. A. J. Soinit, M.D., Melvin Lewis, M. D., Mary H. Stark, M.S.S., Ira W. Gabrielson, M.D. .
, and Ethclyn H. Klatskin , Ph.D. Journal of The American Academy of Child Psychiatry. Vol. V. No. 2. pages 255-271.- April, 1966. -
- 23. Failure to Thrive in Inf ants - A Family Problem.
A. J. Solnit, M.D. and Julina Rhymes , R. M . American Journal of Diseaccs of Children. Vol. III. pages 600-612. J une , 1966.
- 24. Child Psychiatry Consultation in a General Hosoital Emergency Room. A.J. S olnit , M. D. and John E.
Schowalte r , M. D. Jc'arn'al of The Ame rican Acadenv of Child Psychiatry. Vol. 5. No. 3. pages 534-551.
J uly , 1966.
- 25. Some Adaptive Functions of Aggressive Behavior.
In P_sychoanalysis - A General Psychology. pages 169-189. _ :1966,
- 26. Psychoanalysts View Conjoint Therapy. P ane l, Apple Valley Symposium. The Psychoanalvtic Forun.
Vol. 1. No. 2. 1966.
- 27. Who owns the School in Our changing Society? Presented at the Annual Institute..for Teachbrs, February 26, 1966, in Los Angeles , California. Published in the Bulletin of the Reiss-Davis Child Study Center. January, 1967.
- 26. Learning with Teachers . A. J. Solnit, M.D. and Mary H.
Stark, M.S.S. Published in Children. Vol. 14. Mo. 1.
pages 19-24., January-Februa ry , 1967.
w
- 29. The Psychiatric Council: Acolied Psychiatrv in an Anti-Poverty Program. In the American Journal of pages 495-506.
Orthonsychia try . Vol. XXXVII . No. 3.
April, 1967. .
- 30. Trauna and Inf a'ntile Experiences: A Longitudinal Perspective With Marianne Kris, M. D. In Psychic Traura. New York: '
- Basic Books, Inc. pages 176-220. May, 1967.
s
- 31. Discussion of Drua Use bv Adolescents: Some Valuative and Technical 1.,olications bv Aaron H. Esnan, M.D. In Psychoanalvtic Forun. Vol. 2. No. 4. paces 348-350.
1967. -s ,
e k
16
- 32. Post Infectious Diarrhea in Fosnitalized Infants:
A Study of Object Loss. Psyche. Vol. 9. No. 21. 1967.
- 33. Child Analysis and Pediatrics: Collaborative Interests.
In Symposium on Pediatrics and Child Analysis.
- Copenhagen Congress. In the Journal of International Psycho-Analvsis. 49. 280-85. 1968.
- 34. Study of Human Behavior. A. J. Solnit, M.D. and Sally Provence, M.D. In Man, Mind & "edicine "he Doctor's Education. Oliver Cooe, M.D., A Chairran's View of the Swanoscott Studv on Behavior Science in Medicine, October 23-November 4, 1966. Philadelnhia and Toronto: J. P. Lippincott Cornany. 1968.
- 35. Psychotheraecutic Role of the Pediatrician. In Ambulatorv Pediatrics, ed. vorris Green and Robert J. Haagerty. Philadelnhia, London, Toronto:
W. B. Saunders Co. pages 159-167. 1968.
- 36. Eicht Pediatricians and a Child Psychiatrist: A Study in Collaboration. In *he Teachinn of nynamic Psychiatrv ed. Grete L. Bibrinc, N. Y. International Universities Press. pages 158-174. 1968.
- 37. In the Best Interests of the Child and His Parents.
(Presented at Panel at Annual Meetina of the American Orthopsychiatric Association, San e rancisco, Cali#ornie, April 14, 1966.) Orthonsvchiatrv and the Law hv the American Orthopsychiatric Association. 'canne State University Press, Detroit. oaces 139-155. 1968.
- 38. The Conceptual Basis of the Child Study Center, Yale University. In Connecticut "edicine (a ts'o-nart series) a Symposium on the Clinical Ascects of the Psvcholocical Development of the Child: cuest ed. , 'telvin Lewis , "..n.
(Part II) . Vol. 32. No. 6. 1968.
, 39. Child Develoorent and ccientific values. In Connecticut Medicine (a two-nart series) a Syrnosium on the Clinical Aspects of the Psycholonical Develoorent of the Child.
. Guest Ed., Melvin Lewis, M.D. (Part II). Vol. 32.
No. 8. 1960.
- 40. Emotional Manacement of vanilv Stressed in Care of Dying Child. In Pediatric Currents. Vol. 17. No. 8.
September, 1968.
3 73
( ,
'i' ,
- 41. Commentary on: A Psychotherapeutic Aide in a Headstart
. P rog ram. ' Vo l . 16. No. 1. 20-21. Children. J anua rv-
. Febr,ua ry , 19 6 9 .
i .
~
- 42. E .The P.clationsh o of Child Psychiatrv to Vedical Education. *
' Academic Child Dsvchiatrv. A Collection or Pacers
., Compiled by P. L. Adans, H. H. Mork and .T. B. Cramer. ,
The Society of Professors of Child Psvchiatrv.
/ Y February, 1969.
- 43. Youth Unrest: A Synoosium. Albert .T. Solnit, M.D.,
Calvin F.' Settlace ,' M.D. , Stanlev Coodran , 'i.9.
and Peter Blos, Ph.D. In brerican .Tournal of Dsychiatrv.
125:9:39453 March, 1969.
- 44. The Emotional Settino of the Classroom. Chaoter III.
Ed. C. C. Wilson, M.D. and E. A. Milson, Ph.n.
'In Healthful Schnol Envirenrent. National Pducation Association , Mashinc ton , D. C. 29-42. 1969.
- 45. 'A.Persoc[tive #or Students. Also, Surnarv Denort of
..~ the Precaratorv > Commission on Philosonh'r and r,nals (wi th Lawrence ,C . Yolb , ". D. ) In Teachinn osvchiatrv in Medical School. The Workinn Pacers of the Conference on Psychiatry and Medical Education, 1967. American Psychiatric Association. Baltinore, Mashinnton:
Garamond American Priderark Press, Inc. 34-36: 37-46.
May, 1969.
- 46. Bisexuality Gone Awrv - The Child is Father to the Man.
Commen ta ry . Pediatrics. June, 1969.
- 47. Life and Death in Adolescence, commentary. Pediatrics.
44:5:635-36. November, 1969.
- 48. Early Childhood-Pushina and Pullinn. Mh3t Me can Learn from Infants. Proceedines o# a Conference Jointly Sponsored by the Yale Child Studv Center and the National Association for the Education of Youna Children.
49-67. 1970.
- 49. Learning from Psychoanalvtic Suoervision. International Journal of Psycho-Analvsis. 51:1-4. 1970. .
e
18
- 50. Who Owns the School in our Chanoine Society. Contri-l ,
bution in " rom Learninn for Love to Love of Learnino, l by Rudolph Ekstein, Ph.D. and Rocco L. .' lotto, M.D. '
New York, N. Y.: Brunner/. Mazel. 1970.
- 51. Letter to the Editor. Growth Failure f rom Mate rn al Deprivation or Undercatina. Journ al of the Arerican Medical Association. 14ith Martha Leonard , M.D. 212: 5:
882. May 4, 1970.
- 52. The Generation Gan: Continuitv and Chance.
New Itaven Jewish Center Annual Magazine. Septenber, 1970. l
- 53. A Study of Obiect Loss in Infancv. Chaoter: The k
Psychoanalvtic Stude of the Child. Ruth S. Eissler,
- Anna Freud, liein
- liartrann , Mar tanne Kris , Feyrour L.
Lus tman ' (eds . ) New York, M. Y.: International Universities Press. XXV:257-272. December, 1070
- 54. Commentary. A Need for Pediatric Guidance. Pediatrics.
47:2:325-326. r ebru a ry , 1971.
- 55. Inner Tasks of Today's Teen-Acer Connlicated by External '
Forces. Frontiers of Psvchiatrv. 2 :2. Janua ry 15, 1973.
- 56. Adolescence and the Chanoina neality. Currents in Psychoanalvsis. International Universities Press .
April, 1972.
- 57. Youth and the Canous. The Search #or Social Conscience.
The Psychoanalytic Studv o# the Child. 27. 1972.
- 58. Aggression: A View of Theory Buildina in Psychoanalvsis.
Journal of the American Psychoanalvtic Association.
International Universities Press. 20:3 .f ulv , 1972.
- 59. Depressive Reactions in Childhood. Child Psychiatrv.
Western New Encland Society for Psychoanalysis.
September 30, 1972.
, 60. Commentary: To Their Mutual Advantace. Pediatrics.
50:837-838. December, 1972.
- 61. Chapter: The Hospital and Its Children: A Raoidiv Changing Community. The Pf#ects o# "osnitalization on Children. Evelyn K. Orerland , M . F .P.'. and .Terone D.
Oremland, M.D. (eds.) Springfield, Illinois:
Chas. C. Thomas. 1973.
19
- 62. Chapter : . Who Mourns When a child Dies. The Child in
~~
His_ ,Pamilv . E. James Anthony , M.D. and Cyrille
- Koupernik, M.D. (eds.) Yearbook o' the International Association for Child Psychiatry and Allied Professions.
New York, N. Y. and London, England: J. Miley. .
2:245-254. 1973.
- 63. Failure to Focialize in Early Childhcod. Issues in Human Develonrent. An Inventory of Problers, Un-finished Business and Directions #cr Research.
Victor C. Vaunhan III, M.D. (sci. ed.). Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printina Office. 84-91.
1973.
- 64. The Child's Richt to Pantasy. Who is Talkine tn Gur Children? Third National Svr.nosium on Child ren and Television. Pecay Charren and Evelyn Sarson (eds . )
Published by Action for Children's Televisi'on, Newtonville, "assachusetts, and the ERIC Clearinchouse on Media and Technolcov, Stan#ord University, Stanford, California. 1973.
- 65. Child Placement-On Whose Time? The Journal of the American Acaderv of Child Psvchiatrv. 12:3. .1 ulv , 1973.
- 66. Commentarv on Movement Theraov as a Psychothernoeutic Tool. Journal of the Arerican Psychoanalvtic Associa-tion. 21:2. 1973.
- 67. Some Aspects of Children's Accressive Dohavior During States of Illness and Recovery. Psvcholocical Pases o' War. Jerusalem, Israel Acadenic Prens: Guacranole/
The New York Times Book Comnany. 1973.
- 68. Summary: The Infant at Risk-Early Detection and Preventive Intervention. The Infant at ".isk. Daniel Bergsma, M.D. Miami, Florida: SymnosTa Soecialists.
2:167-176. July, 1974.
- 69. Mental Health Services. Issues in the Classi*ication of --
Children. Nicholas Hobbs (general editor) . Donald J.
- Cohen , Richard H. Grancer , Sally A. Provence, n.lbert J.
Solnit. San Francisco, California and London , England :
Jossey-Bass. 18:II:88-122. 1974.
- 70. Care for Your Children as You Mish Then to Care for Your Grandchildren. The Child in His "arilv: Children at Psychiatric Risk. C. J. Anthony and C. Kounernik T7ds.).
Yearbook of the International Association "or Child Psychiatry and Allied Professions. Mew York, N. v and London, England: J. Wiley. 3:405-412. 1974.
i 20
- 71. Developments in Child Psychoanalvsis in the Last Twenty Years, Pure and Applied: A Vital Balance.
- Monocraoh Series of the Psychoanal'rtic Study of the Child. Studies in Child Psychoanalysis : Pure and Applied. New Haven, Connecticut and London, England: Yale University Press. 5. 1975.
- 72. Psycholocical Reactions to Facial ar.d Hand Burns in Young Men. Can I See Myself Throuch Your Eyes? A.J. Solnit and B. Priel. The Psychoanalvtic Study of the Child. R. Eissler, A. Freud, M. Kris an d A . J . Folnit (eds .) . New Haven, Connecticut and London, England: Yale University Press. 30:549-566.
1975.
- 73. Promising Directions in Psychoanalysis. A. J. Solnit and M. Lewis. Arorican Handbook o# o sychiatrv.
S. Arieti, D. A. Harbura and H. K. H. Brodic teds.).
New York, N. Y.: Basic Books. VI:692-701. 1975.
- 74. The Risks of Screenine. A. J. Folnit. Pediatrics.
57:5:646-647. 1976.
i
- 75. Changing Psycholocical Persocctives About Children and Their Parilies. A. J. Solnit. Children Today.
Washington, D. C. Children's Bureau, o?* ice of Child Development. 5:35-9,43. 1976.
- 76. Marriage: Changing Structure and Functions of the Family. A.J. Solnit. Reorinted from: The "arilv-Can It Be Saved? V. C. Vauchan and T. B. Brazelton (eds'T.~ Chi cac o , Illinois: Yearbook "edical Publishers, Inc. 21:231-238. 1976
- 77. Letter to the Editor. A. J. Solnit. The New Encland ,
Journal of .vedicine. 1347. June 10, 1976.
- 78. Scared and Scarred-Psycholocical Asoects in the Treatment of Soldiers with Burns. A.J. Folnit and I B. Priel. The Israel Annal of Dsvchiatrv and oelated Disciolines. 1976.
- 79. Child-Rearina and Child Advocacy. A. J. Solnit.
Brighan. Younc Universitv Law Review. 3:723-733. 1976.
- 80. Special Feature: I. Research in Child Psychiatry -
The History of an Attitude. A. J. Solnit. Deiss-Davis Child Study Center Silver Anniversary Scienti#ic Procram.
Journal of the Association for "svchoanalvsis (Recorted by Elaine Caruth, Ph.D.). 111:1&2:62-64. 1976.
21
- 81. Inner and Outer Changes in Adolescence. A. J. Solnit.
Journal of the Philadelphia Association for Psycho-analysis. III:3:43-46. 1976.
- 82. Obstacles to Providing Psychologic Services to Disabled Children and Their Families. A. J. Solnit. -
In Developmental Disabilities: Psychologic and Social Implications. Daniel Bergsma, M.D. and Ann E. Pulver, M.H.S. (eds.) Birth Defects: Original Article Series. The National Foundation - March of Dimes. New York: Alan R. Liss, Inc. XII:4:85-90.
1976. (Conference sponsored by The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, School of Hygiene and Public Health, March 1-2, 1376, Baltimore, Maryland.)
- 83. Panel Discussion on the Oppositional Syndrome. Chapter 4.
E. James Anthony, M.D., Chairman: Albert J. Solnit, M.D.,
Fritz Redl, Ph.D., James P. Comer, M.D. In Three Clinical Faces of Childhood, E. James Anthony and Doris C. Gilpin (eds.)~~HollTswood, U. Y.: Spectrum Publications.
pages 29-40. 1976.
- 84. Editorial Commentary. Connecticut Medicine. 41:1:53-54.
1977.
- 85. Least Harmful to Children. A. J. Solnit. Adoption &
Fostering. The Journal of the Association of British Adoption & Fostering Acencies. London. 87:1:39-34.
1977.
- 86. Parents as Advocates (Response to " Changes in the Parent-Child Legal Relationship--What They Mean to the Clinician and Researcher" by Henry A. Beyer, same issue). Jcurnal ot Autism and Childnood Schizophrenia. Plenum Press.
VII:1:94-96. Marcn, 1977.
- 87. Recognizing the Psychological Parent in a Custodial Dispute. Review of: Beyond the Best Interests of the Child. J. Goldstein, A. Freud, A. J. Soinit. Roche Report: Frontiers of Psychiatry. 7:7:2-10. April 1, ,
1977.
- 88. Day Treatment. Chapter 40.5. A. J. Solnit and M. Lewis'. -
In comorehensive Textbook of Psychiatrv/IT, A. M. Freedman, H. I. Kaplan and B. J. Sadock (eds.)
Baltimore, Md.: Williams & Wilkins Co. II:2250-2251.
1975,..(updated edition 1980) see page 22b, #119.
- 89. Residential Treatment. Chapter 40.4. M. Lewis and A. J. Solnit. In Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry /II, A. M. Freedman, H. I. Kaplan anc B. J. Sadock (eds.)
Baltimore, Md.: Williams & Wilkens Co. II:2246-2250.
1975
22
- 90. Mourning and the Birth of a Defective Child (1961). Chapter 8. )
A. J. Solnit and M. H. Stark. In An Antholoav of the Psychoanalytic Study of the Child: Physical IllnEis and Handicap in Childhood. R. S. Eissler, A. Freud, M. Kris, A. J. Solnit (eds.). New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 181-194. 1977. ,
- 91. Mental Health and Voluntary Services for Children. An Issue in Child Advocacy. Proceedings of the Third Annual Children's Advocacy Conference. New England Children's Mental Health Task Force. April, 1977.
- 92. Overcoming Early School Difficulties: Three Aspects of Learning Inhibition. Joan Costello, Marjorie Graham Janis and Albert J. Solnit. In The Elementa ry School Journal, University of Chicago Press. November 1977.
- 93. Changes in the Meaning of IIandicap: Children's Rights in a changing World. Proceedings of the Annual Meetinc and conference of the National Society for Autistic Children. July 1977.
- 94. Algunas Consideraciones Sobre las Neurosis Infantiles. In Practicas Psicoanaliticas Comoaradas En Ninos Y Adolescentes. '
Editorial Paidos, Vol. 55, Brazil, 1977. pp. 177-190.
In Psycho-Some Considerations About Infantile Neuroses. Editorial l
analytic Studies of Children and A3olescents.
Paidos, Vol. 55, Brazil, 1977. pp. 177-190.
f
- 95. Children and the Law: AJan. Report of a Multidisciplinary Geminar 24-25, 1976. Vancouver, B.C.:
(AJS Special Speaker) .
j Legal Publications, The Continuina Lagal Fducation Society of British Columbia Centre for Continuing Iducation, University of B.C., Vancouver, June 1977, pp. 56-77; Group Discussion, 78-89.
A Survey of the Chila Study Center. Yale Alumni Magazine, 96.
February, 1978, pp. 21-28.
o
- 97. Introduction in Crisis: Psycholocical First Aid for Recoverv and Growth by Ann S. Kliman, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. xi-xiii. 1977.
- 98. Editorial Commentary. Infants Who Become Enuretics: A Longitudinal Study of 161 Kibbutz Children. In Monograohs of the Society for Research in Child Develogment, Serial _
No. 170, Vol. 42, No. 2. 1977.
98a. Introductory Remarks. Presented at "A Scientific Program in Honour of Frederich C. Redlich, M.D. In The Yalo Journal of Biology and Medicine, Inc. 51: 101, 1978
22 A
- 99. Infantile Neurosis and the Unconscious In Early .
Childhood. Introduction in Issues in Mental Health.
Athens, 1978, pp. 13-22.
100. Counseling Parents of Mentally Retarded and Learning
/ Disordered Children, Albert J. Solnit, M.D. & Julian Ferholt, M.D. in Heloina Parents Helo Their Children, edited by L. Eugene Arnold, Brunner/ Mazel, Inc., -
New York, 1978.
101. The Meaning of Change in Child Development in The Child -
in His Family: Children and Their Parents in a Chancing World. Ed. E. James Anthony, M.D. and Colette Ch11and, M.D.
Yearbook of the International Association for Child Psychiatry and A{ lied Professions. Vol. 5, 1978.
102. Psychotherapeutic Role of the Pediatrician in Ambulatory M.D.
Pediatrics, Ed. Morris Green, M.D. & Robert Haggerty, W.B. Saunders Co., Phila., London, Ontario, 1977.
103. The Rights of the Child in a Changing Society. In Pergamon Child Abuse and Nealect, Vol. 2, pp. 193-201.
Press, Ltd., 1978.
Workshop on Family and Social Environment, Beatrix Hamburg, M.'.
104.
and Albert J. Solnit, M.D. In Adolescent Behavior and Health, Publication of the National Academy of Sciences, ,
Washington, D.C., 1978.
105. Patients' Reactions to the Death of the Psychoanalyst, Ruth Lord, M.A., Samuel Ritvo, M.D. and Albert J. Solnit, M.D.
In International Journal of Psychoanalvsis, Vol. 59, 1978.
106. The Unconscious and Acute Neurosis in a Young Child. In The Unconscious: Nature, Function, Methods of Study, Vol. 2, pp. 382-388, Metsniereba Publishing House, Tbi'.is i, Russia, 1978. .
107. Reflexions d'un psychanalyste d' enfants. In l'identite du psychanalyste, Presses Universitaires de France, pp. 100-106, 1976.
108, Vulnerability and Risk in Early Childhood. In The ,
Handbook of Infant Develonnent. Ed. New York: Joy D. Osofsky, 1979.
Joh Wiley & Sons, Inc. Publisher.
With Sally Provence, M.D. (co-author). ,
109. Contributor to Psychoanalytic Case Studies, Ed. Victor Calef and Piroos Sholevar, M.D., 1979 110. Introduction to Femqle Adolescent Develooment, Ed. Max Sugar, M.
New York: Brunner/ Mazel, 1979.
110a. Introduction in Proceedings, Report of the International Year of the Child'- Child Advocacy,(ed.)S. Katz, June 1979.
22 B 111. Associate Editor - Special Edition American Journal of Psychiatrv -
Festschrift - to honor F. Braceland, M.D., July 1979.
112. Psychosexual Development: Three to Five Years. In: Basic Handbook of Child Psychiatrv, ed. J. Noshpitz, Vol. I, pp.
178-184, New York: Basic Books, Inc., July 1979.
113. Psychosexual Development: Five to Ten Years. In Basic ,
Handbook of Child Psychiatrv, ed. J. Noshpitz, Vol. I, pp. )
164-190, 1979. (with Justin D. Call and Carl B. Feinstein), Aug.197' l 114. Mental Health Services in Head Start. Proiect Head Start: A Legacy of the War on Povertv. Ed. Edward Zigler and Jeanette Valentine, pp. 259-282. New York: The Free Press, A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. (with Donald J. Cohen &
Paul Wohlford). 1979. I 115. The Adolescent's search for Competence. In Children Today, pp. 13 '
November-December 1979 & The Education Digest, Apr11 19o0.pp. 42-45.
116. The Appraisal of the Individual in the Family: Criteria for Healthy Psychological Development in Childhood. In The Family:
Evaluation and Treatment, ed. C.K. Hofling & :.M. Lewis.
New York: Brunner/ Mazel, 1980. pp. 71-85.
117. Child Abuse: Least Harmful, Most Protective Intervention.
Pediatrics, Vol. 65, No. 1, January 1980. pp. 170-171.
118. Eulogy. Ralph R. Greenson, 1911-1979. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, XLXI, 1980, pp. 512-516.
119. Day Treatment. Comorehensive Textbook of Psychiatrv III.
eds., H. Kaplan, A. Freedman, B. Sadock. Baltimore / London:
Williams & Wilkins. 1980. (with Melvin Lewis, M.D.)s pp. 2692-26' 120. Too Much Reporting, Too Little Service: Roots and Prevention of Child Abuse. Child Abuse, An Agenda for Action, eds.
G. Gerbner, C. Ross & E. Zigler. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980., pp. 135-146.
121. Sexual and Gender Development in the Context of the Family, School
, and Society. In: The Sexual and Gender Development of Young Chili eds. E. Oremland & J. Oremland, Cambricge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing Co., subsidiary of Lippincott. (1977) , pp. 3 9.
122. Lessons from Normative Development: A Response. In: The Sexual and Gender Development of Young Children, eds. E. Oretaland & J.
Oremland, Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing Co., Subsidiary of Lippincott. (1977). , pp. 35-37.
123. Three Homes in Two Years. Case Reports in Zero to Three, Bulletin of the National Center for Clinical Infant Programs, Vol. 1, No.2, December 1980. pp. 4-5, 9
P 22 C 124. Participation in Connecticut Conference sponsored by the Dept. of Mental Health and Dept. of Children and Youth Services. Apr. 1979.
" Prevention: An Idea Whose Time Has Come." Proceedings. ,
125. Child Abuse: The Problem. Family Violence, An International '
and Interdisciplinary Study, ed. J. Eekelaar & S. Katz, Toronto: Butterworths, pp. 243-252. 1981 .
126. Infant Sexuality. SIECUS REPORT (Sex Information and Education Council of the U.S.), Vol. IX, Number 14, March 1981. (with .
( Alice Colonna, M.A.). 1981. pp. 1-2, 6.
w 127. Psychoanalytic Perspectives on Children Onc-Three Years of Age.
The Course of Life: Psychoanalytic Contributions Toward Understand _
Personality Development. Vol. I: Infancy and Early Childhood, S.I. Greenspan and G.H. Pollock (eds). National Institute of Ment:
Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, pp. 501-522.
1981.
128. Participation in the " Scientific Forum on the Superego: Its Early Roots and the Road from Outer to Inner Conflict as Seen The Bulletin of the Hampstead Clinic, in Psychoanalysis.
London, England, pp. 77-98. 1981.
Change and Continuity in an Age of Transitions. The Child in His i
129.
Preventive Child Psychiatry in an Age of Transition, (ecs-
~
Family:
E. J. Anthony & C. Chiland, Vol.
6, pp. 1-22. 1980. Yearcook of th International Association for Child & Adolescent Psychiatry and i Allied Professions. Change and Continuity in an Age of Trans 130. Obstacles to Early Assessment and Treatment of Infants. Children Today, July-August 1981, pp. 38-41. (with Sally Provence, M.D. )
131. Research on Repetitive Behaviors in Childhood. American Journal of Psychiatry, 138:12, December 1981. pp. 1598-1600.
132. In Memoriam: Marianne Kris 1900-1980. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. Vol. 36, 1981.
i Selma Fraiberg: 1918-1981. Zero to Three: Bulletin of the 133.
National Center for Clinical Infant Procrams, Vol. II., No. 3, March 1982.
134. The Vulnerable Child-in Retrospect. In: The Child in Hs 3 Family, Th'e Family - Evaluation and Treatment, (eds.)
Brunner/ Mazel, C.K. Hofling and J.M. Lewis. New York: -
1982. Vol. 4, pp. 643-654.
135. Early Psychic Development As Reflected in the Psychoanalytic Procer International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, Vol. 63, pp. 23-37. (198;
23 Reviews
, Attaining Manhood. Georce M. Corner, M.D. Attaining Womanhood. George M. Corner, M.D. Fecond Edi tion.
Revised and Enlarced. Harper and Brothers, 1952. Review
. in Pediatrics. 10:3. Scotenber, 1952. I Childhood Exocrience and Personal Destiny. Willian V.
Silverbera, M.D. Sprincer Publishine Co., 1952. Review in Pediatrics. 12:4. 1953.
Child Psychiatric Technicues. Lauretta Render, M.D.,
Charles C. Thonas, Publisher, 1952. Review in Pediatrics.
12:4. October, 1953. ,
Treatment of the Child in Emotional Conflict. Fvnan S.
Lippman, M.D., The Blakiston Division,'AcGraw-Hill Book Co.,
1956. Review in The Yale Journal of Biolonv and Medicine.
Sep tembe r , 1958.
The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. XIV. 1959.
International Universities Press. Review in Basic Pook Mews.
1960. .
The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. XV. 1960 Inter-national Universities Press. Review in Basic Book News.
XVII:5. 1961.
Child Development and Child Psvchiatrv. In tribute to Dr. Arnold Gesell in his Eichtieth Year. Charles Shacass, M. D. and Benj amin Pasamanick , M.D. (eds . ) . Psychiatric Research Reports. No. 13 (Decenher, 1960) of the American Psychiatric Association. Review in The Psychoanalvtic Quarteriv.
Positive Asoccts of Child Psychiatrv. Pehavioral Science Book Service. Book by Frederick Allen. March, 1964.
Child Develonnent Research. I. Martin L. Foffman and l Lois W. Hoffman (eds . ) Review in .Tournal of the American j Medical Association. 192:8. Mav, 1965.
Management of the Child with a Fatal Disease. Clinical -
19647 In Develoorental ' Medicine
~
Pediatrics. III:418-27.
and Child Neurolocy (London). December, 1965.
1 i ,
24 Reviews, continued s
" Boys in Conflict. Edward A. Mason, M.D. Review of Film.
American Journal of Orthoosychiatry. 727-728. July, ITTO. ,
Essay-Review for Children. The Life and Works of Erik Erikson. September-October, 1971. Erik fi. Erikson: The Growth of His Ucrk. Robert Coles. Boston 7 Massachusetts:
Little, Brown & Co. 440 paaes. 1970.
The Uses of Enchantrent. Review of Bruno Bettelheim's Book.
Books Sand 7iched In, sponsored by The Friends of the New Haven, Connecticut Library. March, 1977.
Autism: Diacnosis, Current Research, and Management (with Psychiatric Annals, Vol. 7, No. 7, Wayne Downey, M.D.).
July 1977.
.I. css:
Sadness and Depression. John Bowlby. Behavioral Science llook Service. Septembcr 1980.
Vivienne: The Life and Suicide of An Adolescent Girl. John E. Mack &
IloIly Hickler. Boston: Little, Brown, 1981.
I k
9 e
i .. ',
_{ .
- n. j ww - '
, e .
ATTACHMENT D
~
3{. CROTON HARMON SCHOOL DISTRICT c
i* 00LMETEC ossTRICT OmCE GERSTEIN STREET USNRC CROTOseON-HUDSON, NEW YORK 10520 (914) 271-4713
- > coac n nsrs o r y scwns 3 93 y y P4
- 57
?.
j ~
s; OFFICf 0F SE(,At p.
d4 , November 16, 1983 DOCKETING A SERviN '
3 RANCH s J
A
.]
's re er eeue.uon .
cm iu.no. Pr. o.n Mr. Nunzio J. Palladino
- . Kay Fm.. Vce Pr.sd.re Chairman r-- --e
] [y Nuclear Regulation Commission h,qn,gy;U,3,,(),0,9,yb d SW Phanm.r Washington, D. C. 20555 9 w s==
y cun sem.no
Dear Mr. Palladino:
4 o.vid S. S6.g.1
.: sup.nre.no.rs or senoons Now that the continued operation of Indian Point has been
- ,,, approved, we call your attention to a glaring omission in
, Cam. E. Tompouns Ewn Senool the new evacuation plan - it contains no mention of school-
< children!
Joe.ph ze>c. Pnne ,et I **" "
j ches The' previous plan was scrapped, in part, because of its
- w. x.ir, PrWcoal
,j ce wien schoo' unrealistic provisions for school-time evacuation. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that public officials have j a nn % A i pg
' solved that problem by ignoring it. County Executive crowermon sign schoot O'Rourke has been quoted in the press as suggesting that
, , , , , , students'be s'at home in the event of an emergency at Indian pups p.,.onn.a s.rvie.: Point. We fe.:1 strongly that routine early diss Issal
^" s. cmc" procedures, appropriate for dealing with a malfunctioning
,, heating system or an impending storm, are dangerously inadequate as part of an area-wide evacuation plan. School
' officials have testified to this explicitly and in detail before the NRC, but to date no one has responded to our.
concerns. Mr. O'Rourke's suggestion remains something we read in the papers, and we have no official course to follow
- should an emergency be declared.
This disregard for the safety of our children is intol- .
erable, and we look for your immediate and appropriate response.
O CROTON-HARMON BOARD OF EDUCATION by: * -
CROTON TEACHERS ASSOCIATION by: , NN
}- d-kg
ATTAC11 MENT E I
\
<r~
I2fTER OF IfffE!rt r- N
, This will confim that perties heres tend to enter int
- a. contract under vehich _
j J.jlA gl ))N Compapy will make available to the State of New York up to buses in connection with an evacuu ion resulting from a radio-
' m logical. emergency at the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plants.- This !
..- _ J \
. contract will be in effect until January 31, 1984 or until the Rockland Count,y Legislature apprcves a plan for the County to Qticipate in this evacuation process; whichever comes first.
The centruct will provide, among other things, for an appropriate indemnity against any and all liability for personal injury and property damages occasioned by the negligence of Company, State, or utility employees and a fair hourly rate of return for the buses or reimbursement for any expense or loss of revenue incurred by the use of buses during the evacuation process. Provision of buseswould,undertheproposedcontract,[besubjecttoprior
~ - _- .
centractual agreements with school districts for their use.
Although the Company shall use its best efforts to supply drivers for any and all buses utilized in this process]it is understood tEt3ef'cimnot guarantee to supply drivers for any or all such ;
vehicles, j
- '-~~~~~,
Accepted-
, By: M o . -
PA L -
Am. '
o By:
N.%A7 Dept. of Transportation s
[
b I
J
l u m. m E' ATTACHMENT F ANDREW P. o'ROURKE
___ U1 Coun'y Esecutive s
s December 14, 1983 School Evacuation Drill Sequence of Events O
r 9:20........ County Executive O'Rourke calls Executive Officer Vincent H. Castaldo to start drill at 9:30.
9:30........ Vincent Castaldo calls Anthony Marasco, Director of Disaster Services. Marasco calls Charles Eible, Super-intendent of Hendrick Hudson School District to start drill.
9:32........Eible calls Robert Scott, Director of Transportation for School District.
9:33........Elble calls Frank W. Thomas, Principal of Blue Mountain Middle School, Town of Cortlandt.
9 : 35. . . . . . . .Eible calls Supervisors of fice , Town of Cortlandt.
9:26........ Principal Thomas makes announcement to students to gather books and outdoor clothing and return to ho.merooms. (Those in gym class dress rapidly and go to hor,e r oom s . )
9:37........Three on-site bus drivers go to vehicles at Blue Mountain School. .
9:40........All students in homerooms.
Thomas announces purpose of first instructions. Gives students and teachers instructions on drill procedures.
9:50........First off-site bus arrives at Blue Mountain School.
9:56........All twelve buses arrive at Blue Mountain School.
Students start exiting school.
o 10:01.......All buses fully loaded and begin movement to off-site O location (Lakeview Avenue East) .
10:12....... Buses return to school.
10:15....... Assembly starts.
10:35....... Assembly over, students return to normal activity.
. Wrnte Plains, N.Y.10601 914 285 2000
______ _countygmce Busiding
__ - A . o.
l ANDREW P. O'ROURKE 111 County Executive Ancillary At-Home Population Telephone Test .
2 "Telsol" machines 5 Operators Started: 9:30 a.m.
Ended: 12:20 p.m.
Student enrollment 583 Absent 12/14/83 42 Participated in drill 541 Houses Contacted (attempted) 523 Not reached 288 Percent Not reached 53%
Percent Interviewed / Contacted 477.
94% of non reached homes had back-up numbers of which 93% had 914 area codes.
Of 21 household busy / wrong # only 1 had no back-up
- Work phones and back-up #s were not contacted County office Building = White Plains, N.Y.10M1 e 914 285-2000
. C :'-J u .
ANDRF.W P. O'ROUAKE County Executive El a
Question il Relationship to Student O
101 Responses <
Mother 73%
Father 11%
Grandmother 2%
Grandfather 0 Aunt 1%
Uncle 0 Sister 6%
Brother 27.
Other 5%
Question #2 How often home covered?
104 Responses Home All The Time 15.2%
Most of The Time 45.1%
Some of The Time 18.2%
Very Little 21.7%
Question #3 e
Were you aware that this emergency drill was going to ?!
occur this month?
102 Responses Yes 77.45%
Iio 22.54%
- 2 people refused to answer questions
___ f*Mdhf6IJrnfhWMrA_ o .17Am PArwsn r/Lil. fD9 o And FIEM l