ML20245J482
| ML20245J482 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1989 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| References | |
| CON-#389-8850 ASLBP, OL, NUDOCS 8907030062 | |
| Download: ML20245J482 (497) | |
Text
c 1
If UN17ED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION qy yg=
, i i
...........................................m..............,
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of: )
) Docket Nos.
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) 50-443-OL NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al., ) 50-444-OL
) OFF-SITE EHERGZNCY l (SEABROOK STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2) ) PIANNING EVIDENTIARY HEARING Pages: 27427 through 27778 Place: Boston, Massachusetts Date: June 27, 1989 am m a m o m es am e = = = m e = = = m e m an e s e ss a m m m m m as a m m m m m m m m m m m m e = = = = = = = = = = = -
78 #
1 I
HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION App: 666 WRW
, ellb , p 1220 L Serest, N.W., Salle 400 g4 Wasidm0 ton, D.C. 20005 002) 62N006 8007G30062 890627 1 FDR ADOCK 05000443 ?/*
T PDC
" ~
l 27427 l
. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR. REGULATORY COMMISSION
[ '
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the' Matter of: )
) Docket 1Nos.
'PUBLIC SERVICE CONTANY OF. ) 50-443-OL NEW HAT SHIRE, et al.,. ) 50-444-OL
) .0FF-SITE EMERGENCY (SEABROOK STATION,' UNITS 1 AND 2) ) PLANNING EVIDENTIARY HEARING i
Tuesday, June 27, 1989-
'I Tax Court Courtroom Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr.
Federal Building 10 Causeway Street Boston, Massachusetts P
.The above-entitled matter came on for hearing, pursuant to notice, at 8:32 a.m. I BEFORE :- JUDGE IVAN W. SMITH, CHAIRMAN -
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 JUDGE KENNETH-A. McCOLLOM, Member Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.~ 20555 JUDGE RICHARD F. COLE, MEMBER Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 i
j Heritage Reporting CorporatA9n (202) 628-4888
27428 APPEARANCES:
For the Applicants:
THOMAS G. DIGNAN, JR., ESQ.
GEORGE H. LEWALD, ESQ.
KATHRYN A. SELLECK, ESQ.
JAY BRADFORD SMITH, ESQ.
JEFFREY P. TROUT, ESQ.
GEOFFREY C. COOK, ESQ.
WILLIAM L. PARKER, ESQ.
Ropes & Gray One International Place Boston, Massachusetts 02110-2624 For th9 NRC Staff:
SHERWIN E. TURK, ESQ.
ELAINE I. CHAN, ESQ.
EDWIN J. REIS, ESQ.
RICHARD BACHMANN, ESQ.
Office of General Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Eor the Federal Emeroency Manacement Acency:
H. JOSEPH FLYNN, ESQ.
LINDA HUBER McPHETERS, ESQ.
Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20472 Epr the Commonwealth of Masspchusettai JAMES M. SHANNON, ATTY. GEN.
JOHN C. TRAFICONTE, ASST. ATTY. GEN.
ALLAN R. FIERCE, ASST. ATTY. GEN.
PAMELA TALBOT, ASST. ATTY. GEN.
MATTHEW BROCK, ESQ.
LESLIE B. GREER, ESO.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
27429-
. /~ APPEARANCES: (Continued)-
.J
.s For the Stat'e of New Hampshire:
.. GEOFFREY M. HUNTINGTON, ASST. ATTY. GEN.
State of.New z Hampshire 25 Capitol Street.
l
' Concord, New Hampshire 03301 For the Seacoast Anti-Pollution Leacue:
ROBERT'A. BACKUS, ESQ.
Backus, Meyer-& Solomon 116 Lowell Street P.O. Box 516 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 JANE DOUGHTY, Director Seacoast Anti-Pollution League 5 Market Street Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 For the Town of Amesburv:
l j BARBARA J. SAINT ANDRE, ESQ. i
- ~ 'Kopelman and Paige, P.C.
1/
- 77. Franklin Street Boston,. Massachusetts
. WILLIAM LORD Town Hall Amesbury, Massachusetts 10913 ,
For the City of Haverhill and Town of Merrimac:
ASHOD N.'AMIRIAN, ESQ. ;
P. O. Box-38' Bradford, Massachusetts 01835 For the City of Newburvoort: .
l l
BARBARA J. SAINT ANDRE, ESQ.
JANE O' MALLEY, ESQ.
Kopelman and Paige, P.C.
77 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 i
\ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
4 L _.__J._._. _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _
27430 )
l APPEARANCES: (Continued)
For the Town of Newbury:
I R. SCOTT HILL-WHILTON, ESQ.
Lagoulis, Clark, Hill-Whilton & McGuire 79 State Street Newburyport, Massachusetts 01950 i
For the Town of Salisburv:
CHARLES P. GRAHAM, ESQ.
Murphy and Graham 33 Low Street Newburyport, Massachusetts 01950 For the Town of West Newbury:
JUDITH H. MIZNER, E30 Second Floor 79 State Street Newburyport, Massachusetts 01950 For the Atpmic Safety and Licensino Board:
ROBERT R. PIERCE, ESQUIRE Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
$ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
t _ _ _ _ - _ -
27431
-~ l r S IEREX i
\ ) )
'~' WITNESSEj;. DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS EXAM l Egn_el No. 20:
S. Joseph Ellis Anthony M. Callendrello Catherine A. Frank Thomas F. Grew by Mr. Traficonte 27434 (Continued) by Judge McCollom 27520 by Mr. Bachmann 27523 by Mr. Traficonte 27527-by Judge Cole 27528 T. Michael Carter (prefiled) 27546 ,
by Ms. Talbot 27544 by Mr. Lewald 27547 l
by Mr. Bachmann 27634 l by Judge Cole 27637 i
( i
\,
4 EXHIBITS: IDENT. REC. bel. DESCRIPTION:
Massachusetts Attorney General:
125 27435 27439 Traffic Management and Control, 10-9-87 126 27507 27508 Portions of Howard deposition, 11-16-88 and Exhibit 1 SAPL:
1 A 27725 27725 Testimony of Dr. Belton A. Burrows on Behalf of SAPL, including attachments
,e
) Heritage Roporting (202) 628-4888 Corporation
I-i 27432 j 1 H P_ E X f INSERTS: PAGE 1
Corrected Testimony of T. Michael 27546 l Carter on Behalf of the Massachusetts Attorney General, Concerning JI-13J, 27G, 36 and MAG EX-9, JI-35, and Attachments ,
Applicants' Cross-Examination Plan 27778 for Testimony of T. Michael Carter.
O'
- me.1 ,e m ,. e 1 . G (202) 628-4888
- c. .r t1_ e
M 27433 i
x[ 1 E B'Q.Q E E Q I N Q E T
":- 2 JUDGE' SMITH: Good morning.
3 Is there any preliminary business?
4 (No response)'
5- JUDGE' SMITH: Mr. Traficonte?-
6' MR. TRAFICONTE: Thank you, Your Honor.
7- We do have an item of prel-iminary business.
8 Mr. Fierce has a piece of testimony that he wants 9 .to distribute at this point.
10 MR.' FIERCE: Good morning, Your Honor.
11' This 'fus a piece of testimony that I have' been .
12 promising to bring in, in response to the Applicants' 13 parking. lot testimony. It's by Professor Ortwin-Renn of
/, -
\ 14- Clarke University analyzing the facility stay. times.
15 There are two components to the parking lot-16 analysis that the Applicants have presented. One is the 17 number of cars in-the lot. And the second piece is.the
- 18 facility 1 stay time. And those two factors work.together to-19 indicate whether they can get. the_ people through-the 20 : monitoring trailers given the parking capacities.
21 So I would like to distribute that now. A piece 22 of testimony with attachments 23 (Document proffered to all parties.)
L 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27434 1 Whereupon, 2 S. JOSEPH ELLIS l 3 ANTHONY M. CALLENDRELLO 4 CATHERINE M. FRANK 5 THOMAS F. GREW f 6 having been previously duly sworn, resumed the witness stand 7 herein, and were examined and testified as follows:
8 CROSS-EXAMINATION (Continued) 9 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
10 Q Panel, I would like to continue, if I might, a 11 line of questioning concerning the training that was offered 12 to the ORO traffic guides.
13 I would like to show you a document.
14 (Document proffered to all parties. )
15 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
16 Q First I' d like to ask, Mr. Callendrello, do you 17 recognize this?
18 A (Callendrello) Yes, it's a document that we 19 provided to you yesterday at the close of the hearings.
20 And as Mr. Grew explained it is a lesson plan for 21 practical training and traffic control.
22 MR. TRAFICONTE: All right.
23 I would like to have this marked as the next Mass 24 AG or Intervenor Exhibit No. 125.
25
( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
___________ - J
REBUTTAL ' P ANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27435
/N . 1 (The document referred lto
%/ 2 was marked for identification 3 as Mass AG Exhibit 125.)-
4 MR. TRAFICONTE: It is a six page document that is 5- headed, " Traffic Management and Control." And it bears the 6 date in the upper right hand corner ~on the first page of
-7 ' 10-9-87.
8 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
I SF Q -Mr. Grew, on that point first, wasn't it your 10 testimony yesterday that this document had been produced at E11 some point after discovery had closed or'at some point 12 fairly recently and for that reason had not been made 13 available to Interveners in this case?
j 14- Did you testify _something to.that effect?
15 A (Grew) Yes, I did.
16 Q Would you want to modify that testimony at this 17 point in light of the date on the document?
18- A (Grew) I don't want to modify that.
19 0 You do not?
20 A (Grew) Do not.
=21 Q Is the date 10-9-87 the date of the creation of
.22 the document?
23 A (Grew) I don't know that.
24 Q Does anyone else on the panel know, in fact, what 25 the date that appears on each page, what that date l
- Heritage Reporting Corporation
. (202) 628-4888 E_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27436 1 signifies?
2 Mr. Ellis, do you know what that means?
3 A (Ellis) I would assume that it's the date that it 4 was originated. But, you know, it's an assumption.
5 Q Mr. Ellis, have you ever seen this document i 6 before?
7 A (Ellis) To tell you the truth, I'm not sure.
8 Q Okay.
I 9 Mr. Callendrello, have you ever seen this document j l '
10 before yesterday?
11 A (Callendrello) No, I had not.
12 Q Mr. Grew, have you ever seen this document before 13 yesterday?
, 14 A (Grew) Yes, I have.
15 Q And, Ms. Frank, have you ever seen this document 16 before yesterday?
17 A (Frank) No, I have not.
l 18 Q All right.
19 We're going to be left with you, Mr. Grew, I'm 20 sure that delights you. l 21 When was the first tire you saw th<e document?
22 A (Grew) It was in the spring of this year.
23 Q I take it, it was -- and I think you testified so 4 24 yesterday -- that it was a part of the materials in addition ;
25 to Attachment M of your testimony, it was a part of a Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
i
- _ _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ _ k
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27437 rS 3 collection of materials that was used to train traffic ,
( I
'V 2 guides?
3 A (Grew) That is correct.
4- Q And wa're to distinguish these materials, the 5 Attachment M materials and Exhibit 125 from Attachment L 6 'which is the training module entitled, " Traffic and access 7 control," correct?
8 A (Grew) That is correct.
9 0 All right.
10 Are the latter documents, Attachment M and Exhibit 11 125, is that a supplemental training program or portion of a 12 program?
13 A (Grew) We regarded that as part of supplemental
.O 14 training, yes.
A ' /
15 O Supplemental in time? That's to say, after the 16 basic training was through and Attachment L's module was 17 provided you went on and added some time later an additional 18 supplement?
19 A (Grew) That is correct.
20 Q Is that why.you're hesitant about the fact that it 21 bears the date 10-9-877 In your view and in your 22 understanding of the facts did it come later in time?
23 A (Grew) The date on there 10-9-87, I did not 24 produce this document, so I don't know what the date is that 25 the people who produced that document put on there.
A Reporting Corporation
(' Heritage (202) 628-4888
}
l i
l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27438 l i
4 1 Q All right. j 2 The traffic guides who were responding to the 3 exercise in June of 1988, had they had the additional l
4 supplemental training? l 3
5 A (Grew) In ' 887 i
6 Q In June of '88, yes? j 7 A (Grew) Yes.
)
8 Q They had? l 1
1 9 A (Grew) Yes.
10 Q So the Attachment M materials and this axhibit 11 were in existence and used to provide the supplement 61 12 training, at least as of June 19887 13 A (Grew) Yes.
14 JUDGE SMITH: Can someone explain the handwritten 15 legend there that is not part of Appendix M7 How did that 16 get on there?
17 THE WITNESS: (Grew) Yes, I can explain that.
18 I wrote that on there because when I brought that 19 particular document here I wanted to make it clear to myself 20 that I brought that and it was not part of Appendix M.
21 JUDGE SMITH: And were you referring to what we've 22 been referring to Attachment M?
l 23 THE WITNESS: (Grew) I'm sorry, yes, 24 Attachment M.
25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
\
l I 1
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27439 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
91 2 Q Mr. Grew, do you know, just very briefly, why this 3 document was not attached and made part of Attachment M?
4 A (Grew) In preparing the testimony I realized that 5 it looked like our documentation of the supplemental 6 training was incomplete in that it didn't have the lesson 7 plan for the supplemental training; and therefore, we were 8 looking around in the training area to see if we could 9 possibly produce that. And it took a while of digging 10 through old materials to find that.
11 MR. TRAFICONTE: I would like to muve that it.be 12 admitted into evidence at this point in light of the 13 testimony it appears to be essentially a supplement to the 14 materials attached as Attachment M to the testimony.
15 MR. LEWALD: No objection.
16 JUDGE SMITH: Attorney General Exhibit 125 is 17 received.
18 (The document referred to 19 previously marked for 20 identification as 21 Mass AG Exhibit 125, was 22 received in evidence.)
23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27440 1 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
2 Q Now I'd like to direct your attention, Mr.
3 Callendrello, to the third page of Exhibit 125.
4 You will note that the third page continues under 5 the general heading of " Intersection Control" which appears 6 on the bottor of the second page. It provides a series of 7 numbered items, and the third item reads as follows, i
8 " Discretion. Individuals should employ common sense in 9 changing direction of flow. Do not change too frequently,"
10 with the word "too" underscored. " Determine length of flow 11 amount of backup heading in each direction and waiting (
12 time."
13 This document was produced, or made available to 3 14 me during cross-examination yesterday concerning what 15 instruction had been given to traffic guides about the 16 timing of alternate streams of traffic, correct?
17 A (Callendrello) Yes, I read that section to you 18 yesterday.
19 Q This was what you had read, was it not?
20 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
21 Q Okay.
22 Can you indicate to me what is intended by the 23 language "do not change too frequently"?
24 What does that mean?
25 A (Callendrello) I can say what it means to me, but
( Heritage Reporting Corporation '
(202) 620-4808
Vi REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS -
27441 y 1; maybe:Mr. Grew is more qualified to answer.that question.
}/'%(
'- / / 2 being that'this is a lesson plan and this'is something that 3 'an instructor would use to instruct students on that aspect
'4 of traffic' control.
5 .Q .All'right, that's' fair enough. l 6 Mr.' Grew, what does this mean?
i 7 'A (Grew) I'm not really certain. I could only 8' speculate at this point.
9 I did not conduct the lesson, nor was I there for
' 10 ' the conduct'of it.
11' Q All right.
12 Mr. Ellis, you have never seen this document 13_ before,'did you?.
14 A (Ellis) No , but I have some experience with law 15 enforcement.and traffic control.
i 1Gl 0 All right.
17 A. (Ellis) And my interpretation of_that paragraph 18' .is that you have individuals, when you put them into a 19 traffic control position, their tendency is to stop the 20 traffic, stop.the traffic, stop the traffic. )
l 21 And what you really want them to do is space it 22 out. Look for the spill-over in the intersection so that 23 you keep the intersection filled, the traffic flow-way, but 24 don't just stop it to be stopping it.
25 Q Well, okay. Let's make sure we are all talking I
[ Heritage Reporting Corporation 4
(202) 628-4888
l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27442 1 about the same problem here.
2 Do you see what the first sentence of No. 3 says:
3 " Discretion. Individuals should employ common sense in 4 changing direction of flow"?
5 Can we all agree that that means that there might 6 be and in fact are situations where a traffic guide has to 7 alternate two conflicting streams of traffic? Has to permit 8 A to go at the cost of B not going and vice-versa.
9 That's really what this is talking about, is it 10 not?
11 A (Callendrello) Yes, I think we discussed that 12 yesterday.
13 Q I think you did, and we are all in agreement that 14 expediting traffic is part of the traffic guide's 15 obligation. He's to expedite in the sense of make it go as 16 fast as he can make it go. But this is a different issue.
17 He is on occasion called on to alternate different 18 streams of traffic, correct?
19 A (Callendrello) For those situations where you 20 have got a T-intersection or a cross-intersection, yes.
21 Q It would be limited to certain traffic guides I 22 will stipulate to that. There would be traffic guides who 23 would not face this as a task, and traffic guides who would, 24 correct?
25 A (Callendrello) Correct.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
}
l l
a ..
r 1
1 REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27443 j
. . l
. /-' 1. I haven't checked the: diagrams in Appendix.J. I d '
didn't.have one available to me last evening. .But-as I can
.i~
2 3 -recall,-there are some points whereithe traffic guides would ,
l 4 need to do that.
5- Q Now, when traffic guides must do that, as we-6 discussed yesterday, the planning basis or the planning.
7 assumptions in the ETE study assume a 75-second alternating 8 time, correct?
9 A (Callendrello) I went back and looked at the 10- testimony, Applicants' Rebuttal No. 16, and there it l 11 indicates that that is one of the inputs to the I-DYNEV 12 model, and also refreshed my memory that the ETE is not 13- sensitive to variations in that green time, in that' 14 allocation of green time.
s 15 .Q Do I understand from that, Mr. Callendrello, that 16 .it's your. view that it makes no difference to the' length of ,
17' the ETE, in the' situations where there are alternating 18 streams of. traffic,. what~ green time is given to each stream?
'I think within some reasonable 19 A (Callendrello) 20 expectation, yes.
21' Mr. Lieberman is obviously the expert on -- i i
22 O All right.
23 A (Callendrello) -- how sensitive I-DYNEV is.
24 But obviously if you complete block flow in one 25 direction, you could affect ETE or the capacity. But, L
l-g Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27444 i i
1 again, within some reasonable limits, it's my recollection 2 that his testimony is that the I-DYNEV model is relatively 1 3 insensitive to that proportion of green time. ;
4 Q And the structure of the training program reflects 5 that assumption, does it not, that it doesn't matter what 6 alternate green time is provided to conflicting streams of 7 traffic?
8 A (Callendrello) I don't understand the question. !
9 Q The training program that you have devised for 10 traffic guides reflects the fact that it's y>ur view that 11 the ETEs are not sensitive to varying green times.
12 You don't provide any instruction one way or the 13 other as to the amount of time to be given to conflicting 14 streams, do you?
15 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
16 What's provided is a different indicator, and that 17 is, keep traffic moving. Don't change too frequently.
18 Q Don't change too frequently?
19 A (Callendrello) In other words, don't block 20 traffic too frequently, and it provides some indicators as 21 to whether you are backing up traffic. And that is, namely, 22 whether there is a -- it says to assess the backup heading 23 in each direction and the waiting time.
24 Q Well, let's take those two indicators. Take the 25 second one first, the waiting time.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) G28-4888 i
i
~
['
l
)
REBUTTAL PANEL'NO. 20 - CROSS 27445 l r^' :1-
'Are these traffic guides provided watches, stop
\'~ 2 watches,-clocks? j 3 A (Callendrello) No.
4 Q They'are not?
'5 A (Callendrello). No, they are not provided.
6 Q Of' course, there is no indication'there as'to how 7 much waiting time is the appropriate waiting. time, is there?-
8 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
9 Q .And as to the first time, the backup heading in ;
l 10- each direction, I think I understand that having recently 11 driven into Boston.
12 That's to say, the traffic guide is to look down, 13' assuming it's a simple' situation where he can look down a Y,.
/' \ .14 and he can see the two-lines-of traffic. stretching out in
{\
15 front of him. He's at the. point of the Y and he can see 16 traffic mount on the stop stream as he's providing access or 17 he's' allowing the other stream to follow, and then he'could 18 stop that and then allow the stopped up traffic.
19 Is that the image that might be engendered by this 20 language, to determine the length of the flow by the amount 21 of the backup heading in a given direction?
22 A (Callendrello) I don't think it necessa.rily would 23 be limited to a Y-intersection. I think also that cross ,
l 24 intersection traffic, I would be able to assess how long the 25 backup is, i
.j Corporation
( Heritage Reporting (202) 628-4888 l
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27446 1 Q Right.
2 But the common sensical notion here is that the l 3 traffic guide can see, can he not, from his vantage point 4 what the backup is amounting to, correct?
5 It's a common sensical notion.
6 A (Callendrello) I would think so, yes.
7 Q Yes, I mean, that's what this language is 8 supposed to engender, is it not?
9 That's what you are training these people to look 10 to.
11 A (Callendrello) That's my interpretation of that 12 language, yes.
13 Q All right.
14 Well, Mr. Grew, you agree with that, don't you?
15 That is the proper interpretation of this 16 ' language?
17 A (Grew) That would be my interpretation.
18 Q All right.
19 What do you do in a situation where you have got 20 traffic that basically is lined up and queued beyond the j 21 vision of the traffic guide?
22 Both directions just backed up as far as you can 23 see. How is he to determine how much traffic he is to allow 24 from one of the two streams when both streams stretch out to 25 the horizon?
i Heritage Reporting Corporation
! (202) 628-4888 <
I I
i
- 1) ;
c' REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27447
~
/N 1- A .( Callendrello); They would do it in accordance
~' 'with the traffic control which' indicates which direction 3 should be encouraged and which should be discouraged.
4 0 Well, we're talking aboutLtwo; conflicting streams-5 of traffic,.both of which have to-be expedited, but both of 6 which.cannot pass through the intersection at the same time.
7- ' JUDGE SMITH: .All right.
.8 Now-let's make sure.you have the same assumptions, 9 becaus'e you don't'seem to.
.10 Your assumption seems to be that there is no 11 direction at this intersection for discouraging traffic.
-12 That both are free-flowing directions.
13 And Mr. Callendrello has introduced the other
, 14 factor into his answer.
)
15 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes.
16 ~ And I was moving to eliminate the other factor.
17 JUDGE SMITH: Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me.
18 But this has been, in my view, a weakness of the 19 whole line of questioning, because it has not taken into 20 account whether or not the intersection has a discouraged 21 traffic aspect to'it or not. q i
22 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, let me go back, because I 23 had tried to stipulate in the hypothetical that I had been 24 using without taking a particular intersection. I tried to l 25 hypothesize a set of circumstances of a more or less generic Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
l
I i
I REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27448 j i
1 nature.
I J
2 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
3 Q Mr. Callendrello, we are talking about the type of 4 intersection where there are two traffic streams coming into l l
5 the intersection appropriately. Two traffic streams that )
i 6 represent evacuation routes from some outlying areas. 1 7 Two traffic streams enter the intersection and 8 they both need to be accommodated at the intersection, but 9 they each put a conflicting demand on the space in the 10 intersection, if you follow the description.
11 So the traffic guide is called upon, by the very 12 nature of the intersection, to permit one stream access to 13 the intersection while not permitting the other stream and g
14 vice versa. That is the nature of the beast in this case.
15 And he or she, therefore, is going to have to alternate 16 green time one stream and then the other stream.
17 I'm using it as a hypothetical, and I'm 18 representing that that exists in the traffic scheme as 19 represented by Appendix J.
20 A (Callendrello) Yes, I --
21 Q You agree that it --
22 A (Callendrello) -- four.d one that does exist.
23 Q That does do that, okay.
24 A (Callendrello) And as I said, I was sure that I
25 there were some locations where that existed.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 ,!
i hh h mm_~__m_.__ _ _ _ _
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS I
27449 "s ' l- QL As;I am, without<looking at particulars.
\~ /: 2' Now the' answer can't be.that he.will discourage 3 -the traffic in accordance.with the traffic management' plan, 4 because,'as stipulated, we're talking about a situation
.5 where he is to expedite both traffic streams, correct?
- 6. A (Callendrello) Well, where I misunderstood your 7 question is that the traffic control diagrams do not provide
-8 specific direction as to the allocation of space'in that 9 intersection to the.various intersecting flows.
.10 What it does say is to encourage a given 11 . direction, encourage movement in a given direction, 12 discourage movement in a given~ direction. That's the type 13' of instruction that is provided.
-/}
\g 14 Q 'And that instruction is irrelevant to the-
'15 discussion we are_having now, is it not?
16 I don't dispute for a. minute that that kind of
-17 instruction is there, but that's irrelevant for.the. issue on 18 the table now.
19 A (Callendrello) As far as allocating the relative 20 flow'into that intersection, yes, I would agree that it's --
21 Q All right.
22 We'll make believe you didn't say it.
23 A (Callendrello) Well, it's irrelevant in that it 24 doesn't describe.that, but it does describe the movements 25 that would be allowed, and therefore the attention that the j
(
\
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
i b_____________________________.-___ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.___j
I REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27450 1 traffic guide has to pay to the given traffic flows.
2 Q Granted.
3 A (Callendrello) As I understand your question, 4 yes, it would be irrelevant.
5 Q Irrelevant.
6 All right, now, make sure I understand.
7 You don't believe, do you, that there is anything 8 in the traffic management plan for the relevant l 9 intersections that provides any indication to the traffic 10 guide what the appropriate amount of time is that he is to 11 alternate the two streams?
12 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
13 0 Okay.
14 As we have just indicated, these people were 15 traineo in such a fashion that they are likely to believe 16 that it doesn't matter how much time they allocate to the 17 two conflicting streams.
18 A (Callendrello) No, I don't think that that's what 19 that said.
20 Q All right.
21 A (Callendrello) It wouldn't say that to me if I i
22 was being trained. l 23 0 Well, all right. )
24 A (Callendrello) It would say to keep traffic 25 moving and not to let backup in any one direction get i
)
' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9i
i' -
k REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 -CROSS '27451 'j L
iI i
/ li 'inordinatelyLlong. Or.if there was not a backup that was 2 controlling..it, not:to'have somebody_ waiting an: inordinate' -
~
'3- amount'of time before they were allowed access to.the 4 intersection.
5- Q. 'All right,'that's fine.
I 6- So they are'to look at-backup'and the inordinate 7 length of the waiting time, correct?
8- A. .(Callendrello) Well, backup and waiting [ time,'
SF yes.
10 0 But we don't.have any determinants as to what an
'll; inordinate' length of waiting' time is, whether it's 75 .
12L seconds or a-minute or two minutes. There is-no guidance 12 .provided, right?
[ 14: A' -(Callendrello) Other than the common sense.
15 Q Common sense. ,
'16 And as to the backup, come back to my 11 7 hypothetical: what does the traffic guide do in a situation 18~ - where'both of the conflicting streams stretch back to his 19 horizon?
20 A (Callendrello) I don't know.
21 O Okay.
22 Mr. Grew, Attachment M, was that a document 23 created by your training group?
24 (Witnesses review document.)
25 A (Grew) Part of this document was created by our Heritage Reporting Corporation
-k_ (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27452 1 training group, but not all.
2 Q All right.
3 Well, let me specifically direct your attention to 4 some interesting pages which begin on 34 and go all the way 5 to the end, the 49th page, 15 pages.
6 Do yo'u see those?
7 My son saw this last night. He's decided he wants 8 to be one of these people, Mr. Grew.
9 Are these materials that Seabrook generated, these 10 pictures of -- I'm not sure what police force this is.
11 A (Ellis) If I may.
12 Q Yes, please.
13 A (Ellis) They are United States Air Force. They 14 are extracted from an Air Force traffic manual.
15 Q I see.
16 Now, we all agree, don't we, that the ORO traffic 17 guides are not uniformed, correct?
18 A (Callendrello) Correct.
19 They do have vests and rain gear and things.
20 Q Well, that's what I was going to come to.
J 21 They do have vests. j 22 In the training, at least, was anything said to 23 the traffic guides about uniforms? )
l 24 A (Grew) Not to my knowledg?.
I 25 Q Are the vests a standard issue?
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 ).
1
_ . _ _ .____________________________._______________J
i
)
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27453
(
i- (
1 A (Callendrello) Yes, it is, '
4 3 ,
l 4 .i i
5 I
6 )
t
'?
8 9 1 10 11 I 12 13 14 .
i 15 16 17 d
I 18 l
19 20 l 1
l 21
- 22
~2 3 l l
24 25 i
l l
' Heritage Reporting Corporation j (202) 628-4888 I
d REPUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27454 i Q Is there a physical device that they are issued in l
2 the form of a wand or some other device that they can use to 3 help themselves direct the traffic?
4 A (Callendrello) They're issued a number of items.
5 They're issued, as I indicated, rain gear; 6 they're issued a reflective orange vest; they're issued 7 reflective orange gloves; they're issued flashlights with 8 reflective orange cones on them so, in essence, those are 9 reflective wands or high visibility wands; they're issued 10 some other things relating to procedures and the traffic 11 control point as well as maps.
12 But as far as visibility devices those are what 13 they are issued.
14 Q Now, would the panel agree with me that, although 15 you do have the supplemental materials, the practical 16 traffic guide training material in Attachment M and its 17 additional lesson plan which is Exhibit 125; would the panel 18 agree' with me that there really has been no meaningful 19 hands-on training provided to tre.ffic guides in the actual 20 direction of traffic?
21 A (Callendrello) No.
22 Would anybody assent to that so we can move on? i Q
23 A (Callendrello) No.
24 The practical training involved setting up a mock 25 intersection at the Seabrook site and actually running
' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9i I
1
1 REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 CROSS 27455
{
.; f y .1. vehicles through the. intersection and directing. vehicles.
.2 Q' And is that what.is described in this first page 3 of Attachment M?
4 A (Callendrello) The first page of Attachment M is 5 a memo 1from - I guess at the time she was involved in the f6 drills group -- supervisor of the drills group as.to th'e 7' requirements for the practical training. And that is 8 basically the site preparation'in anticipation of this 9 practica1' training.
-10 Q. Well,.I mean, the second bullet there tells 11 somebody to' purchase lime. I mean, this is memo that sets 12 up or describes this purported hands-on training experience; 13 correct?
14 A (Callendrello) No, this is-the site preparation;
\
15 it's the prerequisite.
4 16 Q The sito preparation?
17 A (Callendrello) Yes.
-18 Q All right.
19 of the panel who is most knowledgeable about that 20 site -- strike that.
21 Who is most knowledgeable about the actual hands-22; on training experience that was provided to the traffic 23 guides?
I 24 It's a comparative question. ]
25 (Witnesses confer.)
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27456 1 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) How about you ask 2 the question and we'll see --
3 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
4 Q Well, I was going to ask, for example, were any of j 1
5 you present during the days at this site, this mock-up )
i 6 intersection site where the traffic guides were trained? j l
7 A (Callendrello) No. I 8 Q All right.
9 All traffic guides were provided this experience?
10 A (Grew) I don't know if all is accurate. I know l 11 it was offered several times, so that a majority of our l
l 12 people got that training.
I 13 0 I take it, it was offered prior to the June '88
- 14 exercise; correct?
15 A (Grew) That is correct.
16 Q All right.
17 Well, --
18 JUDGE SMITH: Is there supposed to be a page 2 of 19 49 in Attachment M?
20 MR. TRAFICONTE: I don't have one either, Your 21 Honor.
22 JUDGE SMITH: Several of us don't seem to have the 23 page.
24 MR. TRAFICONTE: I have the old version, let me 25 see if there's one in the old version.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27457 f~^ l' Yesj there is. There's'another intersection.
\'" / JUDGE SMITH: . Some of us are missing page 2 of 49.
3 BY MR. TRAFICONTEi 4 Q Mr. Grew, how many hours did the practical hands-5 on training experience take?
6 A- (Grew) 'I don't know that offhand.
7 AL (Callendrello) Indicated on page 6 of 8 Attachment M, it was 8:00 to 4:30, so that would be a normal-9 eight-hour day plus a half-hour for lunch.
10 'O And how much of the tima, Mr. Callendrello, if you-11 know or if you can somehow infer from these documents, how 12 much of that time was actually given over to individuals 13 physically directing traffic?
., 14 A (Callendrello) I don't know. It was not all of 15 that time; there were some other topics that were covered as 16 well.
17 Q And was it like batting practice, Mr.
18 Callendrello,~ you had to take turns to get your crack at the 19 limed intersection to get your crack at the cars?
20 A (Callendrello) I don't know.
21 Q All right.
22 Does the panel believe that this hands-on training 23 -- does the panel believe that it is adequate to provide 24 people who are otherwise not experienced in directing 25 traffic to provide an adequate experiential base so that g Heritage Reporting Corporation l
(202) 628-4888
_ _ - _ _ _ = _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27458 1 they could, in the event of an emergency, effectively direct 2 traffic?
3 A (Callendrello) Yes.
4 Q Mr. Grew, do you believe that?
5 A (Grew) Yes, I do.
6 Q Mr. Ellis, do you believe that?
7 A (Ellis) Yes, I do.
8 Q Ms. Frank, do you believe that?
9 A (Frank) Yes, I do.
10 Q What is the basis for that belief?
11 What experience or knowledge do you have that 12 leads you to the believe that your practical experience 13 module is adequate to provide sufficient training?
3 14 A (Callendrello) Well, I think given the procedural 15 direction that the traffic guides have in terms of the 16 traffic control point diagrams that are in Appendix J, I 17 think that little other practical experience is needed.
18 I think what we have given them goes a long way to 19 helping improve those skills, but I think that -- I know 20 just looking at it myself, armed with that diagram and the 21 necessary equipment it seems fairly straightforward how the 22 traffic is to be directed.
23 And again, the basis being those traffic control 24 point diagrams. I think the practical experience provides i
25 additional refinement of those skills and that the traffic Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
l I
E p
4 ,1
-l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27459. I L
ffs 1- guides are.given the. experience of the instructors. -
One is j
( '
2 .t security -- actually, the person who was a lead was a ,
I
! 3 security individual who had experience in directing traffic, i
{
4 and the others -- the subject matter expert was an 5 individual that served as a New Hampshire State Policeman 1
6 for in excess-of 20' years; I think.15 of that in the field.
7 So that I'can make my assessment based solely on 8 the procedural direction, but again, I think the practical l
.9 ' experience and training provides some additional refinement 10 ~of those skills.
- 11. In addition, as we indicated in our testimony a
-12 large number of these individuals have some previous traffic 13 control experience.
[~' 14 Q I would like to read to the panel a passage from E.)} 15 .the Guide.for Highway Traffic Regulation in an Emergency.
16 It's a publication of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
17 And the quotation I'm going to read you appears on 18 page 4 of-the testimony of Thomas Adler filed in this case 19 on April 10, 1989: "Even in peacetime and even then if all 20 drivers were amiable and docile" --
21 MR. DIGNAN: I object, that was excluded.
22 JUDGE SMITH: Ye$.
23 There was a motion to strike. q 24 MR. LEWALD: Strike from his testimony.
25 JUDGE SMITH: Strike that -- I
(~ Heritage Reporting Corporation
' ^
(202) 628-4888 3
1 REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27460 1 MR. TRAFICONTE: This passage of this --
2 MR. DIGNAN: This very passage.
3 JUDGE SMITH: That very passage that you're )
4 reading from.
5 MR. TRAFICONTE: All right.
I 6 Well, I drop the reference to it appearing in the l l
7 testimony of April 10, and I would just read it and ask if 8 they would agree with it. ..
9 I mean, I just want to identify it for the record.
10 JUDGE SMITH: Well, it will be irrelevant if they 11 agree with it for the reasons -- well, I guess you weren't 12 there, so we'll say why.
13 The objection was based upon the human behavior
. 14 aspects of it, which was deemed to have been res judicata 15 because of our December decision.
16 And the implication there -- I'm just explaining 17 to you, I'm not reopening it.
18 MR. TRAFICONTE: No, I don't want to reargue it.
19 JUDGE SMITH: The implication there was, you were 20 comparing it with " distraught" and another word there 21 " behavior following a nuclear attack at wartime," which we 22 thought would have been excluded by the human behavior 23 decision we made in December, 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Can I read one sentence and we'll 25 do a voir dire?
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i 1
i i
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27461
)
[~N 1 There's a sentence that I could read that would be j l L h i 2 relevant for my purpose that doesn't touch on that, j 3 JUDGE SMITH: I guess I can't stop you from 4 reading. I'm just telling you what our consideration was.
5 MR. TRAFICONTE: All right.
6 MR. LEWALD: Your Honor, if you don't read this in 7 context -- you can't take one sentence out of that 8 paragraph.
9 JUDGE SMITH: I just can't make anticipatory 10 rulings, I don't know what he's going to do. I don't know 11 how you're going to get anything out of there given the fact 12 that the whole passage was deemed by the Board contrary to 13 arguments of your colleague to refer to human behavior of
,- s
/ 14 distraught individuals following a wartime nuclear attack.
N,s 15 MR. TRAFICONTE: Let me just indicate why I think 16 there is yet something that can be done with this passage.
17 It's quite clear the panel's view of the traffic 18 auide function is that it is not heavy lifting. And that 19 their notion of -- Mr. Dignan is nodding in agreement.
20 MR. DIGNAN: It doesn't take a rocket scientist, 21 John.
22 (Laughter.)
23 MR. TRAFICONTE: So even I, and I have been 24 disqualified for quite a few ORO positions.
25 JUDGE SMITH: It's several levels above courtroom
,Q
(' ) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i l
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27462 1 practice.
4 2 (Laughter) 3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 l
18 19 !
0 l i 21 l
22 1 1 23 24 i
25 l
, Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 !
- _-___ _ -_ _ a
i
]
REBUTTAL PANEL' NO. 20 '- CROSS 27463 k .
j.L,' 11 MR. TRAFICONTE: In any event,.we are litigating !
a >
.[ [2 right'now the adequacy 1of the training.provideds And I 3- think it's quite clear the Panel believes that the training =
4 provides adequate training, in.part, because'the t'sk a at 5J hand is' straight forward and simple, if'not simple-minded.
?"- 6 And I have to admit I'was not aware that this 7 ' entire quote had been stricken. But'the first. phrase-in it 8- has;nothing to do -- the first sentence in'it has nothing to
~
9 do with human behavior or distraught individuals. And'I 11 0 will read itLand then they certainly are free to renew the-11 bjection.
12 "Even in peacetime, and even then if all drivers
-13 L were amiable and docile, the job would still be complicated.
/~'.. 14. Witness the-traffic jams before and after big athletic and k
15 entertainment events."
16 That is a statement by the U.S. Department of
~17 Transportation that is it is a complicated job assuming 18 people are not' acting out and are amiable and docile. That 19 can't be subject to the human behavior objection.
20 Can it, George?
21 MR. LEWALD: I have no problem with the question 22 just so long as isn't in the context of a Department of 23 Transportation announcement.
24 .MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, it's in the context --
1 25 MR. LEWALD: As a general proposition, if you want 1
i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 ]
1 I
i l
! 1 i
REBUTTAL' PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27464 1 to p ', it to the Panel, I think that's proper.
2 MR. TRAFICONTE: All right.
3 Well, let me do it this way.
4 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
5 Q Panel, I would like to read you a sentence that 6 appears in the U.S. Department of Transportation publication 7 "A Guide for Highway Traffic Regulation in an Emergency."
8 "Even in peacetime, and even then if all drivers 9 were amiable and docile, the job would still be complicated.
10 Witness the traffic jams before and after big athletic and 11 entertainment events."
12 Does the panel agree with that statement that the 13 job is complicated even assuming that the drivers are 14 amiable and docile?
15 MR. DIGNAN: What job?
16 MR. TRAFICONTE: The job of traffic regulation.
17 The job of directing and managing traffic.
18 MR. DIGNAN: Directing and managing traffic.
19 How specific --
20 MR. TRAFICONTE: I'm sorry, Mr. Dignan.
21 Is this kind of a peanut gallery intervention on 22 your part?
23 MR. DIGNAN: Yes. You can call it anything you 24 want.
25 What I want is the definition of "the job" in that Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
o,.
< }:
2 q;7 REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 274651
~N l' . sentence given to the witnesses,'too.
"- .2^ MR. TRAFICONTE: The definition "the job",'whichi s 3 appears clear when'you read on in the passage, is, "the L4 managing and directing traffic".
'5 .BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
6: -Q Does the Panel agree with it or disagree with it?
h 7- 'A- (Callendrello) I looked briefly at that document.
L.
8 And as I-recall, it discusses the overall management of an 9 evacuation and flow of traffic out of areas that are k
10 affected by' nuclear war. And I did see the passage that-11 related to peacetime radiological accidents.
12 As I recall, it related to clearing of an area.
13 And to that extent,.I think'that that evacuation of-an area f'h G
-14 is a complicated task, and in fact that's why we.have.a 15 detailed-traffic management plan is-to expedite that' 16' ' complicated task.
17 -I think the task at any individual location is
' 18 _ made less complicated and more doable by the fact that these' 19 plans are in place and we've preset the traffic control 20 strategies and have not left'it to occur at the time of an 21 emergency.
22 Q Do any of you know how many, physically, actually 23 how many cars were used, how many vehicles were used during 24 thit Practical training session?
'25: An estimate, if you have any idea. Don't Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27466 l
1 speculate, but if you have some -- l 1
2 A (Callendrello) I don't know. ;
3 Q The Panel doesn't know?
4 (All nod negatively.)
5 BY MR. TRAFICONTE: )
I 6 Q All right, I would like to move on and ask you a 7 series of questions about the training provided for the 8 public notification coordinator.
9 If you would turn to page 29 of your testimony, do 10 you see -- have you all found that?
11 A (Callendrello) Yes.
12 Q All right.
I 13 Now, Mr. Ellis, let me put the question to you.
g 14 At the top of the page in the first full paragraph 15 you testify that the prerequisite established in the SPMC 16 for the public notification coordinator is "public 17 information experience".
18 Do you see that?
19 A (Ellis) Yes.
20 Q What is public information experience?
21 A (Ellis) I'm not sure I can define -- let me put 22 it "'other way.
23 It would be some experience with press releases.
24 In terms of the PNC, it has to be knowledge of what's at l
25 hand for him to do his job. ;
)
l-l seritage Reporting corporation (202) 628-4888 llll
_ - _ - - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________a
p.s -t 27467
. , . REBUTTAL PANEL-NO. 20 - CROSS g 1' 'Q. .It has'to'.be knowledge of what!s at-hand for him
.2 t. do his job.
3 (Pause . )
'4; Well, your answer may have two parts. Let's take
- 5. the first parts, the knowledge'of press releases..
6 Do the public notification. coordinators'-- do the 7 actual. empirical individuals who fill this position in ORO, -
8 the three shifts, do they have public information 9 experience?
20- .Do they have the prerequisites as you describe-11 them here?
12 A (Ellis) I believe at the time that we selected
- 13. the' individuals'not all of them ha'd public information L 14 experience.
f
- 15. Q Do you have some individuals in mind of thos9 who l' 6 did not'have that experience?
17 A (Ellis) Mr. Howard is one of them.
18 Q And the other pub 3.ic notification coordinators did 19 have such public informatiott experience?
20 A (Ellis) I'm trying to remember their' names.
21 I don't recall.
22- Q Do you believe that Mr. Howard now has public 23' information experience?
24' A (Ellis) I think he has the experience that he 25 gained from the drills and the training that he was given.
r Reporting Corporation Heritage (202) G28-4888 a.'--. . - _ - - . . - _ . . - - _ . - . _ - - - - - . _ _ _ - - - - -- ._. .-_------.-.n. . _ . - - . _ . . . _ . - . - . . _ - - - . - - _ - - _ - - - _ --__--.___-._-_.i
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27468 1 Q Yes, there is no question he has the experience 2 which is a kind of logical truism. He's got the experience 3 of the experience that he's had.
4 Does he have public information experience now?
5 A (Ellis) Again, I think the experience that he has 6 is what he was given in training and what he achieved 7 through the drill process.
8 Q As I just said, that's a truism.
9 The question is, has that provided him, in your 10 opinion, public information experience?
11 A (Ellis) My answer is yes.
12 Q Okay.
13 Now, Mr. Callendrello, I noted that in the 14 attachments you provided tc your testimony, you provided the 15 training module, the lesson plan and the student handouts i
16 for the traffic and access control module as well as the 17 protective action decisionmaking module, but that you did 18 not provide those modules for public information.
19 Was that a purposeful decision on the part of the 20 Panel?
21 A (Callendrello) I'm sure it was. It's just that I l
22 don't recall what the purpose was right now.
23 We felt it wasn't necessary to support the 24 testimony.
25 Q Wel:., on page 30 of the testimony in the second l
l Heritage Reporting Corporation l
(202) 628-4888 ,
f l
l l .
l
\
\
l
_ = . _ _ _ - _
y j
REBUTTAL PANEL ~NO. 20 - CROSS. 27469
'I ,
C 1- full paragraph, it: states that, "New Hampshire Yankee has t
l 2 committed to providing to'the public notification 3' coordinator additional training dealing with the 4 modification and development of EBS messages."
S Has that additional training been provide?.
6' A (Callendrello) No, it has not yet been provided.
7 .Q This is an obligation that you made, or-at least'a 8 representation that New Hampshire Yankee made to FEMA, did 9 it not, some timesin the August - September 1988 time frame?
10 'A (Callendrello) Yes.
11 .When I say it hasn't been conducted, in fact,,
12 there is one session being conducted this week, and.there is 13 .also another. session at the end of July.
14 So it's been developed. It just hasn't been 15- conducted'yet.
1 16 Q It has been developed?L j'
17 A (Callendrello) Yes, because it's being conducted 18 this week.
19 Q All right.
20 And would I assume, then, that this represents
- 21. changes in the -- what's being described here represents or 22 constitutes changes in the training module for the public 23 information training program?
24 A- (Callendrello) Let me'just check.
25 (Witnesses confer.)
?
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
- _ _ _ _ = _ - _ - _ _ _ -- _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ -
l- 1 1
i REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27470 j
, 1 1- A (Grew) That particular commitment to address that 2 FEMA ARCA is being addressed through supplemental training.
3 So we developed a new lesson plan and we are 4 conducting two sessions that are supplemental. And that 5 material will not be reflected in the public information 6 Module No. 13.
7 Q Number?
8 A (Grew) Thirteen.
9 Q When was the new material created, if you know, 10 Mr. Grew?
11 A (Grew) We started drafting that material in the 12 spring of this year.
13 Q Well, let me show you a document.
14 A (Grew) I'm sorry.
15 I was answering the question when was the material 16
- developed, the supplemental material.
17 Q Yes, I understand.
18 A (Grew) Okay. I 19 Q In the spring.
20 Was it after February of this year? l 21 A (Grew) I can't be certain on that. j j
22 Q Well, there is a revision, is there not, of your l I
23 public information training module that's dated February l 24 1989, correct?
l 25 A (Grew) I would have to take your word on it. I'm f i
f i
l l
- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 Gl l j
I l
l I;
]
l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27471 l n . .
l
" l [j , il not;1ooking at that.
'\ _) 2 QL 'Well,~ let me show you;a document.
i 1
(l 3 (Document ' proffered to the witnesses. )
1
.l
~
-4 Q .There'is a revision, is there not,"to the public.
5 information training module of February 1989, correct?
.6 A (Grew) That is correct.
7 Q And this revision'that was'done as of that date :
8 does not supply additional training dealing with the 9 modification and development of EBS messages, does it?
10 -A -(Grew) I; don't know that it was reflected in 11 here, but it was intended that the EBS issue relative to the
'12, FEMA ARCA would be addressed in' supplemental training.
(L k3 0 Supplemental:in the sense'that it is something
[\
\
14 beyond what appears in the training Module No. 137 15 A (Grew) That is correct.
.16 Q All.right.
17 Are those materials available in the room today?
18 A (Grew) .They are not.
19 Q Are you familiar with what that additional 20 supplemental training for the public notification 21 coordinator consists of?
22 A (Grew) The supplemental training on the l 23 development of warning messages, I am somewhat familiar with -!
24 that, yes, though I haven't seen the final version that is 25 going to be used this week.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27472 1 Q Can you describe it in general terms what the 2 content of this supplemental material is?
3 A (Grew) The content of that material is based on a 4 program that was developed by Dr. Mileti on the development 5 of EBS messages. And that content was identified to us by 6 Dr. Mileti and also through LILCO.
7 Q Mr. Grew, prior to providing your public 8 notification coordinators, this supplemental training, you 9 will agree with me that the public notification coordinators 10 were not adequately trained, correct?
11 A (Callendrello) I think I'd agree that there were 12 ARCAs --
13 Q Before you agree, which is fine, let me just see l 14 if I can get Mr. Grew to agree. l 15 A (Grew) I do not dispute -- sir?
16 MR. LEWALD: Mr. Callendrello started to make a 17 statement, or respond to an answer, and I think you cut him 18 off.
19 MR. TRAFICONTE: No , I had put the question j I
20 directly to Mr. Grew, and I just wanted him to answer and 21 then it's fine if Mr. Callendrello wants to add his views.
22 MR. TURK: Let's note that Mr. Callendrello had 23 not explained what it was that he was agreeing to.
24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Pardon me? j i
25 MR. TURK: Mr. Callendrello had not yet explained I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l-L,;
l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27473 1 what.he was agreeing to.
.f/~'} -
2 MR. TRAFICONTE: Then I cut him off in time.
3 JUDGE SMITH: Don't worry about it. Mr. Grew is l
l 4 ' going to make him sorry he asked that question anyway.
i !
5 (Laughter) -l 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 ,
14 15 16 17 l i
18 19 20 21 22 23
)
24 l 25 O Corporation i
(' Heritage Reporting !
(202) 628-4888 l
3 l
I REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27474 1 MR. TRAFICONTE: You don't remember what the 2 question was.
3 THE WITNESS: (Grew) Would you repeat the 4 c;aestion, please?
5 MR. TRAFICONTE: Sure, of course I will.
6 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
7 Q Mr. Grew, will you agree with me that prior to the 8 provision of the supplemental training for the public 9 notification coordinators that those individuals were not 10 adequately trained?
11 A (Grew) I do not dispute that the FEMA evaluation 12 noted that there was an area that needed some corrective 13 action. And the supplemental training is addressing that
, 14 corrective action.
15 Q Well, no one is going to dispute that the FEMA 16 report says what it says.
17 But would you agree with me that the public 18 notification coordinators were not adequately trained, at 19 least to the point at which you're offering the supplemental 20 training?
21 A (Grew) I think we've established that they did 22 need some corrective action addressing that.
23 Q Do you recognize a distinction between needing 24 corrective action and being inadequately trained?
25 JUDGE SMITH: You were asked for your opinion as Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27475 j f"'s 1 to whether you believe they're ;equately trained?
( }'
\-- ' THE WITNESS: I believe that there were 2 (Grew) 3 some areas that perhaps we needed to address further.
4 In other words, there were some areas that perhaps 5 may have been in adequate.
6 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
.7 O And were those areas the areas basically of the 8 major responsibility of the public notification coordinator, 9 that's to say, properly drafting EBS messages?
10 A (Grew) That is the area noted.
11 Q That is, you'll agree with me, if not the only, .
I 12 that is the major and significant responsibility of the j 13 public notification coordinator; correct?
(% 14 A (Grew) I' m sorry, I really don't -- I'm not in ,
'~'/
15 the position to evaluate that.
16 Q I see. I'm sorry.
17 Let me just make sure I understand how that works.
18 That's a content-oriented task question. Given 19 the approach that your training group takes, I would have to 20 ask somebody who is knowledgeable about what that job is; 21 correct?
22 A (Grew) I would say that it would probably be best 23 directed to somebody else. I can't evaluate --
24 Q All right, that's fine.
1 l
25 Mr. Callendrello, you know the answer to this I'm j l
Heritage Reporting Corporation tN 'j (202) 628-4888
)
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27476 1 certain.
2 You'll agree with me that the drafting of the 4 3 appropriate EBS message is the major, if not, the sole 4 responsibility of the public notification coordinator; 5 correct?
6 A (Callendrello) It's part of that' individual's 7 responsibilities. I wouldn't say it's the major role, 8 although it does occupy a good portion of his time.
9 He has overall responsibility for ensuring the 10 prompt alert and notification of the public of the 11 emergency; that involves two aspects.
12 One is the activation of the siren system. The 13 other is the drafting, review, and obtaining the approval of i 14 Massachusetts officials on the EBS messages to ensure that 15 that information is provided. There are other parts of his 16 job: he coordinates with the State of New Hampshire; and he 17 also coordinates with the public information individuals.
18 So it does occupy much of his time, but his major 19 responsibility is the overall objective of providing alert 20 notification to the public. I 21 Q Well, yes, and that has at least two parts -- two i
22 major parts, does it not? One, the activation of the j 23 notification system; and two, the drafting of appropriate 24 EBS messages? l 25 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
i I ___ . . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.y ..
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27477 1 -Q So-you'll agree.that the drafting of appropriate
- []
2 EBS messages is "a major" part of his responsibility?.
3 'A- (Callendrello) It's one of the_ jobs he performs.
4, and it is an important -- one of his important functions; 5 yes.
6 Q LAll right.
7 And, Mr. Grew, youLagree then, do you not, that as 8- to that important. function the_ training provided at least to 9 the date.of these supplemental materials was not adequate; 10 correct?
11 A (Grew) It was not adequate in that area.
12 A (Callendrello) Mr. Traficonte, as I started to 13 say, FEW4 identified areas . requiring corrective action. -
By
[' 14 their very definition those are not areas that indicate an
(~
. 4 15 impact to public health and safety.
16 So'therefore, the fact that there was no 37 deficiency in that area indicates to me that the training
- 18. was adequate.
19 Q Well, then you better talk to your compatriot.
1 l 20 A (Callendrello) -- and it needs --
21 Q -- because he has testified that it was not 22 adequate?
23 A (Callendrello) I think what he's saying is, l
24 looking at the narrow aspect that you provided in the
- 25 question and that is, the modification of prescripted I
~
i Heritage Reporting Corporation 4 (202) 628-4888 i
\. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _
7---_.
f 1
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27478 l
1 messages. And in that area I agree that there was an issue p 2 raised by FEMA. In fact, I was the controller and I raised 3 the same issue that the individual -- and I recommended for 4 all individuals -- be further trained on the development and
( 5 modification of messages incorporating the good practices 6 that Dr. Mileti has established.
7 Those were issues. FEMA identified them as 8 issues. We identified them as i.ssues. That aspect of the 9 training needed to be improved. Overall the training for 10 that individual was adequate. There is certainly refinement 11 that's needed in that aspect of the training.
12 Q All right.
13 Let's go back to Mr. Grew.
3 14 The question on the table is: we've identified a 15 significant important function to be performed -- task to be 16 performed by the public notification coordinator. He is 17 tasked to draft the appropriate EBS message.
18 In your view, Mr. Grew, was he adequately trained, 19 prior to the supplemental materials, was he adequately 20 trained to perform that task?
21 MR. LEWALD: I'm going to object to the question.
22 It implies that drafting an EBS message is the 23 only thing that the PMC is to do. And you have limited the 24 question to the witness on that score, I submit " unfairly".
25 It's a question to him that's very narrow and it ,
l l
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
1 j
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27479 i
r-"x' \
I has a premise that.just simply isn't supported by the Y) 2 record.
3 MR. TRAFICONTE: The design of the training 4 program, Your Honor, in accordance with INFO is to divide 5 jobs into tasks, a graded training program that can create 6 the skills and experience that would provide the capacity to 7 perform each of those tasks. That's the nature of the 8 design.
9 JUDGE SMITH: Well, was the deficiency a need for 10 training a consequence of inadequate task analysis or 11 inadequate training to the task analysis?
12 Has that question been answered?
13 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) The need for the 14 training was not the result of a task analysis. The need 15 for the additional training was identified as a result of 16 performance in the exercise and the fact that an issue was 17 raised both by the FEMA evaluators and by myself.
18 JUDGE SMITH: The exercise did not reveal a fault 19 in the task analysis?
20 MR. TRAFICONTE: Your Honor, there has been no 21 task analysis. The testimony of this panel --
22 JUDGE SMITH: Oh, that's right.
23 MR. TRAFICONTE: -- the testimony yesterday was 24 that they assumed --
25 JUDGE SMITH: Job analysis.
/~% .
! Heritage Reporting Corporation
\ (202) 628-4888 f
REBUTTAL PANEL No. 20 - CROSS 27480 1 MR. TRAFICONTE: Job analysis.
2 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) Job analysis.
3 JUDGE SMITH: All right.
4 Was that the problem?
5 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) I'm not aware that 6 being a result of a job analysis.
7 As I said, I'm aware of it being the fact that 8 there was an issue raised.
9 JUDGE SMITH: I was wondering if Mr. Grew is 10 speaking -- his reservation may be that he believes that the Il job analysis as it was defined for the training, he was 12 trained to it, but the job analysis didn't do the job. I 13 was just wondering if that could be the. source of confusion?
14 THE WITNESS: (Grew) No , Your Honor.
15 I would say that the task of the drafting and 16 reviewing of EBS messages and the subsequent release of 17 those messages had been identified in the job analysis.
18 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
19 Q Had been identified in a training program in 20 accordance with the INPO guidelines; had been designed to 21 provide the requisite experience and skill for this 22 individual to successfully complete that task; correct?
23 A (Grew) At that time, yes.
24 Q And it turned out -- I take it as your testimony, 1 25 that the training that was provided with regard to that task j Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 !
l l
_ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ - - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . -_ a
i REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27481 f'~i 1 was not and is not-adequate; correct? I j
l.\- ') 2 A (Grew) It was identified through performance --
3 Q In your opinion, I'm sorry?
4 In your opinion, it is not adequate?
'S A (Grew) It was identified through performance that 6 the performance could be improved and that's why we do 7 evaluation and feedback on performance.
8 Q Well, I think I put the question to you a few-9 minutes age and I'll put it again.
10 In your opinion, Mr. Grew, was the training 11 program with regard to this task -- appropriate EBS mess. age 12 drafting -- was the training program adequate?
13 In your opinion? !
r
( 14 A (Grew) .In my opinion, if you equate adequacy with
\
15 or inadequacy with an identified weakness, yes, we have that 16 identified weakness. We do not dispute that.
17 Q So I take it then that your testimony is simply 18 that you will agree that FEMA identified it as a weakness, 19 but beyond that you have no opinion independent of it as to 20 whether the training was or was not adequate? i 21 A (Grew) We agree with FEMA's evaluation on this.
22 Q You do?
23 A (Grew) Yes. -
l 24 A (Callendrello) As I indicated, Mr. Traficonte, I 25 provided a similar comment through our own evaluation f
/N Reporting Corporation
(' ) Heritage )
(202) 628-4888 I
_ - _ _ _ . - _ _ . \
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27482 1 process.
2 Q All right.
3 Mr. Callendrello, let me put the question to you:
4 before this supplemental training was being provided or 5 before it was designed, was the training provided for the 6 public notification coordinator with regard to this task of 7 drafting appropriate EBS messages, was that training 8 adequate?
9 A (Callendrello) In my opinion, yes.
10 Q Notwithstanding the fact that FEMA and yourself, 11 as a controller, noted that performance during the exercise 12 was not completely up to snuff?
13 A (Callendrello) It was adequate. Adequate meaning 14 that the overall objective of providing notification and the 15 other functions that that individual performs, alerting of 16 the public, was performed. It was performed in a manner 17 such that the public health and safety was protected.
18 There were issues identified, as I indicated.
19 There were weaknesses that the individual demonstrated and 20 felt could be alleviated by improving the training that the 21 individuals receive in that area where the weaknesses were 22 observed, namely, the modification of the prescripted EBS 23 messages.
24 I made the recommendation. FEMA made a similar 25 evaluation. We've taken that to heart and have added
[ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l l
1 REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27483 ;
L ,r'"x .
1 supplemental-training for that position. j
+
\
\- 2 MR. TRAFICONTE: At this point, Your Honor, in the 1 1
3 spirit of the week, I would like to offer into evidence 4 portions of the deposition of Gregory Howard that was taken l l
5 in November of 1988 by me. And Gregory Howard is one of 1
']
6 three public notification coordinators. 1 7 MR. LEWALD: I don't know for what purpose it's 8 being offered.
- 9. MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, the purpose is 10 essentially --
11 MR. LEWALD: Do you want your question --
12 MR. TRAFICONTE: -- impeachment. I'm not going to 13 describe this as any portion of our direct case. But I
/N 14 would offer this as a form of impeachment of the panel's --
~s 15 and now I would have to identify Mr. Callendrello's
- 16. testimony, that the public notification coordinator is 17 adequately trained and was adequately trained.
18 We have, obviously, the point that additional 19 training is being done, but we have no details as to that.
20 JUDGE SMITH: The difficulty you have, Mr.
21 Traficonte, is that you're using the term " adequate" as an 22 open-ended concept without reference to the criteria that it 23 should be measured against. And they just have refused to 24 accept that.
25 Mr. Callendrello has used one, it did the job but l
-( N (N ) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27484 l 1 it can be improved, by rejecting your suggestion that it 2 wasn't adequate. I think that's reasonable.
3 You haven't come up with another standard that 4 should be applied.
c 5 MR. TRAFICONTE: The standard to be applied, it ;
i L 6 seems to me, is internal. The job of public notification 7 coordinator as described in the plan requires that he or she 8 be able to do certain things.
9 And the training is adequate if he or she can do 10 those things.
11 JUDGE SMITH: That's fine. I 12 But I think there has to be the understanding 13 among you and the witnesses and the parties, if adequacy in 14 your view means that no improvement is possible, that's one 15 thing.
16 If it means that they cannot do the job, well, so 17 far your witness disagrees with you.
18 MR. TRAFICONTE: I appreciate that.
i 19 I should just explain: I'm not going to take the 20 time with this panel to try to get their assent --
21 JUDGE SMITH: All right.
22 MR. TRAFICONTE: -- tha' EBS messages were not 23 adequ at e . We have another -- we have a witness who is i
24 coming on who will testify that the EBS messages as drafted )
25 during the exercise were not adequate. f 1
l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9I
i REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27485 l g'~x, 1 JUDGE SMITH': Who is this Howard?
! }.
\~/ 2 What does he have to say?
i 3 MR. TRAFICONTE: He is one of the three public l 4 noti fication coordinators. And I believe, although I guess j
]
1 5 they had two shifts during the exercise, he was one of the J 6 two shifts. He was a player.
7 JUDGE SMITH: What's he going to say?
8 What did he say?
9 MR. TRAFICONTE: What did he say at his 10 deposition?
11 JUDGE SMITH: Yes.
12 MR. TRAFICONTE: I asked him about the training 13 that he had. I asked him about the experience he had prior
[h N'~,Y 14 to the ORO training. I asked him what his understanding of 15 his job was. I pursued with him at length his understanding 16 of the messages, the prescripted messages and what they 17 meant. I asked him at great length whether he understood 18 the differences between the prescripted messages such that 19 he could adequately choose the right one at the time of the 20 emergency.
21 The deposition was designed -- as the lawyer who 22 took the deposition -- it was designed to reveal or disclose 23 the fact that this person does not know what he's doing.
24 And I would offer it for the proposition that the ,
25 public --
'rh Heritage Reporting Corporation (x- ') (202) 628-4888
l l
l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27486 j 1 JUDGE SMITH: All right. l 1
2 MR. TRAFICONTE: And the point being, we're here l
3 only on the issue of training and rather than -- I certainly 4 don't want to have to read --
5 JUDGE SMITH: If we read that deposition, if it's 6 in evidence, we would infer from the deposition that he's 7 incompetent? He has not been trained to the job?
8 MR. TRAFICONTE: He has not been adequately 9 trained to the job that he's occupying of public 10 notification coordinator; that's right.
11 And in the form of impeachment because I pursued 12 the line here as to whether the panel takes the view that 13 the training that's offered to the public notification s 14 coordinator will produce a trained individual. You know, 15 this deposition stands for the proposition I believe that it j 16 does not.
17 JUDGE SMITH: So the idea expressed by the panel 18 is that while improvement was in order he had been trained 19 sufficiently for the job.
20 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes.
21 JUDGE SMITH: And you're going to attack that 22 directly.
23 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes.
24 Through the deposition transcript, yes.
25 Why don't I just give copies. It's not the whole Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
e.
, l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS- 27487
-Q 1 deposition.
12: 'MR. LEWALD: 'I don'tLknow who he's-impeaching.
R 3- JUDGE SMITH: Mr. Callendrello.
L 4 MR. LEWALD: Mr; Callendrello?
5 :This is a deposition that Mr. Traficonte took of a
- 6. person who is employed as public notification coordinator at 7 the time.
8- The deposition just went to his background and his 9 education and awareness of EBS messages and the subject. Il 10 don't know how that impeaches anything.
11' JUD#5 SMITH: Standing alone, I guess it does.
12 MR. LEWALD: This is not an attack on the 13 exercise. .This is an attack apparently on this panel's
~
/ 14 testimony.
(
15 (Document proffered to all parties.)
16 MR. TRAFICONTE: Just for the record, the document 17 I have just distributed is selections from the deposition of 18 Gregory Howard which was taken on November 16, 1988 and it 19- contains the following pages: 1 through 3; 73 through 129; 20 154 through 157; and 174 through 178.
21 JUDGE SMITH: I guess in the formal sense of the 22 term, this does not actually impeach Mr. Callendrello. What 23 it does is, if it is what you state, it rebuts what he has
~24 to say.
25 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, yes, yes, yes.
k Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27488 I i 1- There was the possibility that these witnesses i l
2 could have come in and testified that they would have 3 acknowledged that the contention has merit. That the public 4 notification coordinator was not adequately trained. Did 5 not know, at least as to this task of appropriate EBS 6 message drafting, and that they made changes and they 7 anticipate that the changes will adequately train.
8 If they had said that I don't think this could 9 come in, in any form. We hadn't offered it as part of our 10 direct case. But they haven't said that. They've said, 11 FEMA identified a difficulty -- or at least Mr. Callendrello 12 has said -- FEMA identified a difficult'y. We could make it 13 better, but even without making it better it still did the 14 job and public safety was not put at risk; and there's no 15 indication that it was an inadequate training program.
16 So if that's, at least the testimony of one of the 17 panel members, then I think call it impeachment or call it 18 rebuttal, but I think it was appropriate to hold off and not 19 offering this in our direct case.
20 MR. DIGNAN: Well, you' re supposed to file 21 rebuttal, if it's rebuttal, as part of your direct case.
22 MR. LEWALD: There's a matter that disturbs me, 23 Your Honor, in this and that is, Mr. Howard is no longer the 24 public notification coordinator for the ORO. He no longer 25 holds that position.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
l i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ i
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27489 1 (Laughter)
(
(/
) 2 MR. TPAFICONTE: It would seem to me that would 3 run to letting this in, I would guess.
4 (Laughter) 5 6
7 8 ,
9 -
10 11
'12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21-22 23 24 25
- Heritage Reporting Corporation A. (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27490 1 MR. LEWALD: That should be brought to the 2 attention of the Board and the parties.
3 JUDGE SMITH: Well, I don't know.
4 Are you testifying?
5 I mean, we've got a --
6 MR. LENALD: Well, I can ask that question of the 7 witness, but I think it -- .
8 JUDGE SMITH: Do you think that --
9 MR. LEWALD: To the extent that it's trying to 10 impeach Mr. Howard, he's gone.
11 JUDGE SMITH: Do you think that Mr. Howard was 12 adequately trained as you would use the term?
13 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) As I would use the 14 term, and that is, that he performed such that the public 15 health and safety was protected.
16 Yes, I think he was adequately trained.
17 JUDGE SMITH: Do you think he needed improvement 18 in his training?
19 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) Absolutely.
20 JUDGE SMITH: Yes.
21 Well, I think we have gone into a web here that's 22 going to be pretty hard to untangle if you use the form of 23 give and take of rules of evidence here.
24 I think that Mr. Traficonte is entitled to make l 25 his point. I don't know if it's made any more by having l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
m__
.e REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27491 e
l . -
Callendrello:had to li fg 1 .this in evidence as compared to what Mr.
~
-l-say.
.3: Did you.want to be heard, Mr. Turk?
i's l 4- MR. TURKi Yes.
5 Three points, Your Honor.
6' . Number one, Mr. Traficonte has not demonstrated 7 that the witness is unavailable to come in here to testify.
8 So it.seems to me he hasn't established a basis for getting.
.9 the deposition into evidence yet.
10 JUDGE SMITH: Well, now I agree with you, but I
.11 'think Mr. Traficonte might have reasonably anticipated a 12 stern look.from the Board if he.had suggested yet another 13 witness this week.
14 (Laughter)
N- But it's really the same thing, Your 15 MR. TURK: j 16 Honor.
17 I mean he's putting into evidence something which-18 presumably he would put~inLthrough a live witness. The only 19 question is could he have had the witness come down here and 20 testify for an hour instead of putting the deposition 21 forward, and could he have notified the parties previously.
22 JUDGE SMITH: There is no question this --
23 MR. TURK: He had the copies already.
24 JUDGE SMITH: If we were adhering strictly to the 25 rules pertaining to depositions, if he is available, he Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
l l
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27492 J 1 could not offer this directly into evidence. ;
l 2 But I would hope we could short-circuit and i
3 resolve it on more substantive grounds.
4 MR. TURK: All right. l i
5 Secondly, Your Honor, I don't know that anything 6 is going to be established more than that this particular 1
7 individual was not trained properly. And if that's all it 8 is, I don't see that it gets at an issue, or that it 9 establishes anything of substance for your determination.
10 JUDGE SMITH: He wants to establish one step 11 farther, and that is, his training was not even sufficient 12 to do the job, perform the task. That's the tension right 13 now.
, 14 I don' c know how this is going to do it. I don't 15 think that the Board is going to want to sit down and read 16 all this and conclude that that is the case. I don't know i
17 how you are going to go from this deposition to the finding 18 that Mr. Howard was not trained adequately for the task, for 19 the job. I don't know how you are going to do that.
20 The best you've got right now is Mr.
21 Callendrello's concession or statement that he needed more 22 training.
23 MR. TURK: Let me note also, Your Honor, that FEMA 24 has identified this, if I' m' not n.istuten, as an ARCA.
25 JUDGE SMITH: Right..
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
- 1 i
1 j
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 -CROSS- 27493 j SA s l' MR. TURK: Rather than a deficiency.
f
\s. 2 ~ JUDGE SMITH: That's correct. i 3'. ' MR . TURK: And Mr. Callendrello's testimony is j 4 consistent: with that. There was a need for corrective 5- action, which apparently they have taken, but there is no 6 finding by FEMA that:there was-an. inadequacy of such a 7 degree-that' rises to the level of finding a deficiency-in 8- the planning. .
-But let-me add to that, also.
10 If we look at ALAB-918, the recent' Appeal Board 11- ; decision,-the last'several pages 01 that decision indicate 12 -- that it wi31 be a rare case, if ever, that training can
- 13. establish a' fundamental flaw, or defects in training can 14 establish a fundamental flaw in an emergency plan such that 15 in exercise contention related to training.can even be 16 ~ admitted.
17 MR. TRAFICONTE: This is not an exercise 18' contention, Mr. Turk.
19 MR. TURK: No.
20 But you're talking about the training of this 21 individual as demonstrated through the exercise.
22 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes, and I said this is not an 23 exercise contention. It's plan contention.
24 MR. TURK: But the adequacy of this individual's 25 level of training, as demonstrated through the exercise, I i
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l
- l. j L
1
- REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27494 t
1 think is an exercise issue.
~
2 MR. TRAFICONTE: No , the contention --
3 MR. TURK: Was this person, was this person as he 4 performed during the exercise sufficiently. buttressed by 5 good training.
6 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, just so we are clear, and I i
7 would hate to have 918 work back, ALAB-918 work back on to 8 plan contentions, it has --
9 JUDGE SMITH: You didn't mind it working back on 10 jurisdiction.
11 MR. TRAFICONTE: Not at all. Not at all.
12 There are places where it should be worked back 13 and places where it should not be. The key is knowing when 14 it should be used.
15 Bun ALAB-918 talks about training in an exereire 16 context as not alleging a fundamental flaw in the plan, 17 because it wouldn't require, in the Appeal Board's opinion, ;
18 a significant revision of the plan. f; 19 But JI-13, which is the contention at issue here, 20 is a plan contention to start with. We're challenging the 21 training progrcm developed and implemented pursuant to the j i
22 SPMC. l l
23 And I will grant Mr. Turk that the exercise can be I l
24 evidence one way or the other as to the adequacy of the '
25 training, but it doesn't turn it into an exercise
- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4808
-g -
l 1
-J REBUTTAL' PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27495~ _j is
^
'1- contention.
h /
MN)
IA '- '2 JUDGE SMITH: Let's go back to the substantive u 1
'3- aspects.of what;you are undertaking to do..
l 4 How are:you going to bridge the gap between this 5 deposition and a' finding-that Mr. Howard was not trained 6 adequately to perform the job or the: tasks of the job?
7 How;are you going' to do that '
8 1G1. TRAFICONTE: I would even go beyond that.
9- OUDGE SMITH: Because an' expert witness on it has 10- already -- that's the evidence that we have.
- 11. How are-you going to do that?
12 MR. TRAFICONTE: I would go beyond that~and 13' indicate that Mr. Howard himself was not adequately' trained,
/~ 14- and that.would become apparent from' answers to specific
('
15 questions.
16 JUDGE. SMITH: He admitted he was not adequately 17 trained?
18 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, I wouldn't represent that' 19 he admitted that he was not adequately trained. But I think 20 the inference to'be drawn from a series of answers to 21 questions about his knowledge, his experience, his 22 ' understanding of the messages, the inference to draw from 23 his answers is that he is not adequately trained.
24' But I would go further to develop --
25 JUDGE SMITH: And that's what we have to do. This Heritepe Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27496 1 is going to be an inference drawn directly from the evidence 2 which we will have to read and draw our conclusions with 3 your help.
4 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, with the findings.
5 JUDGE SMITH: Yes.
6 MR. TRAFICONTE: If this were in evidence, I could 7 use for findings.
8 But I will go farther. I mean I have now learned 9 this morning for the first time that Mr. Howard has been 10 deselected, I take it, as a public notification coordinator.
11 He is no longer a public notification coordinator.
12 I don't believe that touches on the relevance of 13 the thing at all, because I would push beyond the fact that 14 Mr. Howard is not adequately trained, to the point of the 15 contention which is the training program for the public 16 notification coordinator is not adequate to train an 17 otherwise inexperienced person and turn them into an 18 adequate public notification coordinator, a person who can 19 do that job.
20 JUDGE SMITH: So we are going to have to make a 21 very fine distinction here. We will read this, and we will 22 be required to determine whether this demonstrates that the 23 program, the training program for this job is so 24 fundamentally inadequate, as we can see by this product, 25 that it can't do the job as compared to the improvements.
- i. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
b i Y
t L ' REBUTTAL PANEL NO.'20 - CROSS 27497
'~' >
'l .We are going to.have: cut with a very fine scalpel
.2 here.
.3 MR. TRAFICONTE: As to-the training, that's the
- 4 relevance of this deposition.
5 :But as to the adequacy of'the.EBS messages, for.
6 example, that were generated during the exercise,.we have an 7- independent witness.
B ' JUDGE SMITH: Yes, that's not involved.
9 MR.:TRAFICONTE: Oh, it's. involved in the sense 1 10 that that was the failure in the training, that he was not 11 at all alert or' knowledgeable about.EBS messages.
12 JUDGE SMITH: All right, his product.-
13 MR. TRAFICONTE: He didn't'really_know or
[ 14 comprehend what it was that he was doing and what the 15 differences between the messages are, significant 16 differences.
17 And that comes through, I believe, in the-18 deposition, and. runs back to the fact that his training was I 19 not adequate in that regard. And, in fact, obviously they l
20 are going to supplement the training.
21 Now there is nothing in the record about.that ,
22 supplemental training. I don't know what it is. The Board 23 doesn't know what it is. The Panel doesn't know what it is.
24 But absent some supplemental piece of testimony from the 25 Applicants as to what they are going to do to further train i
\ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27498 1 these people in these particulars, I think the record is --
2 this is a portion of the basis, evidentiary basis that I i 3 would need for appropriate findings.
4 JUDGE SMITH: One additional difficulty is we --
5 MR. DIGNAN: -- for impeachment at this point, and 6 what I want to know is why wasn't it prefiled as rebuttal 7 testimony. That's not impeachment what was just outlined.
)
8 MR. TRAFICONTE: I already --
9 MR. DIGNAN: Indeed, what you got out.of these 10 witnesses probably isn't capable of impeachment. They gave 11 an opinion that these people -- that this program was 12 adequate. This is not another expert. This is a guy. And 13 why wasn't .it offered as rebuttal?
14 I mean everything you have said may be so. Why i 15 wasn't it preoffered as rebuttal?
16 JUDGE SMITH: So far you've examined Mr.
17 Callendrello and the Panel on the FEMA findings of ARCA and 18 their view as do they independently believe that improvement 19 was in order and as to adequacy.
20 You have never undertaken to cross-examine any of 21 the Panel on Mr. Howard's deposition.
22 MR. TRAFICONTE: No, I didn't, Your Honor.
23 JUDGE SMITH: Have them defend their product as 24 they represent.
25 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes, that is true.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27499
'~% 1- JUDGE SMITH: I think that that is a way that you
(
~N/ '
)
2 could have done it.
3 MR. TRAFICONTE: It is. It is.
4 JUDGE SMITH: But I think you are also correct 5 that that could occupy much of the --
6 MR. TRAFICONTE: I was just going to add, I could 7 take that, I could take the Panel through each of the areas 8 that I questioned Mr. Howard about. And I could say, is it 9 your view that the training program provided, up to this 10 point at least, adequately explains to the trainees the 11 difference between the emergency prescripted messages. ,I 12 could ask that question, and I could get an answer.
13 JUDGE SMITH: Right.
j/') 14 MR. TRAFICONTE: I'm assuming the answer in one
%) 15 form or another, yes, it does. It is adequate.
16 JUDGE SMITH: Right.
17 MR. TRAFICONTE: Then I could say this impeaches.
18 I mean, I think I could go the whole line and it would take 19 the morning, And I can't imagine that's in anybody's 20 interest.
21 JUDGE SMITH: This deposition is relevant, and it 22 is marginal as to whether it was appropriate for him to hold 23 it up pending cross-examination of the Panel, or to have 24 anticipated from the direct testimony that rebuttal evidence 25 should be required. It's marginal.
Corporation (O)
Heritage Reporting (202) 628-4888
r REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27500 1 We will give the nod that it appropriately was 2 held until cross-examination.
3 Now what we need is an efficient, effective way to 4 cut out going through the very slow process of getting Mr.
5 Callendrello to deny in every instance that this is evidence ,
1 6 of a deficient product.
7 MR. TURK: Your Honor.
8 JUDGE SMITH: But go ahead, consult.
9 MR. TURK: May I indicate something?
10 I personally don't know at this point which pages 11 from the deposition -- i 12 JUDGE SMITH: I know.
13 MR. TURK: -- are here, which questions and !
, 14 answers Mr. Traficonte thinks are most relevant for his 15 proposed findings.
16 We haven't had those deposition answers made the 17 subject of examination of this panel, so we don't know, for 18 instance, if there is some new matter here on which the 19 Panel has not yet testified which will then be unconfronted 20 by these witnesses and will come in essentially not in 21 impeachment, but as a pure rebuttal piece that has no 22 opportunity for surrebuttal'.
23 Now, I don't know if Mr. Traficonte intended to 24 ask these witnesses about the deposition questions and 25 answers. But I think that's the proper thing for him to do.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 ;
1 l
1
p REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27501:
]
s,-,):
l- Not.that-I'm encouraging him to, and not that-I.think it's
' proper. r t
3- :I?mean yesterday he indicated, as I. read,the-4 reccad, he had one more hour-of examination for this Panel.
5 It's'now been:over an hour. It's an' hour and a half 6 already.
7 So I would encourage him to finish. And to l 8 whatever extent he thinks there is relevant questions and
\>
19 ' answers:in'this deposition, ask the Panel quickly about them.
10 <and then be done.with it.
i 11 But this looks to be about 200 pages'of proposed
'12 evidence which has not really been examined by these 13 witnesses.
24 JUDGE SMITH: Well, see, that-goes back to my
- 15
- basic concern, too. This is a large amount, and we're only 16 assuming from your representation that it does what you 17 offer it.for.
- 18. MR. DIGNAN: Your Honor, also, if the final ruling 19 is to admit it, presuming that, I.would hope that it would -]
l 20- be held open to us to review the portions of the deposition *
)
l 21- -.that have been extracted, and offer any of them that we feel j 1
22 will fill out the picture, especially if what is being l
)
23 offered here is on the theory that, well, the guy was 24 totally incompetent.
.25 There's been a selection of pages here. For all I ,
1 l
r k Heritage Reporting ' Corporation (202) 628-4888
l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27502 1 know there are other pages, and I don't know, but for all I 2 know there are other pages in here that make him look like a 3 genius. I don't know. I doubt it, frankly, the way 4 Traficonte is over there shaking his head.
5 (Laughter) 6 MR. DIGNAN: And I wasn't at the deposition.
7 But I would like the right to look it over 8 afterwards if the ruling is to admit it. l 9 I still think it's rebuttal and it should have 10 been prefiled. There hasn't been one argument you've heard 11 here of really impeachment.
12 MR. LEWALD: Your Honor, these depositions were 13 taken,for discovery, and as such, they are the discovery of 14 the Attorney General, and they were not contested. That is, 15 there was no recross, if you will, of the witness and 16 matters covered.
17 So, in essence, we've got one end of discovery 18 going in that's never been effectively crossed.
19 JUDGE SMITH: We're enlarging this debate now 20 quite a bit.
21 You are maintaining that this interrogatory does 22 not qualify as traditional interrogatory - you are saying i 23 that the man is available, call him, in effect, is what you 24 are saying.
25 MR. LEWALD: We think that we --
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
1 l
i REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27503
('~'y 1 JUDGE SMITH: But you were noticed, you were N
[
2 noticed for the deposition.
3 MR. LEWALD: We were noticed for the deposition, 1 4 but we weren't noticed that it was an intention to file this 5 testimony.
6 JUDGE SMITH: No, and never are you unless it is a 7 deposition to preserve testimony when you know that the 8 person is not going to make it.
l 9 MR. LEWALD: Certainly. l 10 JUDGE SMITH: But this is just ordinary discovery f 11 deposition.
12 I don't doubt, Mr. Turk, as you reach for your 13 book there, that you are going to find an evidentiary basis
[ }
\ /
14 for your position. But I don't think that you are going to I 15 find anybody who authored that book and find himself in the 16 situation where this Board is today either, alluding to the 17 Federal Rules of Evidence.
18 MR. TURK: It would be an unfair advantage for Mr. I 19 Traficonte, Your Honor, just on the argument that it's a 20 short week and we have a lot to do, to be permitted to 21 introduce rebuttal testimony through this means.
22 JUDGE SMITH: Okay.
23 I think in the last analysis, if the adversaries 24 and Mr. Traficonte wish to stand on the technical bases that 25 the opponent is available and there are other means, you
/N kj'"
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27504 i
I have a right to stand for that.
2 MR. DIGNAN: No.
3 That's.not what I'm standing on, Your Honor.
4 JUDGE SMITH: Well, your --
5 MR. DIGNAN: My only objection is that it should 6 have been prefiled as rebuttal testimony.
7 If the Board overrules that, and I would like, if 8 the Board's penchant is to admit this, I would like a formal 9 ruling that that objection is overruled.
10 And then I would also reserve the right to add 11 more parts for any reason after reviewing it.
12 But I am not standing on the " witness isn't 13 available" objection. Or excuse me, the " witness is i 14 available" objection.
15 JUDGE SMITH: With respect to your motion, we l 16 already did address it with a pretty oroad brush. It may 17 very well be that if I were doing it and that if you were 18 doing it and most people were doing it, they would have 19 filed it as rebuttal testimony.
20 But there comes a point where a distinction has to 21 be made giving benefit to the discretion of the litigant as 22 to whether he reserves it for cross-examination or had all 23 along intended to use it as a part of his case and should 24 have been filed as rebuttal.
25 In this instance, although you might disagree, and .
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 !
{
l
g
' REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20'- CROSS 27505
. l'. IJmyself, as I sit.here,' disagree, too, it is not
' unreasonable for.him to have taken that position. It~is-2 3 'within the discretion.
4 I don't see this as being an. intentional 5- . withholding of primary' evidence used on rebuttal ~'as compared 6 to a piece in. cross-examination which'our-rulings have 7 permitted withholding until there is examination.
1 8 MR. DIGNAN: Well, then the offer should be for
^
9 impeachment purposes.
10 JUDGE SMITH: Well, see, the more I visit that --
11 MR. DIGNAN: And confined to that.
'12 JUDGE SMITH: The more I visit that, it's not just 13 .the1 testimony of Mr. Howard, but this is, in effect, the
/i 14 deposition of Mr. Howard is the product of their training N~,l \
15 program. And they say it's good, and here's.the product.
16- You can test it. This is an empirical test of their 17 testimony. This is what they turned out, apparently.
18 It comes close to impeachment. I don't believe 19 literally it is, but it comea close to impeachment.
20 MR. TRAFICONTE: I would agree that if there is an 21- issue that the purpose of the offer is to put into evidence 22 the deposition of an individual who was, at least, the 23 public. notification coordinator, who went through the 24 training program, and who evidences in these deposition 25 pages the knowledge that he does.
( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
= _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ __.
i
)
RSBUTTAL FANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27506 j
1 And obviously I'm offering it because I believe 2 that the inference to be drawn from the knowledge that he's )
I 3 acquired is that he wasn't adequately trained. j i
4 I will stipulat' that I would characteri=e that as 5 impeachment. I do believe it's impeachment of the 6 proposition tha't he was adequately trained.
7 MR. DIGNAN: Well, then, are you confining this 8 for impeachment purposes only?
9 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes. I will limit it, understood l 10 as I just indicated, it could be used for impeachment only.
11 MR. DIGNAN: Okay, objection -- no objection on 12 that basis.
13 JUDGE SMITH: What's your position, Mr. Turk?
q 14 MR. TURK: On the basis that it's impeachment 15 only, I have no objection.
16 JUDGE SMITH: I thought that's where we were at 17 the beginning. That's final. We'll take that.
18 (Laughter) 19 MR. DIGNAN: I'm with you. I'm darned if I know 20 how we got there.
21 (Laughter) 22 23 24 25 i Heritage Reporting (202) 628-4888 Corporation 9l l l
I p ,
. REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 -1 CROSS 27507 V,..
1 ~ JUDGE SMITH: All right.
c- .2 Attorney General Exhibit 126.
3L (The document referred,to 4- .was marked for identification 5 as MassL AG Exhibit 126. )
6 MR. LEWALD: I understand these are excerpts.and' L
7 not the entire deposition.
8 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes.'
9 I'had read a few minutes ago,.Mr'. Lewald,.the 10: .pages of the deposition which I have.now provided to you, in-11 fact.
12 JUDGE COLE: And there are some attachments, also.
- 13 MR. TRAFICONTE: Oh' sorry; there are.
'~' 14 In fact, it.will be alGast unintelligible without
.15 . Exhibit 11which is referred to throughout; and that.was an-
-16 oversight on my part.
17 MR. DIGNAN: We will.have'an opportunity to put 18' further.pages in.
19 Your Honor, are you going to take it as an 20 exhibit?
1 21 JUDGE SMITH: We've identified it'as Attorney 22 General Exhibit 126, and it's received.
23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27508 1 (The document referred to, 2 previously marked for 3 identification as 4 Mass AG Exhibit 126, 5 was received in evidence.)
6 MR. TRAFICONTE: I'm sorry, I was correct; the 7 attachments are here. There's only one exhibit to the 8 deposition.
9 JUDGE SMITH: Attorney General Exhibit 126 10 consists of the deposition of Gregory Howard together with 11 documents marked Exhibit No. 1.
12 Exhibit No. 1 all carrying the legend 13 IP-2.13.
f 14 Mr. Traficonte, on that resounding victory, do you 15 terminate your cross-examination or do you have other 16 points? I 17 MR. TRAFICONTE: I have only one other point. The 18 last point on my outline which has to do with the training 19 for protective action decision-making.
20 Mr. Turk has reminded me of my promise to be only 21 an hour, so I'm going to cut this back.
22 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
23 Q Mr. Callendrello, I've reviewed your Attachment K 24 which is the module for protective action decisions.
25 Is there any training or any portion of the Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888 i
i
____-__-________N
I i
REBUTTAL PANEL NO.'20 - CROSS 27509- i U/j 1 training program'with' protective action decision-making.
1 Lk ') q '
- '- 2 responsibility that~ describes release duration and the n
S 3 ' impact of release duration on appropriate protective action 4 decisions?-
l g
5 A '(Callendrello) Yes, there is. ]
r]
6 If you look at Attachm' ant K, page 17..of 47, it 7 refers'the' instructor to cover the topics of time )
(
8 considerations regarding evacuation L And one of the l 1.
9' . questions that the instructor presents to the class is:
10~ "Will the plume pass before evacuation can be. completed?"
11 And the thought there is, as stated: " Compare the 12 release duration with the evacuation time."
.13 Q Yes, that's what'I found, too. J 14 I'm glad you picked out that passage because it
\
15 will make it very easy. 4 16 What does the question mean: "Will the plume-pass 17 before the evacuation can be completed?"
18 How are we to understand that question?.
19 A (callendrello) That's one of the thoughts or 20 questions that are built into the dose savings comparison as 21 ' performed in accordance with IP-2.5 and that is, is the 22 shelter dose or evacuation dose -- excuse me, which dose is 23' lower, shelter dose or evacuation dose; therefore, which 24 action should be recommended.
25 Q And that relationship between sheltering and
?
Heritage Reporting Corporation
\
(202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27510 1 evacuation and release duration is also part of the METPAC 2 analysis; is it not?
3 A (Callendrello) METPAC does do that type of 4 analysis; yes. l 5 Q I want to make sure that you have the same 6 understanding that I have.
7 METPAC, does it not, plots relative dose as 8 between shelter and evacuation strategies for 2, 4, 6 and 9 8-hour release duration assumptions; correct?
10 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
11 But when you say " plot" it provides that data and 12 recommended protective actions for those various release !
13 durations.
14 Q All right.
15 Now, let me just ask you this question about this 16 sentence: "Will the plume pass before the evacuation can be 17 completed?"
18 If the plume originating from the reactor is 19 blowing towards Newburyport and the wind is predicted to 20 shift and blow the plume -- let's assume that the release 21 has stopped. All right, the release has stopped.
22 If in one instance the plume is expected to be 23 blown over Newburyport, what is the answer to that question:
24 "Will the plume pass before the evacuation can be 25 completed?"
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
1 1
- _ - _ - _ - 1
-N ' a .
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27511 P .
y 1 A (Callendrello) In that case you would compare 2 time till the start of release. Now, obviously, the release 3 has' started and ended, so that would be zero. And you would T
4 be comparing the travel time and release duration to both,
. 5' -to the evacuc e a time estimate in order to calculate the 6 evacuation dose.
7 Q I think my. question was not very artfully crafted.
8 Let me put a different question to you.
9 Am I to understand on that page.17, section 10 B (2) (b) , am I to understand that the question: "Will the 11 plume pass before the evacuation can be completed," does 12 that have to do with release duratic.n?
, 13 A (Callendrello) Yes.
[
v 14 15 There are two considerations. What this section deals with is the consideration of evacuation or the 16 comparison of evacuation versus sheltering.
17 There are two time components that are added 18 together and used in the decision-making process. One is 19 the time till plume arrival, and that in itself is composed 20 of two times. The time until the start of release plus the 21 plume travel time.
22 Q That's what "A" deals with?
23- A (Callendrello) That's what "A" deals with.
24 Q Now, tell me what "B" deals with?
25 A (Callendrello) "B" deals witn the duration of the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27512 ,
i 1 release. How long will radioactive material be released i
2 from the plant. l 3 Q Yes.
4 How long will it be released from the plant and 5 delivered to a specific location or simply, how long will it 6 be released from the plant?
7 A (Callendrello) In this comparison which is a l 8 projection it would be done assuming persistence of the wind 9 over that entire duration.
10 Q The assumption made about duration is that, if you 11 know how long or you're assuming a certain release duration 12 you assume it gets delivered -- the wind stays constant and 13 it gets delivered to whatever site or area you're examining; 14 is that how it works? ,
15 A (Callendrello) That's what IP-2.5 does and this 16 training module does.
17 Now METPAC, of Course, has the capability to do 18 "what if" type of calculations where you can input a number 19 of parameters, a number of wind shifts in increments as 20 small as 15 minutes and come up with a "what if" type of 21 projection for doses.
22 O I'm trying to understand the training materials 23 specifically, and trying to understand what you're 24 explaining to a trainee when the instructor puts the 25 question: "Will the plume pass before the evacuation can be Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1
, ,i
'i,$ .
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27513 1 complete?" I l
2 And I'take it.they are being trained to assume .l
!3 that.a particular amount of radioactivity when it begins at o
4 the reactor is going to travel'out to the area of interest, 5 ' pushed by a persistent wind? l 6 A! (Callendrello) In this analysis and the analysis j l 7 done in IP-2.5, yes. !
8 Q Will .you agree with me that: that phrase: "Will the 9L plume pass before the evacuation can be completed," -- if I.
10 gave you,a hypothetical such that you had in Newburyport, 11 for example, and you had a shifting wind and there was an.
12- . ongoing release and right now the release was heading toward 13 Newburyport, as we are looking at the conditions on the u
, 'f 14' ground now. .l A :
15 But if I'm asked the question: "Will the plume !
16 pass before the evacuation can be completed," I could infer 17 from that question: "Will the plume pass over Newburyport?"
18 Will it, i.e., that's to say, will it remain being i
19 blown in the same direction that it's being blown in now, {
i 20 and will it reach Newburyport or perhaps be blown in a 21 different direction and never reach Newburyport.
22 Do you see --
23 A (Callendrello) I don't understand the question.
24 Q The question: "Will the plume pass before an 25 evacuation" must have a geographic point as referenced, it b( j Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _A
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27514 1 must have that. "Will the plume pass a particular location 2 before an evacuation can be completed;" correct?
3 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
4 These analyses are done based on various 5 distances.
6 Q All right.
7 Let's get that established first.
8 Then I could take a particular location like 9 Newburyport and put the question: "Will the plume pass !
10 Newburyport before the evacuation of Newburyport can be 11 completed;" correct?
12 A (Callendrello) This statement is intended to 13 convey the thought that's consistent with Attachment -- I
. 14 believe it's Attachment 3 to IP-2.5, and that is the 15 analysis that looks at evacuation dose sersus shelter dose.
16 And in the case where you are taking a release 17 that is either not yet begun or has already begun and you 18 are comparing "will it pass," meaning will it start and end 19 before evacuation has been completed.
20 Q Mr. Callendrello, we're going to get bogged down 21 in the details in this particular training manual.
22 Let me put the question more generally.
23 Is the sensitivity of the protective action to 24 release duration assumptions, is that explained to the 25 trainees who take this protective action decision-making i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
L REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27515 lD[ 1 module?
L 2- A (Callendrello); .I don't understand what you mean 3' by " sensitivity of release duratic n. "
l ",
'4 Q Will you agree with me that the protective action
_5 decision is sensitive to release duration assumptions?
6 AL (Callendrello) It can be, yes.
~
7 Q And very often the decision-maker is in a ii.
I 8 situation where he must assume certain release duration;-
9 correct? .Because it's an uncertain variable?
10 A (Callendrello) There is direction that indicates 11 that if you don't know the release duration to use a default.
12 value.
- 13- Q All right.
/'~\ .14 Is that in these materials?
15 A (Callendrello) In this training material?
16 0 Yes.
17 Well, let me put it: I don't care about the 18 training materials in a narrow sense. But is part of the 19 training program to educate the trainees as to the default 20 value of 8-hours?
21 (Witnesses confer. )
22 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) I don't know.
23 I would have to review the material.
24 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
25 0 One last question: is there any portion of the
.[
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27516 1 training, either in these materials or otherwise, that 2 explains to the trainees METPAC and how to use it?
3 (Witnesses confer. )
4 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) We believe there is.
5 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
6 Q Is it in "K," I have not been able to locate it 7 myself?
8 A (Callendrello) No, there's a separate module for 9 dose assessment.
10 In fact, in our Attachment A to our testimony.
11 Q Attachment what?
12 A (Callendrello) Attachment A.
13 It is Attachment -- it's module 4. And, yes, it 14 indicates that use of METPAC and the HP-41 programa are 15 included.
16 (Pause) 17 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
18 Q I've looked quickly and I have looked in the past 19 in more detail at pages 13 and 14 of your testimony.
20 Mr. Callendrello, can you tell me what module 21 number is the dose assessment?
22 A (Callendrello) Module 4.
23 Q Can you tell me whether those individuals who are 24 getting protective action recommendation training as 25 described on pages 13 and 14 of your testimony, are they i Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27517
,(~N,. 1 getting Module 47
\ ' ~ 'l' 2 I would like to represent your testimony as that i
3 they are not. )
4 A (Callendrello) Please just give us one moment.
5 Q Sure. i 6 (Witnesses reviewing document.)
7 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) The technical 8 advisor does get that training as indicated on page 25 of
~
9 our testimony.
10 And the accident assessment coordinator who is an 11 individual who reports to the radiological health advisor 12 and the accident assessment coordinator is the one who is 13 actually responsible for performing that dose assessment.
14 BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
O 15 Q There are five individuals, are there not, with 16 protective action decision-making responsibilities?
17 A (Callendrello) There were five that were defined 18 in the contention. I think in our testimony we indicated we 19 didn't agree that all were involved.
l 20 Q You left out the public notification coordinator, 1
21 didn't you?
22 A (Callendrello) No.
23 We felt that t.'e ' lie assistant offsite response 24 director for support liaison really doesn't have much 25 involvement in the protective action recommendation process.
i f%
( ) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
I i
)
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27518 1 And the accident assessment coordinator actually 2 does have involvement in that. That's the individual who 3 would be performing the dose assessment and providing the 4 dose information. In fact, I believe that's also the 5 individual who completes the protective action work sheet.
6 Yes, completes the protective action work sheet ,
a 7 and provides that information to the radiological health 8 advisor.
9 Q So the other individuals other than the accident 10 -- I'm sorry, is it accident assessment advisor?
11 A (Callendrello) Accident assessment coordinator.
12 Q Coordinator.
13 Accident assessment coordinator.
, 14 And who is the other individual that gets 15 Module 4?
16 A (Callendrello) Technical advisor.
17 Q Technical advisor and accident assessment l 18 coordinator, other than those two individuals, other 19 protective action decision-makers do not get Module 4 which 20 explains how METPAC operates; is that a fact?
21 A (Callendrello) That's a fact.
22 I don't -- we have a problem with the way you 23 phase that question. The accident assessment coordinator, 24 who is the individual who does the protective action 25 recommendation analysis, he's the one who fills out the work Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 626-4886
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27519 r' l' sheet.
\!
~ 2 And the technical advisor is the one who would 3 make a recommendation based on plant meteorological 4 conditions.
5 So that the two individuals who are in the nitty-6 gritty of making a protective action recommendation do get i
7 that module. The others, the decision-makers, the persons 8 who superviso inose positions do not.
9 Q All eight, that's fine.
, 10 We can draw whatever inferences we want from that.
l l 11 1 just want to make sure that's a fact,
! i 12 Now, in your opinion, Panel, do you think that the 13 individuals who are not receiving Module 4 and who are
' otherwise not receiving training as to METPAC, do you
.j 14
\~,/
15 believe they're adequately trained to make and be I
16 responsible for protective action decisions?
1 17 A (Callendrello) Yes, I do.
18 Q Mr. Grew, do you?
19 A (Grew) Yes, I do.
20 Q Ms. Frank?
21 A (Frank) Yes, I do.
22 Q Mr. Ellis, you do?
23 A (Ellis) Yes 24 25 C Corporation
'g Heritage Reporting A
(202) 628-4888
27520 1
1 MR. TRAFICOMTE: All right.
2 Your Honor, that's all I have for this Panel.
3 JUDGE SMITH: Let's take a 10-minute break.
4 (Whereupon, a recess was taken.)
5 EXAMINATION BY JUDGE McCOLLOM l
6 JUDGE McCOLLOM: I would like to ask a question j i
7 that was brought up earlier by the Massachusetts Attorney )
1 I l' 9 Generals' witness. He criticized the fact that the 9 examinations for these training modules were open book. l 1
l 10 Would you give a little bit of a discussion on how 11 the examinations of the trainees occur at the testing l 12 period, and also the evaluations that you get from them 13 after they have completed the course as to the value of the 14 course, and how much that has worked, too, those two items?
l 15 THE WITNESS: (Grew) Okay, Your Honor. ,
l 16 First of all, the philosophy that we viewed behind 1
L 17 the written examination is that, during all the training, 18 during all the drills and exercises, we encouraged our l
19 trainees to make use of their reference material, whether it l
I 20 be the procedures, player cards, material that they would be 21 provided in their response roles.
22 And to get them into that mode of operation, we 23 allow them to use any of the training materials that are 24 presented in class in order to make responses or to research 25 whatever they have t'o do in the examination.
i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l I
i 27521
'1 So, in light of fostering that philosophy, we 2 allow that all materials used during the class would be 3 acceptable in responding in the written exams.
l 4 Generally following each classroom session, but it 5 doesn't have to be, we will solicit feedback from the 6 trainees. And we asked them specifically questions relating 7 to the presentation, the adequacy of the training that they 8 have received and comments on instructor performance. We 9 also asked them for feedback on where they feel that their 10 is need for improvement in plans and procedures.
11 When the instructors return these forms, I 12 personally, along with my supervisor, review each and every 13 one of them to get feedback from the students as to how the 14 training is going.
15 JUDGE McCOLLOM: What is your results there?
16 Do you feel like you got useful information back 17 from them?
18 THE WITNESS: (Grew) The requirement for this had 19 really been substantiated, Your Honor, in that we get some 20 very valuable information, not only as it pertains to the 21 conduct and delivery of the training, but sometimes we even 22 get feedback about sections in the plans and procedures that 23 may need improvement. There may be things in facilities and 24 equipment that need improvement or even in response and 25 implementation.
-4 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27522 1 So we generally get feedback in all the areas of 2 emergency preparedness, not just training, even though 3 training is the setting where we solicit the response.
4 We have the formal process for tracking the 5 comments that come back from training that need to be 6 responded to on our part.
7 JUDGE McCOLLOM: Do you find that the students are 8 pretty frank about what they are getting out of the course 9 and their criticism of it?
10 THE WITNESS: (Grew) Just from the variety and 11 the validity of the comments that we do get, it looks to be 12 a very effective process for getting good feedback to help 13 us improve not only the training program, but our overall 14 program of emergency response.
15 JUDGE McCOLLOM: Back to the testing.
16 You said that they had access to all v. the 17 material that was used in the training modules themselves.
18 Is that correct?
19 THE WITNESS: (Grew) That is correct.
20 I should have clarified that they are required to 21 do that on their own, and they are not allowed to converse 22 or collaborate with one another.
23 JUDGE McCOLLOM: All right.
24 Now when you go into an actual emergency 25 situation, do these trainees in each of the areas, do they Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27523
/ ~ l have these same materials available to them?
\-' 2 THE WITNESS: (Grew) Not necessarily.
3 For one thing, Your Honor, we completely 4 discourage that any of the trainees, in their response role, 5 make use of any of their training materials even if they are 6 procedures that are distributed during the classroom 7 environment. -
8 What wc do is we train them that any of the 9 materials that they need will be provided to them in their 10 response. positions, and not to bring any of the training 11 materials.
12 But generally our training materials are based 13 around information that is contained directly in the plans
( 14 and procedures.
V 15 MR. BACHMANN: I have a couple of questions, Your 16 Honor.
17 CROSS-EXAMINATION 18 BY MR. BACHMANN:
19 Q Earlier in the cross-examination by Mr. Traficonte 20 there was a fairly lengthy give and take as far as these 21 right-angle intersections where you would have alternating 22 competing traffic streams. And I've been looking through 23 Appendix J and looking at the traffic control diagrams, and 24 I do not see very many situations where that arises, 25 although I haven't given it a very thorough perusing.
C
(' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27524 {
1 Can anyone or anyone on this Panel give me a 2 feeling for how many of these right-angle alternating 3 competing flow intersections there are in the Massachusetts 4 communities?
5 A (Callendrello) It will just take me a few minutes 6 to look through Appendix J.
7 (Witnesses review dccument.) j 8 JUDGE COLE: Does your question also include Y-9 intersections whero the two legs of the Y would go into one 10 leg, which would be approximately the same situation? j 11 MR. BACHMANN: I was more concerned with the 12 classic intersection, 90 degrees.
13 JUDGE COLE: Ninety degrees?
14 MR. BACHMANN: Right.
15 JUDGE COLE: Okay.
16 MR. TRAFICONTE: While they are searching, could 17 you reformulate your question, if I might, I beg your 18 apology, but could you reformulate your question and not aim 19 them at 90 degrees so much as two competing traffic streams 20 that have to be alternated, regardless of the shape?
21 MR. BACHMANN: I'll accept that modification, yes.
22 MR. TRAFICONTE: I think that's really what you 2r are after.
24 MR. BACHMANN: Where they have to be alternated 25 by means of active intervention by traffic guides.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27525 (Witnesses review document.)
9 1 2 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) It looks like about 3 a third are. That's a rough estimate.
4 JUDGE COLE: Out of how many?
5 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) Out of 37. ;
6 BY MR. BACHMANN:
7 Q Also during Mr. Traficonte's cross-exainination the 8 issue of the supplemental training was brought up.
9 And did I understand the testimony to be that this 10 supplemental training, and I'm sorry, excuse me, this is 11 going on to the public notification coordinator. I should 12 preface it with hat.
13 Supplemental training of public notification 14 coordinator, was that as a result of the ARCA that came 15 about as a result of the exercise?
16 A (Grew) The supplemental training on the topic of, 17 I believe we're going title it " emergency warning messages" 18 or something to that effect, is as a direct result of the 19 FEMA ARCA.
20 Q All right, now, the FEMA ARCA itself, and I just 21 want to make certain. This is the one where the objectives 22 begin on pige 215 of the exercise report?
23 (Witnesses locate document.)
24 A (Callendrello) Yes, it is.
25 Q And if I understand what FEMA is saying here is Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - CROSS 27526 1 that one of the EBS messages, the ARCA itself was that one 2 of the EBS messages contained some inconsistences regarding l 3 a couple of schools in Newburyport.
L ~4 Is that correct?
l 5 A (Callendrello) That was the issue, yes.
6 Q And the recommendation of the ARCA was that the 7 staff should be trained to review the instructions 8 concerning EBS messages for consistency and accuracy because 9 of that.
10 Is that right?
11 A (Callendrello) That's correct.
12 Q Now how has the supplemental training addressed 13 this consistency and accuracy? -
14 Was it a major undertaking to corre.:t the ARCA 15 situation?
16 A (Grew) What the training does is, based on Dr.
17 Mileti's testimony, it has a check list of items that should 18 be reviewed for a warning message to make it a good warning 19 message.
20 And among these are consistency and accuracy. We 21 addressed the possibility of misinterpretation. We 22 addressed things like word choice, clarity of the 23 statements, the origin of who in authority is making the 24 recommendations and so forth.
25 Q Did the inconsistency in the message, that one f Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 626-4000
}
REBUTTAL PANEL NO. 20 - RECROSS 27527 )
l
/'~'N 1 message that generated the ARCA, would that inconsistency in
\
2 a real situation have any impact on health and safety?
3 A (Callendrello) Cer' iy the FEMA evaluation was i
4 that it did not.
5 MR. BACHMANN: I have no further questions.
6 MR. LEWALD: No questions.
7 JUDGE SMITH: Do you have'any recross?
8 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes, just one brief question.
9 RECROSS-EXAMINATION 10- BY MR. TRAFICONTE:
11 Q Has anyone, Panel, to date had the supplemental 12 training? ..
13 A (Callendrello) No, as I indicated, the first
[ h 14 session is scheduled for this week, and then there is one
\ !
%_ /. ;
15 scheduled in July.
16 MR. TRAFICONTE: That's all, Your Honor.
17 JUDGE COLE: Just one question, Mr. Traficonte.
18 I'm sorry.
19 (Laughter) 20 MR. TRAFICONTE: I'm here, Your Honor.
21 22 23 24 25 t
's Heritage Reporting Corporation
'~
(202) 628-4888
l I'
27528 i
1 EXAMINATION BY JUDGE COLE 2 JUDGE COLE: Mr. Callendrello, you indicated that 3 12 out of 37 intersections were intersections of the type l 4 that required direct intervention by a traffic guide to stop.
S traffic and permit another lane to come through. ;
i 6 Is that correct?
7 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) That's a quick look.
i 8 I think I counted 13.
9 JUDGE COLE: Were any of those 12 that you 10 indicated traffic light controlled?
11 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) I don't know if they ,
i 12 are. I would presume that they are. I just don't know j 13 offhand.
14 JUDGE COLE: Well, what if certain of them were 15 controlled by a traffic light, would they permit the light 16 to control the traffic if the cycle was about what it I
17 normally would be? J 18 What are the ground rules for that? ,
19 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) I just don't know l I
20 off the top of my head.
21 (Witnesses confer.) ]
22 JUDGE COLE: The reason why I ask the question is 23 I seem to have remembered reading somewhere that they do not 24 go in and change those traffic signal time. !
25 THE WITNESS: (Callendrello) If they don't touch j Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 t.
27529 1 the signal timing. But my recollection, and Mr. Grew's 2 recollection confirms it, is that they may operate somewhat 3 in conflict with that traffic signal.
4 JUDGE COLE: All right, sir.
5 Is that your understanding, too, Mr. Grew? j 6 THE WITNESS: (Grew) Yes, it is.
7 JUDGE COLE: Okay. Thank you.
8 JUDGE SMITH: All right, you are excused.
9 Thank you.
10 (The witnesses were thereupon excused. )
11 MR. SMITH: Your Honor, I just wanted to apologize 12 for something.
13 I had indicated during the break that I would not 14 be arguing the Carter motion. And due to miscommunication, 15 I guess I should have said we wanted to argue the second 16 portion as opposed to the whole motion.
17 We are going to withdraw the first part of the 18 motion.
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27530 1 JUDGE SMITH: You had previously indicated that 2 you were not going to argue your motion in limine on Dr.
3 Carter, but now that's a mistake. You are going to argue 4 the second aspect of it? .
5 MR. SMITH: Yes, Your Honor. -
6 It's the part beginning in the middle of the page 7 2. The section of the testimony entitled "The Adequacy of 8 the Procedure in the SPMC", from that point forward.
1 Y
l 9 (All parties review document.) t 10 JUDGE SMATH: So your argument is disruptive 11 members of the news media has not been the subject of any 12 contention.
13 MR. SMITH: That's correct, Your Honor.
14 JUDGE SMITH: Do you agree?
15 MS. TALBOT: No, Your Honor, I don't.
4 16 I would like just a brief argument.
r 17 Basis A of the contention state that no adequate 18 procedures for coordinating the activities of the public 19 information staff at the EOC and the personnel at the media w
20 center are provided.
21 The expert on this matter, Dr. Carter, simply 22 takes this assertion, examines it and expounds on it, ,
23 arriving at the conclusion that, among other th: .igs, the 24 inadequate procedure for the coordination of the media staff 25 and personnel results in disruption.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
-1 27531 In other words, the disrupt 3sn is the effect of
}_ '
1 x- 2 the lack of' adequate provisions, or if you will, the effect ,
3 of the confusion that arises as a result of the inadequate l 4 provisions.
5 Applicants decry the fact that Mass AG proposes 6 the development of what Applicants have construed as a 7 comprehensive plan for handling disruption. I wonder if l 8 Applicants disagree that this supposed plan is in direct 9 reply to the explicitly-asserted statement that Applicants 10 have inadequate procedures.
11 To penalize the Mass AG for not using the magic i'
12 word " disruption", but instead to use the term " inadequate 13 procedure" while coordinating activities, which as I said is
[~'}
\~,)
14 an effect of condition precedent to disruption, the 3oard ,
15 would place.the Mass AG in the impossible position of having 16 filed direct testimony at the contention drafting or l 17 discovery phase.
1 18 Just as an aside, Your Honor, the Board has 1
19 already recognized in these proceedings that direct-filed 20 testimony by its nature is a built-in discovery document.
21 So if Applicants are claiming some sort of 22 surprise at Mass AG's statement that disruption arises out 23 of failure to provide coordination, I would point to that 24 observation by the Board. That transcript cite, by the way, 25 is 16444 at line 16 to 17.
\
\ Heritage Reporting Corporation j
(202) 628-4886 i
i
27532 1 JUDGE SMITH: Would you repeat that last 2 statement?
3 What's the re'evance of that citation?
4 MS. TALBOT: Oh, that's where the Board just made 5 note that sometimes you can construe prefiled testimony as a 6 built-in discovery document.
7 The way I read that was that if it wasn't a total 8 surprise, but that if it was related something that was 9 already on the table, it could be construed as discovery.
10 I added that -- maybe I shouldn't add -- but I 11 added it in response to Applicants' implicit claim that this ;
12 element of disruption is somehow a surprise.
13 JUDGE SMITH: And I guess I need help. I don't 14 have my list of contentions here. ,
15 MS. TALBOT: I have one, Your Honor.
16 JUDGE SMITH: We need help on the language of the 17 contention.
18 (Document proffered to the Board.)
19 JUDGE SMITH: Did you intend to say that the 20 testimony you challenge continues onto to page 41 or is it 21 page 407 l 22 MR. SMITH: It goes to page 41r Your Horior, just 23 before Sect ion 5.
24 JUDGE SMITH: What basis do you say it is?
25 MS. TALBOT: Basis A, Your Honor. ;
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
E 27533 l
)
[~'s I. 1 JUDGE SMITH: Basis A.
4'*~'/ 2 MS. TALBOT: I mean tait a minute. I'm stepping 3 all over myself.
4 MR. SMITH: JI-36.
5 MS. TALBOT: Right. Basis A.
6 JUDGE SMITH: I can't seem to catch up here.
7 All right.
8 MS. TALBOT: That's right. I was looking at the 9 wrong contention.
10 It's both the body of the contention itself and 11 the basis.
12 (The Board confers.)
13 JUDGE SMITH: We believe that' disruptive news r'
(Nv 14' media representatives is within the contention and the 15 basis. It's predictable without coordination.
16 MR. SMITH: But, Your Honor, if I might just be 17 heard for a moment?
18 JUDGE SMITH: Oh, I'm sorry, you want to respond?
19 MR. SMITH: One thing I would like to point out to 20 the Board is, in the discovery on the individual contentions 21 there was no mention at all when we asked to describe the 22' basis for their statements in that basis, there was no 23 reference at all to effects of disruptive media.
24 In fact, it only discussed problems with having to 25 contact and communicate between the EOC and the media center 10
)q,j/ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l 27534 ,
1 by telephone. That's, I believe, responsive to 2 Interrogatory No. 58, and Interrogatory No. 59. ]
I 3 JUDGE SMITH: Well, that's been one of the tests J l
4 we have applied. I guess we didn't go through the whole 5 procedure this morning. q i
6 MR. TRAFICONTE: Your Honor, standard argument, 7 standard ruling.
8 MS. TALBOT: I guess, Your Honor, it's just the 9 classic question of where do you draw the line.
10 I mean to take your argument to its logical 11 conclusion, Mass AG would have had to have retained Dr.
12 Carter at the contention drafting or discovery --
13 JUDGE SMITH: Well, wait a minute, that's 14 different. That's a different argument.
15 Right now I think you should direct your argument 16 to whether there was a discovery request that should have 17 produced that information.
18 What did you ask on discovery?
19 MR. SMITH: I'll read the two questions that I 20 believe pertain to Basis A.
21 Number 58 is, "Please state all the facts 22 underlying Interveners' assertion that no adequate 23 procedures for coordinating the activities of the public 24 information staff at the EOC and the personnel at the media 25 center are provided, and define ' adequate.'"
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 0 27535 j 1 JUDGE SMITH: Okay, that's not the effect of
' I 2 inadequate coordination. Explain where you believe the 3 procedures for inadequate coordination are inadequate.
4 MR. SMITH: Well, that was actually all the facts 5 underlying their assertion that there would be no adequate 6 procedures.
7 The second will be No. 59, "Please state all the 8 facts underlying Interveners' assertion that adequate 9 procedures also'do not exist for the coordination of the 10 activities of media relations representatives who will be 11 communicating directly with the press by telephone. Define 12 ' adequate' and then identify all such media relations 13 representatives."
[ \ 14 MS. TALBOT: Your Honor, if Mr. Smith would go
\m /
15 further, the answer would read further, "The SPMC provides 16 little or no procedures to' ensure that there is coordination 17 of the media relations personnel representing ORO, the State 18 of New Hampshire, the Commonwealth, and those personnel 19 responding pursuant to the Seabrook Station radiological 20 response plan. Coordination of the content of news releases 21 should take place prior to release and not afterward."
22 Again, this goes back to my original point that 23 the disruption is the effect of the lack of coordination. J 24 It's a predictable outcome.
25 MR. SMITH: I didn't catch what that reference was y~x ,
Heritage Reporting Corporation i
(202) 628-4888
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ _ _ _ - _ ________a
27536 1 to.
2 MS. TALBOT: I thought I was reading from the same 3 one you were.
4 MR. SMITH: I was just reading the question.
5 MS. TALBOT: Oh, I'm sorry, no wonder you didn't 6 read the anewer.
7 MR. SMITH: That was just our interrogatories.
8 MS. TALBOT: I was referring to our answer to I
9 Interrogatory 58 regarding JI Contention 36. It's the last 10 full sentence on page 34.
11 JUDGE SMITH: I think that that's the same 12 distinction that we noted ourselves.
13 Your interrogatory goes to why do you say there is e
14 inadequate coordination as compared to the testimony that 15 you are challenges, and I think they answered that.
16 Now they have testimony which goes to the need for 17 such coordination.
18 MR. TURK: But, Your Honor, when is there ample 19 notice?
20 The purpose cf discovery is to allow the parties l 1
21 to know what kind of testimony they are going to confront. I 22 JUDGE SMITH: That's right.
23 MR. TURK: The purpose of forming contentions with 24 specific bases -- j i
25 JUDGE SMITH: That's right.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 G4 i
27537 1 MR. TURK: -- is to allow the parties to know what 2 evidence they have to confront.
3 JUDGE SMITH: Right.
4 MR. TURK: The argument from the Mass AG to you 5 has been, well, our testimony identifies the problem.
6 Confront that. But that does not provide early enough 7 not ice of what it is that's at issue.
8 JUDGE SMITH: Well, then, that's the purpose of 9 discovery.
10 MR. TURK: That's right. And the discovery 11 answers --
12 JUDGE SMITH: And the discovery questions were 13 fairly answered and didn't elicit -- I mean, you know --
14 MR. TURK: Well, as I understand the discovery, it 15 looked at the words of the contention and the basis, and l 16 said, okay, here are words. Now give us all the facts that 17 support it.
18 JUDGE SMITH: Now I can think of arguments which 19 have not been made today why this testimony shouldn't be 20 entered, but none of you have made them.
21 The questions went to why is the coordination --
l 22 what is your basis for saying that there are no adequate 23 procedures for coordinating the activities of the public 24 information staff.
25 And what is the answer?
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 o _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - -- - _
27538 1 The answer is, you don't have any procedures.
2 That's what the answer is.
3 And now they've got testimony saying, indeed, they 4 don't have any procedures and they are going to have a mess.
5 Now, you could have argued that, well, the 6 contention and the basis did not allege the effects of 7 inadequate procedures.
8 MR. TURK: That's correct.
9 JUDGE SMITH: And it would have been a rather --
10 and it did - but it would have been a rather pointless 11 contention had it just argued for procedures for the sake of 12 procedures.
13 MR. SMITH: Your Honor, I think --
c 14 JUDGE SMITH: I don't think that you could have 15 foreseen this and asked a better question in the 16 interrogatories. But on the other hand, the fact is you did 17 not ask a question which would produce that answer.
18 MR. SMITH: I think though, Your Honor, the answer 19 to the interrogatories, in light of the wording in the 20 basis, I think would preclude even that further inquiry even 21 if we could have had that benefit.
22 Starting at the top, the way the basis is 23 formulated, it says, "No provision has been made in the SPMC 24 for the news media at the EOF. The media center is located 25 in the town hall."
Heritage Reporting Corporation (2021 628-4888
275391 i
And they say, "which is..four miles away. However, J/ :1:
,2 the' PIA, . who is. responsible for: issuing news releases and 3 -directing public information:is locate at the EOC and not.
4- the media center. No adequate' procedures for coordinating ,
5 thefactivities:between these two locationsDis provided."
.6' That'is what this contention, to me,-goes to, is 7' the coordination because they.are physically separated.
-81 That, to'me, is.the foundation of this basis.
9 And-from the response that was given in the
~10' interrogatories, to me that is what -- there is nothing in 11 there to show us'that there is anything different than the 12 physical = separation.
13' What this testimony goes to, however,. is the fact
, 14 that, okay, hero we are. We're already at the media center,
\
15 and people are going to be coming rushing into this place 16 and disrupting the whole1 works. Iljust don't think that's 17- within the bounds of this'conter. tion.
- 18. MR. TURK: They could have filed'that contention.
19 MS. TALBOT: Your Honor, I realize you have L 20 already ruled, but I would like.to just say one more thing 21 in response to the post-ruling.
'I
,22 JUDGE SMITH: Well, see, we reopened it.
23 MS. TALBOT: Oh.
24 JUDGE SMITH: We reopened it when it was pointed 25 out that we did not address the responses to discovery, m
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L l
l 27540
[
1 which we didn't do that. It was in the written motion, but 2 we didn't pick that up.
3 MS. TALBOT: I jost want to make the Board aware 4 that, although Mr. $mith may interpret the response to 5 Interrogatory No. 58 as being limited, the language speaks 6 for itself.
7 The pertinent language, I won't repeat it because 8 it's already on the record, the las'. sentence begins with 9 the word "Further,", relevant words. And I think that in 10 light of that you can't play this grammatical game of i
11 telling the Mass AG what the Mass AG meant when the Mass AG 12 drafted an answer to a broad interrogatory.
13 MR. TURK: The problem, Your Honor, is the thrust 14 of this contention, as demonstrated through their 7
15 interrogatory answers, is they were looking for coordination 16 among the ORO, the State of New Hampshire, and the 17 Massachusetts personnel.
18 They never said that there were going to be 19 disruptive media persons that have to be dealt with.
20 MS. TALBOT: Mr. Turk, again, the disruption is an 21 effect of the lack of the coordination.
22 JUDGE SMITH: What is the purpose of coordination, 23 any coordination?
24 Just because people like things neat, they want 25 them well coordinated, or do they want to deal effectively Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
7.
1 27541 i
~s l
[
4 T
h 1 with the press?
l \J' 2' What are the effects.of coordination?'
3 MR. TURK: It could be that not that there were 4 going to be disruptive persons at the media center.
l 5 JUDGE SMITH: I think that there are going to be !
l 0 l
6 disruptive persons. )
7 MR. TURK: But there will be a lack of information 8 or perhaps that the information going out to the public !
\
9 would not be coordinated so that in one media center certain 10 news is going out, whereas at another media center other 11 news is going out.
12 You could postulate all kinds nf effects.
13 MS. TALBOT: And I would offer to you, Mr. Turk, O
/ 4 14 that --
't.)
15 JUDGE SMITH: Well, wait a minute. Please.
16 MS, TALBOT: Okay.
17 (The Board confers.)
18
'19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l
(
(_ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
i l
i
27542 1 JUDGE SMITH: The Board doesn't doubt that, if the j i
2 parties had the benefit of today's discussion months ago, l 3 the contention and the bases would have been written 1 i
1 4 differently and certainly your interrogatories would have 5 been directed differently and everything would have been 6 different.
7 But we see a permissible reading, maybe not the 8 best reading, but a permissible reading of Basis A is, and 9 I'm beginning with a sentence where it says: "No adequate 10 procedures for coordinating activities of the public 11 information staff at the EOC."
12 And then I'm focusing on the next word, the 13 conjunction "and." It does not say "with," it says "and."
14 And so it can be fairly read that we're talking 15 about coordinating the activities of both groups. And I 16 don't think that is necessarily the best reading, but it is 17 a reading.
18 So here we are today, we' re in a less than 19 desirable situation where we're trying to conform today's 20 reality with yesterday's uncertainties.
21 And I believe, unless you have more arguments, 22 we'll adhere to our earlier ruling. The motion is denied.
23 MR. TRAFICONTE: Your Honor, I think we're going 24 to have -- before Dr. Carter takes the stand we're going to 25 have argument on SAPL's motiv-Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 6Z0-4809 1
l l
t
l -.
['
27543 JN\
t 1 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, actually it's a response --
\' '/ - .2 JUDGE SMITH: Dr. Burrows you mean?
l l 3 MR. TRAFICON'44 : That is not the case?
l 4 JUDGE SMITH: No.
I 5 MS. DOUGHTY: There's no motion. There's no l
6 argument.
7 JUDGE SMITH: Wait a minute.
8 Are we talking about Dr. Burrows? j 9 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes. !
10 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes.
11 JUDGE SMITH: I thought just a moment ago we had 12 decided it was going to be Mr. Trout who was going to make i
13 that argument. l
// ~\ 14 MR. TRAFICONTE: I'm sorry, I wasn't aware of
\,
15 that; I was out. ,
j 16 MR. LEWALD: Mr. Trout will be available this j 17 afternoon.
18 MR. TRAFICONTE: All right.
19 MS. TALBOT: Your Honor, shall I put Dr. Carter on 20 the stand?
21 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, I guess it's time.
~
22 MS. TALBOT: Your Honor, at this point I am going 23 to distribute a corrected version of Dr. Carter's testimony i
24 with a correspondent errata sheets. The changes are l 25 cosmetic in nature.
,f
('~,) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - DIRECT 27544 1 JUDGE SMITH: Dr. Carter, remain standing and be 2 sworn, please.
3 Whereupon, 4 T. MICHAEL CARTER J l
5 having been first duly sworn, was called as a witness 6 herein, and was examined and testified as follows:
7 (Document proffered to all parties.)
8 MS. TALBOT: I will also have attachments to this 9 testimony before the end of the day that will be admitted 10 with it.
11 DIRECT EXAMINATION 12 BY MS. TALBOT:
13 Q Dr. Carter, I have placed before you a document 14 entitled, " Corrected Testimony of T. Michael Carter on 15 behalf of James M. Shannon, Attorney General for the 16 Commonwealth of Massachusetts concerning Contentions 17 JI-13J, JI-27G, JI-36, MAG EX-9, and JI-35." ;
18 To the best of your knowledge and belief, is this 19 a true and accurate copy of your testimony?
20 A (Carter) Yes, it is.
21 Q Do you have any changes to be made to it?
22 A (Carter) The errata sheet that is attached with ,
23 it, yes.
24 MS. TALBOT: Your Honor, at this point I would 25 like to offer into evidence this corrected testimony of Dr.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - DIRECT 27545
/N 1 Carter.
k l JUDGE SMITH: And the attachments? 1 3 MS. TALBOT: And the attachagnts. Your Honor, my 4 apologies for not having them with me, it was human error on 5 my part.
6 JUDGE SMITH: What's that?
7 MS. TALBOT: Pardon me?
8 JUDGE SMITH: What don't you have?
9 MS. TALBOT: I don't have copies of the l 10 attachments, but I will have them soon.
11 JUDGE SMITH: For the reporter?
12 MS. TALBOT: I will have them for the reporterz !
13 JUDGE COLE: Are they modified, also?
/x
[ \, 14 MS. TALBOT: No, they're not; they're the exact G.!
15 same.
16 JUDGE SMITH: Well, you'll have them before the ;
17 end of the day? j
)
18 MS. TALBOT: Yes, Your Honor, I will.
I I
19 JUDGE SMITH: All right.
20 If there ere no objections the corrected testimony 21 of T. Michael Carter, dated June 27th together with the 22 attachments to his testimony dated April 10th, 1989 is 23 received.
24 ,
25 i
(
( ,/ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4.888 I
CARTER - DIRECT 27546 1 (The corrected testimony of 2 T. Michael Carter on behalf
'3 of the Mass AG concerning 4 JI-13J; JI-27G; 3G; and 5 MAG EX-9; JI-35 and 6 attachments follows:)
7 8
9 10 11 12 13
. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
7 77---- -- - q k '-
p l;
ps
['N UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '
, NUCLEAR EEGULATCFY COMMISSION 3
ATOMIC' SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
.Pefore the Administrative Judges:
Ivan W. Smith, Chairman Dr. Richard F. Cole Kenneth A. McCollom
) .
In the Matter of' ) -Docket Nos. 50-443-OL.
) 50-444-OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) (Off-Site EP)
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE,.EI AL.
)
}-
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) ) ,Ap r-i4-44 , 1989
)
Juw et-Qrr70{ch d TESTIMONY OF T. MICHAEL CARTER ON BEHALF OF JAMES M. SHANNON, ATTORNEY GENERAL c#
Oi =FOR.THE-COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CONCERNING
-Q CONTENTIONS JI 137: JI 27G; JI 3 62 MAG EX-9
- Tl Jf Department.of the Attorney General Nuclear Safety Unit Public Protection Bureau One Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02108 (617) 727-2200
.t
/*
)
I I
I
. f' ' 'h
'I I N- / )
i i
l' UNI!ED STATES OF AMERICA !
GUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 3efore the Adminis'rative Judges:
Ivan W. Smith, Chairman Dr. Richard F. Cole Kenneth A. McCollom l
)
In the Matter of ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL
) 50-444-OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) (Off-Site EP) !
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ET AL. )
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)
!rs\ )
)
June 27, 1989 (v/
ERRATA TO TESTIMONY OF DR. T. MICHAEL CARTER ON DEHALF OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CONCERNING CONTENTIONS JI 13J; JI 27G; JI 35; JI 36; MAC EX-9.
- 1) On cover sheet and page 1 of testimony, change "JI 138" to "JI 13J" and insert JI 35.
i j
- 2) On page 14, line 18, change "regarding the social context aspect" to "with respect to family plans."
- 3) On page 15, line 11, change " returning for a moment to g the existence of a ' family plan'" with "with respect
! I As/ to ' social context'".
hh.. ,m_._______-_ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
0 l
,)
l O J. Page 15, line 12, add t he word "pr ef e r ent i ally" l
l affer " people".
l l
- 5) on page 24, line 20, enange "12:15" to "12:25".
- 6) on oage 25, line 15, change "1:15" to "12:45".
7 ,' on page 27, line 16, substitute " school children in tne tour sheltering communities" for *Newburyport en11dren".
5 1
- 6) On page 27, line 25, change "3:57" to "4:03".
- 9) On page 29, line 14, change "at 5:10 p.m." to " any wherebetween5:04and5:30").
- 10) on page 30, line 19, add "the puolic" after "urce".
- 11) on page 30, line 22, chage "to" to "the".
- 12) On page 36, begin new paragraph before the word "much".
- 13) On page 36, delete the last paragraph which runs over to page 39
r--
W
.,. x UNITED STATE 5 OF AMERICA
'k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND-LICEt3SI!3G BOARD.
Before the Administrative. Judges:
- van W. Smith, Chairman Dr. Richard F. Cole Kenneth'A. McCollom
)
In the Matter-of ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL
) LO-444-OL l PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) (Off-Site EP)
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, EI E . )
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) ) April 10, 1989
) ,
q
. TESTIMONY OF T. MICHAEL CARTER ON BEHALF OF
\ JAMES M. SHANNON, ATTORNEY GENERAL
[
FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CONCERNING CONTENTIONS JI 13:r; JI 27G; JI 36; MAG EX-9 ' ~JT ,3s My name is T.' Michael Carter and I have a Ph'.D. in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin. I currently have three professional positions: 1) I am Vice President for Human i
Factors of the Corporate Response Group of Washington, DC (about 50% time), 2) I am a Visiting Fellow at the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmoshpere (CIRA) at Colorado State University in Fort Collins, Colorado ind via this position on contract to the National Weather Service in Silver Spring, Maryland (about 30%) and 3) I am Vice President and Director of Hazards Management Group of Tallahassee, Florida
, (about 20%).
! \
l l
~ ar 'in au--^:i y in t".e area of behsvi;ral respcnse .
1: 1 and erer;ency situations. My first work in this area Legan :n 1976 when I participated with Other colleagues at the
'niversity of Minnesota in securing and conducting a National Sulence F'_undat; n research grant on " Community Response to Natural Hazard Warnings." This effort included a before-and-after research design of the response by emergency respense agencies and the general public to tornadoes, flash floods and hurricanes in approximately 30 communities nationwide. During this study I was able to observe on-site the preparation and response to four hurricane threats.
After completing thi: study in 1980, I spent two years atthe National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's Environmental Research Laboratories in Boulder, Colorado, through my association with CIRA. During this period, I developed the conceptual basis for an automated warning fan-out system which is currently being integrated into a prototype of j the National Weather Service's future automation system which will be implemented in the early 1990'c. l
(
In 1982, again through my association with CIRA, I began a contractual relationship with the National Werther Service Headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland. My initial task ,
involved the development and implementation of the hurricane probability program. This involved an assessment of the impact of the hurricane probabilities on both agency and public response to hurricane warnings and the development of an education program to maximize the utilization of this forecast 1
l l
L l
s e 1
l
'er:+r infir a:::n. I During 19.93 and 1994, I personally 1 4
f/ .:nducted mere than 30'w:rk. shops arcund-the Atlantic.and Gulf
_ arts on this subject.
Fr?m 1983 through 1985, I worked on-site as a liaison !
betaven Ucal-weather service offices and local officials durino f ive ht': ricane th rea t s . My primary tasks during these emergencies were to advise local officials on the extent and timing of evacuation orders, to coordinate, through state officia , the evacuation orders of various local jurisdictions and to compose and write local weather service office emergency warning messages.
Other tasks with the National Weather Service have involved l
a nationwide evaluation of their Disaster Preparedenss program, the development of a hurricane evacuation decision-making
, /
.! strategy for local officials and an evaluation of the forecast information' requirements of. local officials for severe convective stortcs, tornadoes, flash floods and winter storms.
With the incorporation of the Hazards Management Group in 1983, I have participated in the development of behavioral assumptions concerning the likely response of the public to a variety of hurricane threat scenarios. The response dimensions include the evacuation rate, the timing of.the evacuation, the type and location of refuge, the percentage of vehicle usage and the percentage of the special need population. These assumptions form a part of the basis of comprehensive hurricane plans in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Fi.orida, South
- (
'b I
i 1
i__._____.__.___________------- - - - - - - - - - ~ ' ' ' ' - - ~ ' _ .]
. ::..na,
.10::- !arti.ni, .. ;;n;3, Mar ;anf, De;3sare, :+ c le: ? e'/ , New Y : r <. , Ton.e::.:;;, ?n:le !31Snf, Massaan;setts ri M24h;;.
, 2;rr;;;_;r 'li t a e ;s attacned to tnis testimony.
- MTE:;.:::.N ne contentions to wnicn nis testimony is addressed are J:
.33; J: 2'3; J: 36; and MA3 EX-9.
SUMMARY
OF TEST MONY Tnis testimony sets out tne casic premises regarding the nature and effect of puolic response to emergency warnings. In addition, it d:scusses in derail the criteria against which the level of detailed information contained within a message needs ce Judged. The testimony also examines the nature of procedures for tne formulation, coordination and dissemination of emergency
( information, as set fortn in the SPMC and as exercised in June of 1988, as well as the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of NMY ORO's Public Notification Coordination in coordinating and i
drafting emergency messages is also discussed, Tne conclusions reached through this testimony include the following: emergency messages contained in the SPMC and emergency messages issued during the June exercise are not able to adequately and effectively guide and channel the public's response during an emergency; procedures specified in the SPMC and utilized during the exercise cannot adequately ensure the timely dissemination of consistent information f ror. NHY ORO to tne puolic; provisions in the SPMC and performance during the exercise show tnat there is a lack of coordination of emergency
_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _--- - -------- _ - -- - - -- -- --~-------------~-- --~~ - ~ - ~
f put;;: :nf:trati n between NHY OFC and responding g o v e r r.re r. t s :
- he edia cannot ce effec :vely handled given the procedures :n
- ne SFMC and the facts elic:ted through the exercise; the SPMC dre; n:t pr vide for cr require that the NHY ORO Public Not:ficat:en Coordinator have adequate training and experience.
TESTIMOEi l I.
DISCUSSION OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE SPMC EBS MESSAGES AND THE EMEEGENCY MESSAGES ISSUED TO THE PUBLIC DURING THE JUNE, 1988 SEABROOK EXERCISE A. BACKGROUND There is a significant amount of social science literature and findings which deal with the nature of public response to emergency warnings. Rather than repeat those findings here, I will take, rs my starting point, pertinent portions of Dr.
Dennis Mileti's pre-filed testimony in the aew Hampshire portion of these proceedings. (Specifically, I refer to pages 149 through 159 of Applicants' Direct Testimony No. 7, Docket Nos. 50-443-OL; 50-444-OL, Nov. 12, 1987.)
In this material, Dr. Mileti reviews the social science literature regarding the factors which influence an individual's decision to evacuate. For purposes of this testimony I accept Dr. Mileti's basic summary and interpretation of the research. findings.
In sum, the most relevant portions of these research findings indicate that individuals respond in a somewhat rational manner relative to their perceptions of their personal risk in a developing emergency. Or, in Dr. Mileti's words, Most members of the public in emergencies behave in ways 9 .m m - - . _ _ _ . . - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - - - - - - - _
1
- ela*'re:/ : ns. stent witq t.eir situat::nal perceptirn3 :f i t< and wnat t- do ab ut ;- "
Ld2 at 151, 11. 1-3. This cerreption of. personal r:sk is determined by a wide variety Of a factt:s, including psychological characteristics, personal I exper:ence. :::a1 context, emergency warning information and vironmental cues, to name only a few.
Most of these factors vary widely over a population and, thus, cannot be controlled by officials through the issuance of emergency warning. However, one element which can be controlled and which is the focus of this testimony is the emergency warning information which is issued to the public.
As Dr. Mileti stated in his earlier testimony, a good emergency warning message is one which can overcome the effects of an individual's characteristics on his own perception of personal j risk. Thus, the primary function a good emergency warning s
message can perform is to provide information that will enable all members of a population, regardless of their individual characteristics, to develop an appropriate 'Jerception of their personal risk to the warned threat. Indeed, a fundamental tenet in the social science research literature on public response to emergency warnings is that members of the public reach their own decisions on what actions to take, if any, on the basis of the information available to them. The information provided by officials of response agencies and organizations plays the critical role in this process.
1 I
- _ - _ - _ - . )
i i
.9 10. :TERIA,FOR EMERGE!!C*: WAR!!!!1G MESSAGES O/~N THE CHECELIST 15 C:, Mileti has set forth s." checklist of.what constitutes- i the type.cf emergency public information that helps most' merte r s ;f a public perceive risk more' accurately in an e.T.ergency". Id at .56, 1 11 12-14. Howevte, I'believe his p discussion of'this-checklist is~far too "briefly summarized" to enable thel reader to effectively utilize it in order to evaluate EBS messe.ges like the ones at issue. 'Also, his ensuing discussion is much too theoretical or abstract to j enable.even a skilled. practitioner to effectively utilize it in order to evaluate the messages like'the ones at issue.
However, more helpful than this summarized presentation '.s a paper;that Dr. Mileti and his colleagues have presented ;
l
,L 4
elsewhere. It is a much more detailed discussion of the factors'which "have been documented as being important to [the]
issuance of a good warning" (Sorensen, Vogt and Mileti, l'9 87 : lll) . In this discussion, ten documented factors are discussed:
- 1. The source of the message: the source of the message must be perceived.by the receiver to be both credible and reliable. However, since any given source is unlikely to be perceived as credible and reliable by all members of a public, a good warning message should cite a number of different sources who have cooperated in its development.
h:
_ Tne ::ns13:en;2 Of the essage: the state. rent :n the message which describes the threat must be Osnsistent with the statement in the message which describes the level of concern the receiving public should have. In addition, if multiple agencies or officials are issuing warning messages, these multiple warning messages should be consistent with each other.
. 3. The accurscv of the message.
l
- 4. The clarity of the message.
- 5. The certainty of the message: a message which is certain in its description of the threat and aggressive in its call for protective action is more effective than a tentative message.
- 6. The level of detailed information in the message:
if,the warning message is to perform its primary purpose of providing sufficient information to enable the receiver to develop an appropriate perception of personal risk, it must contain all the information the receiver requires to develop such a perception. To the extent that the message contains insufficient or inconsistent information, the message may create confusion, uncertainty and anxiety. In addition, any missing or ambiguous information will be sought by the public from other sources or will be assumed on the basis of potentially uninformed perceptions.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - ~ -- ~ - ~ - ~ - ~ ~ -
'b.. ; sly, the effec- of incorplete?r inconsistere G :nt:rmation is that the public can deri.e an inappropriate perception of personal risk whereupen the wrong actions may be taken and incorrect or
.ncomplete information may be passed on to others.
A ? od exemple of this was TM7 where people )
evacuated who didn t need to. Conceivably, this king of inappropriate action could be very dangerous, for example, where a person unwittingly exposed himself to radiation because he evacuated rather than sheltered.
7 The protective action cuidance in the message: a message which contains clear and explicit guidance about what protective actions to take is obviously more effective than one which either provides no 9 guidance or only ambiguous guidance. In addition, the time frame in which these actions are to be taken should also be made explicit.
Although not mentioned in the Enrensen, et al.
discussion, the message should also make clear whi'ch actions should be taken by which groups in those cases where not everyone receiving the message is at equal risk to the threat. This point will be discussed in more detail later in this testimony.
l E
The Liecuencv Of ne essages: the more frequent.,
, a warning essage is repeated, the better its ,
chances of being effective. 140t'everyone in the threatened population will hear a single warning message and, to the extent it is repeated frequently, the percentage of the population who hears it will be increased. Moreover, a frequently repeated warning message is more likely to be understood.
A further point not mentioned in the Sorensen, et 31 discussion is the necessity for frequent updates to provide additional, confirming information on the development of the threat. For example, in the hurricane warning program, updates
~
on the status of the storm are successively reduced from every six hours to every hour as the storm approaches the coast. Given the nature of a particular incident, shorter intervals between updates may well be appropriate.
- 9. The specification of the location of the event in the message: the more specific the message is in terms of what geographic areas are being or will be affected by the threat, the greater its effectiveness. I I
1
.: The disse :ry ic". ch unsls .'f.the message: Warning r
Lj messages are A cre effective ifLdisseminated,through
~
multiple channels, thereby increasing the possibility of reaching more people in a shorter time frame. In addition, personal communication of the warning message, for example, by uniformed officials, has been'found to be more effective than media messages or simply sounding a siren.
When taken together and redefined in more hazard-specific, or operational, terms, these ten factors described above can provide a means of objectively evaluating the potential effectiveness of emergency warning messages. For.
example, when focusing on a particular hazard, careful attention must be paid to the " level of detai-led information"
's J ~(no. 6). Application of a non-specific criterion would simply
. bee too generic. I discurs the necessary level of detailed information and the failure of ORO and the SPMC to provide that i level of detail in a later segment of this testimony.
l THE PERRY MODEL l
}
In my emergency warning work with the National Weather j Service, I have' drawn from both my own research and the theoretical work of Ronald Perry and his colleagues in order to )
develop a criteria for the types of information which should be i j
ine'luded in a warning message. Ronald perry is a sociologist j with expertise regarding-response warnings. His work is largely read and relied on in this field. Together with his i
~_-
P m___._____ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
d l
ac;les;Le, ne *ss devel: ped a useful model of the process c,
. i whicn individuals reacP decislens to take protective actions .-
res;:nse to warning messages (perry, Lindell and Greene, 1981) ,
i Fct example, regarding the primary function of a l warn:n; essage, which is to provide information that will enable the receiver to develop an appropriate perception of personal risk from the hazard, perry has focused closely on the actual dimensions of personal risk- "In examining people's perceptions of personal risk, we are concerned with their beliefs about the damage or destruction to their person or property that may result from the impact of the disaster agent" (Id. at 33).
The perry model identifies two key elements in an individual's perception of personal risk: (1) the conception of the severity of impact and (2) the conception of his proximity i
to the area of impact. In my own work with the National Weather Service, I have expanded on these two dimensions.
S.everItv of imoact involves two different but related notions.
First, one must identify the intensity of the hazard. For !
l example, not all hurricanes are equally dangerous--e.g., !
i hurricane Florence which struck the Alacama coast with winds j barely attaining hurricane strength presented a much less ?
i dangerous threat than hurricane Gilbert with its winds approaching 200 mph--nor are all floods of equal intensity, nor all nuclear power station accidents. Second, one must identify the physical impact of the threat itself, in other words, what will actually happen when the impact occurs. For example, what l effect will the hurricane's winds have on typical structures;
7r7m
, r p
l'.'
1
'[
yc
.na- effect w::1 t he hu r ri: e ne '- s st:rm surge have en : D a s t e ',
, :(
structures; wnst effect c.1 the released radiation have':n an
~
g expcsed person?- The provision of'such information in a warning i.essage is necessary to prevent the receivers from developing perceptions :f personal risk on the basis of rumcrs'or b
m uninformed perceptions of risk or safety.
With reg;ic to proximity to the area of imoaci, it must-be recognized that-fea hazards pose an equsi risk over the entire area they affect. For example, the' most dangerous hazard posed by hurricanes is the storm surge, and this hazard is largely limited to the immediate coastal area. An
.1 individual' located in a sturdy building inland has little to fear from the effects of-all but the most intense hurricane.
Thus, not.everyone in a community experiencing a direct hit
+
i 3
from a-hurricane needs to evacuate. Likewise, not everyone within a ten mile radius of the site of a nuclear power station
-accident will necessarily need to evacuate, given the fact that the' entire. radius may not fall within~the exposure plume pathway. To.the extent that not everyone in contiguous
- geographical areas need to take the same protective action, such distinctions, and the reasons for them, must be made
-explicit in the warning message.
Three factors are identified by perry which facilitate the taking of protective action are the following:
- 1. The identification of an appropriate and effective protective action.
am o O
i i
l l 1 I
Tte ex::tence :f an ind:r:du31 Or farily erergency p'.Sn.
{
- 3. A social context in which the family is together r l 1 otherwise accounted for at the time of the
-rergency The necessity of providing appropriate protective action recommendations in emergency warning messages has already been discussed and is a subject of essentially unanimous consensus in the emergency warning field.
However, the existence of an ir;dividual or f amily plan
- s problematic for large portions of the warned population because, as with individual psychological characteristics, this is often regarded as an uncontrollable factor in the public's response. A traditional method utilized to promote such individual and family preparedness is the development and distribution of hazard awareness materials. The research results on the efficacy of such materials is mixed.
w x- .osg.- s 1. A, , u ypu -
pogarding ..hc social .vnuext b pect, it is routine in the hurricane warning progran to adopt a strategy of preparing the threatened population for the possibility of evacuation early in the developing threat. A hurricane, unlike some other hazards--e.g., tornadoes, earthquakes, etc.--provides fairly !
long warning lead times. During the early watch phase--within about thirty-six hours before landfall--we regularly issue messages urging the public to begin making plans in case evacuation becomes necessary at a later time. Specifically, we suggest that people decide where they would go if they had to 1
i
- 4" QE*
% @& q*lg"g3 l
IMAGE EVAL.UATION b, i
/g Y 9tf/ 't TEST TARGET (MT-3)
/ f($g gj?
~
/(4,
% ,// #
g?fffz- @ ($jp kegf
+ pp <*
l.0 Q?
u ua g=u E
t at l,l f I.8
==
l 1.25 1.4 I.6
- 150mm >
d 6" >
A *>
A m p%
'Wp 4+ ,
//%s 6p 3 //N'% 4,N 19
//
< p % ;.;
o . 47 ,
-go s
?
e j[
gp ,
e Scuste, wha
- they'wculd ha/e to take with ther, etc. :- " -
g y :17 we attempt : encourage the development Of individual r
'~~
family plans during the earls chases of a cotential emersency, a
- per;;d in which no specific protective actions are yet necessery. Although a thirty-six hour lead time, as de.;ribed above, may be unlikely under certain accident scenarios, a similar strategy can nonetheless be utilized to foster the development of personal preparedness during the early phcses of
'he accident.
Significantly, this was not done during the Seabrook exercise in June of 1988. I u _ .i .sc* + ' % , c t .. c.& e k, RetN[or_ a moment-- to t he exi+te .ca of a fami+y
-plea", pa &,t h olyl it is well established that people evacuaten as family units. As such, to the extent that evacuation plans presume
.that this may not be possible, it becomes imperative to provide 4f'~h)
+
sufficient information in warning messages to assure the population that actions are being taken to assure the safety of all individ;als in the threatened area. However, the effectiveness of warning messages containing information persuading parents to evacuate without their children, as is supposed in the Seabrook Plan for Massachusetts Communities, is very problematic.
For example, during i he evacuation for Hurricane Iva in Hawaii in November, 1982, there was a good deal of confusion and anxiety caused by the issuance of warnings which did not persuasively and clearly inform parents as to the evacuation procedures for school children. Many parents would not leave the evacuation area until they had collected their children (n)
%_./ regardless of the fact that evacuation was intended to proceed with parents ant going to the schools.
- H E 7 1 :5 T O!1 "LE'/EL OF DETAILED I!1 FORMAT:0:1" Having discussed the eierents in an individual's ge: cept :n of risk and these factors which facilitate the !
- akir: Of protective actions, I will expound on number six of Dr. "._let;'s ' checklist" which pertains to the level of detailed infctmation in a warning message. In my opinion, there are seven essential cieces of informat_ inn which must be communicated in an emergency warning message in order to attempt te enable all members of a population to develop an appropriate perception of personal risk and to take appropriate protective actions to that perceived risk (Carter, 1988).
- 1) The message must clearly identify the nature o'f the hazard. In this case, the emergency messages must n.ake clear references to the hazard of radiation exposure. It is this hazard, after all, which underlies the reason for issuing the message in'the first place. All additional information in the message must relate directly to this hazard.
- 2) The message must clearly identify the time frame in which exposure to radiation will occur or is forecast to occur. Dr. Mileti was correct in pointing out that this information is necessary to provide the public with guidance on when protective actions should be completed in order to avoid radiation exposure.
- 3) The message must clearly identify the geographical areas at risk to radiation exposure. This portion of the message should reiterate the boundaries and scope of the EpZ '
and also emphasize areas within this zone that are at higher ,
risk because of current or forecast wind conditions.
I l
l 1
4). The Tessage must clearly assess how severe the f a s ;.
Lt :adiet;on :s er is forecast-to be. The mere s;atement that a
\
[ ' :elease has. occurred gives the public no information by which
- assess their risk.
- 5) In conjunction with the above, the message should sis: contain information regarding the effect of exposure which
- rrespends to the level of radiation. This effect should be stated'in terms of the short or long health effects of the i
exposure. Simple comparisons of the exposure to other sources of exposure (i.e., cigarette smoking) without an explicit ref erence to health ef f ec'.s does not give the public the detailed information required to develop an appropriate perception of personal rfsk.
- 6) If the release har roc already occurred, the
.[~
\
message must specify the level of certainty regarding the cccurrence of the release of radiation. -(Again, if the release has occurred, numbers four and five would be applicable.) A tentative or amiguous statement is obviously not as effective as one which clearly states the chances, if known, of a radiation release.
- 7) The, message must contain recommendations for l protective actions. Further, these recommendations must be )
)
explained within the context of the hazard--exposure to radiation. That is, the message should explain how taking the protective action would limit, reduce or avoid exposure to radiation. If the same protective actions are not being recommended for all persons within the EPZ, the message must
( (
__ - _-______-___ _ - _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ __a
r.;;..,
2:ste try p;pu 3 ::n3 seemin ly at equal r:sk 3:e ---
r.; idvised to take the same actions or, why some populat:rns s a- greater risk than others.
In the early phases of a ize :p;ng risk, the messages should contain the necessary
- _
- 3: :n that will allow the public to begin preparing for 5 scustion, if that becomes required. Also, if evacuation is
_equ; red in a context in which families cannot evacuate as a
..: :he message must provide information which will assure
- rents that their children are being sufficiently cared for
-.d that someone is preventing or minimizing the childrens'
.:; sure to radiation.
- n terms of general message characteristics, the erer ency messages should, to the extent possible, reflect the
- 11aboration of a number of sources. This is especially true
( un protective actions are being recommended.
e In the case at
.f, at a minimum, the messages should reflect the
. ..~aboration of the response organizations involved in an
. cident at the Seabrook nuclear station: the State of New
-ia mp s hi r e , the St. ate of Massachusetts and the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization.
Also, the messages should be both internally consistent snd consistent with the messages issued by other agencies or
' organizations.
" Internally consistent," as stated above, means that the statement in the message which describes the threat of radiation exposure is consistent with the statement which describes the appropriate level of concern. " Consistency with other messages," means that protective action recommendations should be consistent across jurisdictions. In the situation
r n + : + I . T .m re :rrendati:n3' differ for legitimate r e s s o ris , theie D
? a s :".3 T.ust~be explained. 7:r exa ple, during:the June
\
\
+ +r::se; the seemingly. llegical closing times of contiguous
- ea hes in the Seabrook Ep2 should have been
- explained.to the l 1 1
.;t.;:.
i The Tessages should also be repeated' frequently and be frequent *y updated. _
It is recognized that the frequency with
.thich a single message is repeated is controlled by the media e
and not by the issuing agency or organization. However, it is within the control of the issuing agency or organization to frequently update the emergency information to be provided to the public by the media.
Finally, emergency messages should be issued to the public through a number of channels to ensure wide and timely
/ dissemination. In addition, the same information issued to the public'should be disseminated through the many channels that are used. In other words, the messages which are disseminated through EBS broadcast should also be given to all other channels. .Similarly, messages disseminated to the Media Center should be disseminated through EBS. Failure to do this could cause confusion,among the public, since not all members of the public will have access to the same set of information. While face-to-face communication has been found to be most effective, we realize that this channel is impractical in the context of many hazards, such as tornadoes, flash floods and nuclear power accidents.
l i
f- k, l l 1 1
I.
1 - -
_. EVAL.'AT :CN OF THE 5FMC EB5 MESSAGES
'J s i n g the rde's and standards set forth earlier an d, j
- - particular, the "seven pcint checklist" I have just desc
- bed which concerns the level of detailed information, I hste e"aluated the suggested EBS messages contained in the SFMC. All the messages contained in this packet are designated as " Amendment 4," with the exception of the " prerecorded Generic Alerting Message," which is labelled as " Amendment 3."
These SFMC messages are attached to this testimony.
In evaluating these messages, I understand that they are intended to be merely suggestive of the types of messages that may be issued in the event of an accident at the Seabrook nuclear power station. The use of such pre-prepared statements is common practice among many emergency response stations. I further understand that later versions may be in existence i after this testimony is written. If this is tht case, I would like to review these later messages and amend or alter any part of this testimony that would be affected by changes in the content of the SpMC messages.
Because these messages are only suggestive of the type to actually be issued, I have not focused on literal and word specific problems. Rather, there are a number of fundamental problems which occur repeatedly throughout the messages. I I
i focus on these. l 1
l
- 1) A large number of the messages consistently fail to l j
i give instructions to all members of the public within the EpZ. I In terms of the SpMC, the general population (excluding those
-u-i
)
l l
i i
E. :
- nitir_
- dhs such as sch::ls> .hespitsis and nursi'ng hrmes 3
[N . appears :::fre; divided -int: frur groups: 1) boaters, 2)' teach l
(N,)~' <I ani wifdlife refuge visitors, 3) residents.cf' Salisbury and 1.restury and 4)' residents of Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury.
snd ';ew uTvg rt. In a Site Area Emergency in which no sheltering is being advised (Attachments 8 through 11) boaters and/0r' beach and wildlife refuge visitors are instructed to leave.the area. ' However, the two groups of residents are given no instructions and, more importantly, are not told why they have not been given instructions while others in the EpZ have been given instructions. The effect of this, in my opinion, would be to cause. confusion and raise the. level of anxiety among these groups. Further, in those cases where Salisbury and Amesbury have been instructed to shelter (Attachments 12
/
i and 13) or to evacuate (Attachments-18 through 21) but the remaining communities have not been so instructed, the messages give'no reason for this differentiation. As stated above, if population groups seemingly at equal risx are:not being told to take the same protective actions, some explanation for this differentiation must be given to avoid confusion and anxiety.
- 2) Except as an option for a catastrophic accident, Attachments 19 and 21) in those cases ~where a radiation release into the air'is reported (Attachments 7, 11,13 and 17), no statements are given at all as to the actual or forecast severity of the release or to the potential health effects of the release. Further, there is no statement in these messages as to whether or when such information might be made available.
p .:
- C.._ _ _ - . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
l
- :: Tessage .0 Oslling f:r protective act ?ns ::/=:
- -. -_; dance :: the res:fer.ts as to hew to prepare fer future
- .;ns which may be required. The only references are to the
- e-e ergency information wh;ch may or may not be readily ec+;.3
- 1+.
- f such information is, indeed, unavailable, these re : dents are left with no information on future preparedness 9-fs. M :eover, to the extent that such information is
- c;;able but is inconsistent, incomplete or confusing,
- ss;2ents are still not able to develop an appropriate 7.e::eption of personal risk. Further, there is no mention of
~ ceach and wildlife refuge visitors are to obtain such
.c.f:rmation during the Alert phase of the emergency.
In summary, these suggested messages are incomplete,
.::k Clarity and certainty and, are generally haphazard in
.c:ms of the information they give to the various pop lation 1 :::/ps in the EpZ. They do not seem to have been written in systematic manner to address the criteria required of a essage that will be capable of enabling all members of the EpZ population to develop an appropriate perception of their personal risk in terms of the threat of radiation exposure. As a result, as written, these messages are more likely to create confusion among the public than to provide constructive guidance on the nature of the threat and how to avoid its effects.
1 D. EVALUATION OF THE JUNE, 1988 SEABROOK EXERCISE EDS MESSAGES While the SpMC messages are suggestive and may or may not be actually used, the messages released during the June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise were, in fact, released and, thus, can 1 \
Lm___.___.__.___ _ . _ . _
- e +1 .;t:ed .- de ~- Sec a ;se e resident ^r *-
/isitnr ne ie :::rk Ep: :sr . ster :: e :ner New H3.Tpshire or Mass 3chuse *.:
e ; ; e. . regardless Of the siste in which he or she is physically i:;sted, these T.essages can ce compared with other information ce;n; released by other players in the exercise to evaluate the exten: :: wh::n information given to the public is consistent end : lear.
The meterial used in conducting this evaluation include: 1) the " Exercise Report" produced by FEMA and dated t
September 1, 1988, 2) the set of News Releases prepared by New Hampshire Yankee, 3)the set of News Releases and EBS messages prepared by the New Hampshire Office of Emergency Management,
- 4) the set of News Releases prepared by the Office of the Governor of the State of Maine and 5) the set of News Releases and EBS messages prepared by the Massachusetts Offsite Response organization of New Hampshire Yankee. Portions of the FEMA Exercise Report which I have focused on are Table 3 (Significant Event Log), Table 7 (Summary of Protective Action Recommendations and Protective Action Decisions) and Table 8 (EBS Messages), Table 9 (summary of News Releases). It should be noted that the times and numbers recorded in the actual warning messages often vary from those listed in the table. In addition, I have read certain portions of the depositions of Richard Donovan and Gregory Howard.
As I will elaborate in greater detail further on, the SPMC makes what I consider to be a fallacious distinction between EBS messages and News Releases. The only sensible way to evaluate the warning messages is to evaluate both sets together.
l k
4 4
.e firs: ::/ :t? pr::ler is the fact 'na' '
in:.e -e 4;+r cas de:;3 red ?: ?:09 A", 'JH'i ORO Jid net release any
-f r ation t: he pub 11: until 11:22 AM (ORO News Release
- . During this peri d Of silence for Massachusetts residents a ml
.s: :::- :f ever tw: hours. New Hampshire not only had
.ssued informa :en an 5 cur before, but had already ordered the Harp'on and Seac::ck beaches to be closed (10:58 AM). This is a glaring example of inconsistent messages between adjacent
- jurisdictions wh;ch can and do create tremendous confusion and anxiety among the public. To make matters worse, the 11:22 AM NHY ORO message T,ade no reference to the fact that the New Hampshire beaches had been closed nor did it contain any information concerning recommended actions for visitors to the Massachusetts beaches or wildlife refuge. Thus, in the initial j
- phases of the emergency, where beach goers on nearby or adjacent beaches have left and are leaving, there was no information available to Massachusetts residents and visitors i
a except that issued by New Hampshire which made no reference at }
all to the Massachusetts portion of the EPZ. (
The NHY ORO EBS message #1, issued at 12:25 PM, as well j as the other warning messages issued during the Site Area Emergency, suffer from a number of inadequacies. First, while the initial message calls for the closing of the Massachusetts beaches and wildlife refuge as " precautionary measures," it contains no statement regarding the level of concern which residents of the area should have. In fact, none of the \
I 1
emergency messages issued by NHY ORO during the Site Area !
{
l w __-_--__
1 ..
b p
L l
E erger:7 eke ary rec mrendati:n-to *he resident- ;f the t
(~' '< s t a c h u s e t t s - E p 2 ,. : : ".e r than to refer to the pre-emergency
\
pit;.ic information. TP.ere is': b'T.uch presumptive weight given
- '.a'Oelendar or flyer which may or may not be available..
In arcri -httugh the'first five hours of'the developing erergency, NHY ORO provided absolutely no substantive inf- .ation to the Massachusetts residents concerning the potential severity of the developing emergency. That is, NHY-
! OKO provided no information that.would allow Massachusetts residents to develop an. appropriate perception of personal risk.
Second, during this period, two significant actions were taken by-New Hampshire officials which indicated a level of concern: the State of Emergency (at 12:40 pM) and the announcement that schools will hold their students until 5:00 a vi
[-' pM (at approximately tTt$ pM). Neither these actions nor any T'"
related actions ( or non-actions) by Massachusetts.were explained or mentioned to the public by NHY ORO. 'This is another example of inconsistent information being released by adjacent jurisdictions which would cause confusion.and anxiety among the public. As stated earlier, because of the sensitivity of parents to the safety of their children, the failure of NHY ORO to even address this issue during this period represents what I consider to be a fundamental i deficiency in their public information efforts.
Third, the fifth paragraph of Release #3, issued at 12:22, contains the following statement: "The closing of the Wildlife Refuge, beaches and boating areas ... .
The i g
preceding paragraph, however, only refers to the closing of the J
.;_d.;:e F.ei; e ant :.e :ss:nts. N where in the essa e :.'
- .e:e any explici; s t a t arer . is :: which beating areas are *
- e 21: sed. In fact. exp;;::: : instructions on the 5 mile Marine safe:S Cone were apparenti; n: issued for another hour. (News Releasa #4.)
The publ;; inf0rmation inadequacies noted during the Site Area Emergency continue into the General Emergency. The ESS message released at 2:20 FM (News Release #7) contains a number of serious deficiencies in regard to the "seven point" criteria developed earlier. First, while the message states that the emergency could produce a contaminating accident, there is no rationale given for the fact that residents of Salisbury and Amesbury are being advised to evacuate while the remainder of the Massachusetts EPZ is being advised to shelter
,, in place. This ambiguous statement regarding the projected severity of the accident is the first statement which indicates that the public should be concerned about the accident.
However, :hroughout the emergency, residents of all six communities had already been told, in essence, that they were in areas of near equal risk by the fact that they were named as being within the 10 mile EPZ and no distinctions among the communities had been made. In order to avoid confusion and anxiety among the public, an explanation of why the distinction is now being made should have been contained in the message.
A second problem (in number 7) is that the statement regarding the possibility of a contaminating event is never repeated in subsequent messages. That is, after raising the public's level of concern by mentioning possible contamination, I t
1 1
y
\-
- W. : ;PJ.11:erally.dr:ps. he surfect'and makes eirtually nc
.[)
KJ -
ent:en.of the1 actual.;tt pr:fected severity of the accident throughs theLremainder of the first day.. Again, the effect of 1;
this is an increase-in confusionJand anxiety.
i A th:rd problem, which would be exacerbated-by the. .
statement of possible contamination, is the inconsistent )
information given.in the message-concerning the status of ;
school' children in Salisbury and Amesbury.- In the fourth paragraph on page 2 of News Release #7, a generic statement is !
made that schools in these two communities are being evacuated and'that parents can pick up.their children at the designated l .. reception centers.
L However, later in that same message (p. 5)
'isteners are explicitly informed that school children in Salisbury and Amesbury are being kept at school. There is
)I further confusion with respect to information regarding I
w rc i e, , J , ~ ,, A 4- %Hrr9
" ::bu rype r t children. h -.N4
" Officials" are apparently protecting the children but it is not stated who these officials are or what authority they have The inconsistency and vagueness in this message is a prime example of the type that can cause serious problems in the public's response. This problem would have become very serious if an actual accident had occurred because, throughcut the remainder of the first day, no other clarifying statements concerning the status of school children were made. The only further mention of school children was a 4 OS generic paragraph in message number 11, r e le a s ed a t -tT$i p . m. ,
over ninety minutes after the inaccurate and inconsistent message number 7 had been released. I have already discussed m i.__ _i _ _.. . _ _ _ _ _ _ .- _
+ 1:.i: .f garerta; 3+ :.-'..-
. re;ard;n; ne .23.e f +
- -: if cn;.iren and, .r -.:s exerrise, *:FY ?] nas fa.;e"
.; r ic i) :s adequate;; ad;ress *n;3 response .ss;e.
- -deed, :ne only say to correct a cad E3S messa e is
~;.- a ;;:i :n+. A.
s.cseq;ent warning message shoJ11 '. ave teen
- 35.ed ; redistely after tne confasing and inconsistent essage
.;mcer ~.
- inety ninutes is much too long. Within thar time period, a :renendoas anoJnt of confusion would nave ceen generated.
l
- . ave read pages 44 tnrough 65 of Richard Donovan's deposition, ta<en on January 11, 1989, regarding exactly this
- ssue.
- n Mr. Sonovan's opinion, this problem would nave been m;t; gated and apparently rendered less than fatal because people would nave called the rumor control number for clarification or .
( cna: "snarp" alsteners would have figured out what the '
- nformation was really supposed to mean. I totally disagree witn Mr. Donovan's characterization of tnis problem and with nis quic< "fix" approacn. It is simply illogical to think the 1 proolem would remedy itself in this manner. First, only a certain percentage of listeners might think to call the rumor I
)
s control number. ' Assuming that lines were free and that the !
{ 1 rumor control personnel were knowledgeable as to the inaccuracy, ) i i
it is conceivable that tnose callers would have received t corrected information in a reasonable amount of time. This is no care nowever. You still would have two, three, or even four different messages "out there" and being repeated to others:
O
- _se 4.;e,.n; :ne.scro:^. :;..dr+r 4-r+
/mi
, e v a :; 3 : + i; -- e (v; +1.+'.;n; :ne; e;_. ce sne.:ersi:
- se ce;ieving ney aere 4
2 .- :.n; to te evac;a:e;; and : nose nav n; no ;ies anar o ze..s:+,
- v. + r off.::a1 information is issued witn a ser:oas flaw
- f in;s na:;re, :1e only "fix" is to correct it. ORO failei to do ::;s.
- n addition, FEMA's eneory that it somehow fixes
\
1 : se.i Ra<es no sense.
A fourtn proolem with message number 7 concerns residents a;:noat transportation. :n tne 2:20 p.m. message, they are told
- o asi: for an announcement stating what time buses will begin traveling emergency roates. In fact, such an announcement was not madeu,..i anti; almost tnree nours later (News Release #12,
<_ ;ae...
r e _ e a s e d M)+Mr-p-re . ) .
.. 6 cv + E ed
,n That is a long time to wait. Such a
/
(, t;me lapse ;s totally inadequate and inappropriate. To 1
complicate matters, this bus route announcement states that the ouses sill begin picking up residents of Amesbury at 4:05 PM, yet tne message wasn't even released until over an hour later.
As witn tne issue of the school children, no timely or adequate ,
clarification or explanation was released to the public. !
l In summary, the information provided by NHY ORO during tne June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise fails to meet the standard for emergency warning messages.
For example, they nave displayed the characteristics including inconsistency, inaccuracy, lack of clarity, uncertainty, and inadequate provision of detailed information.
f-'s With tne exception of the single reference to the possibility of v}
l
- ' ;nat n; 3:::dsn- ..: essages Only Obliquely .ske
- +:ence :: he ".a:E:d +: z3 e--exposure to radiation. The references to an, ;re irsme f:: taking protective actions
,i repeated calls for 'immedia:e" evacuation. The messages
.. :: expla:n why ar::us eress within the EPZ are' being
- sed to take differen
- .::::ective actions.
With the riept;:n of the statemen- :n the contaminating accident, the
- rmation g;ves n ind :ation of the actual or projected
,ce::ty cf the accident. NHY ORO released virtually no
- ation on the effect Of exposure to the released radiation. l
_le one message compares :he one hour exposure rate to smoking, contains no information on the effects of this exposure.
-: Ween the beginning of the incident and the actual radiation
.elease, NHY ORO made no statements concerning the likelihood or j :ertainty of the incident developing into a serious accident. !
I n
information concerning protective actions, NHY ORO did not exclain why different portions of the EPZ were being advised to take different actions. At no time during the Alert or Site- j a
+4 pwebc Area Emergency phases of the accident did ilHY ORO urge to begin 1 j
q preparing for the possibility of a serious accident which would require evacuation. ,
Indeed, as Salisbury and Amesbury were n t_
being evacuated, NHY ORO still did not urge 4%f sheltering communities to begin developing personal plans for evacuatior .
Finally, the critical information regarding the safety of school chiIdren was totally inadequate and inconsistent.
In addition to the level and type of detailed I information, the NHY ORO messages are also woefully inadequate with respect to general message attributes. For example, the 1 J
1 1
g exi agisJ d: .:t take.sdvantage :f.the similari.3ct Ons Of New WN ^l j ua-"'"..:e1during the Geners: Emergency phase in' order to 1'(
a r:11300 rate:the re: mrended pr:tective actions. The critical
- aneral Emergency ESS message is internally inconsistent 1 regardi.g sc:::ns being taken to protect-school children and is.
inconsistent with later assages regarding the severity of the-f radiation release. In addition, ear. lier ORO messages are inconsistent with the actions. advised by New Hamps' hire officials regarding.the closing of beach' areas. The frequency with which the messages were updated.was grossly inadequate, as evidenced..
by the excessive delay in; announcing the bus arrival times in
'the evacuated communities. Finally, the dissemination channels utilized to issue the messages were not well coordinated as will be discussed in more detail in the next section.
A
- In my opinion, the emergency public information effort of NHY ORO during the June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise was akin to
" going through the motions" of providing critical information to the public. The information provided was inadequate to compensate for the myriad of pre-existing individual fears or misperceptions regarding personal risk during a nuclear power station accident and, certainly, was not adequate to guide an orderly puclic response to the accident. Certainly this effort was not adequate to guide an orderly public response to the accident scenario. Indeed, aspects of the Seabrook Exercise with respect to the issuance of emergency warnings would have (
exacerbated those fears and misconceptions.
]
/' I 1
- _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ . __ _. - _ - = - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ - - _ _ _ .. .
i l
1 i
- 5 CU55 : : ': :F THE ALE;7ACY OF THE PROCEDURES SPEC'F:ED a; '
THE 5FMC AND THE FROCEDURE3 JT:1::ED DURING THE JUNE, '3a; cEA??DCK EXEEC:SE TO EN57EE TME !!MELY DISSEMINATION Or 1
- 'NSISTENT INFORMA!!CN FR:.t" '::E OEO TO THE pUBLIC. i A. BACKGROUND k l
In the procedures Outlined in the SPMC, the resp ns:bility fcr developing and disseminatir.g emesqency information to the public is divided, within NHY ORO, cetween
- he Public Notification Coordinator (PNC) and the Public Information Adviser (PIA) The pNC has the responsibility for I developing and disseminating EBS messages and the PIA has the i
responsibility for developing and disseminating News Releases.
Additional emergency information regarding plant conditions 1 will be developed and disseminated independently by New Hampshire Yankee. Because two organizations and three positions have designated responsibility for the development and dissemination of emergency public information, this organizational structure can be characterized as less than-cohesive or centralized.
In many cases there are valid reasons for designing or tolerating such a decentralized organization. First, there may be a legitimate distinction between " technical experts" and those who operationally respond to the forecasts or projections of these experts. Thus, the organization of the provision of emergency public information may, in these cases, be legitimately divided into technical and operational functions.
In fact, this model is utilized in varyir.g forms in both the hurricane and earthquake warning programs. Further, it provides a legitimate rationale for the distinction between the i
l information functions of NHY and NHY ORO.
'l 4
i a
i l
E y
A sec nd ;usfif :3 .:- f:: a decentralized infarmat. -
4;s rgan::stion :s :n th: e :sses where 13 cal government jurisdictions have the s: led _;;h:rit'y to or'er or advise protective actions. To isry:ng degrees, natural hazard warning systems are als character::ed by such jurisdictional decentralization.
Mcwever, the distincti:n drawn in the SPMC between the functions of the PNC and !".e ?!A falls into neither of these categories. Rather, the di/ici0n of these functions appears to be based on what-IJc0nsider :: be a fallacious distinction between dissemination channels-- .e., between the EBS system and News Release' distribution at the Media Center. In the absence of uniform dissem nation channels, it is less likely
,, that consistent, non conflicting information will'be disseminated.
B. EVALUATION OF THE SPMC AND JUNE, 1988 SEABROOK EXERCISE PROCEDURES From my. viewpoint, emergency information is emergency information is ..., whether it is laballed as a News Release or an EBS Message. As such, these smorgency information messages should be uniformly disseminated to the public. SPMC procedures, however, provide' for the disscaination of an EBS Message to all local broadcast media station: whereas a News Release is distributed only to those broadcast media in attendance at the j Media Center. Thus, there is no provision to assure that all local broadcast media stations receive the same information in the same time frame. It seems that the drafters of the SPMC did not understand either the importance of uniform dissemination or the role that EBS can play in ensuring uniformity.
l
_L--_-_._L-._--___-. - _-. - - _ . - - . - _ - - _ _ _ _ - - __ -
~~iee;. -
b--- "e ::::[ : - -he App' gr , y e.
l
-"e NHREEP, there seers :: ce s :erdency to regard the EBi
- e- as some " magical" rys.er : de used in only the direst :
- cumstances. To the c:n:rary :.e EBS system is nothing more that a cisserination syster :.;;r assures that all local tr:sdcast media stations receive :he same message in the same ti e frame. When activcted at the 'ocal level, that is its only !
function. Since this unifor and timely dissemination of emergency information is a fundamental requirement of an effective warning system, the argument can be made quite i strongly that all emergency information released during a nuclear power station accidant--whether coming from the power st'ation, utility response organizations, state governments or local governments--should, in the absence of alternative uniform ,
j and timely dissemination systems, be disseminated over the EBS system. The requirement is the uniform and timely dissemination of emergency information; the EBS system is merely a tool to meet that requirement.
l The failure of the SPMC procedures to recognize this fundamental requirement and, indeed, the institutionalization l
1 and implementation of procedures which make its accomplishment impossible creates a situation in which it is highly unlikely if not impossible that all local broadcast media stations and, thus, the public, can receive the same information in the same time frame. Examination of Table 9 (Summary of News Releases) 1 in the FEMA Exercise Report makes this clear. As this table 1
l indicates, the delay in releasing EBS messages to the Media Center was in the neighborhood of an hour in the cases of NHY 1
l i
I
- .:e: r e.eise :'; 2 - and __. T.e results Of these de.9ys :- . 2
- v/ e :e e n - t h e ". a p n a : a r d ; .c : . r e : f Id and new informati,n '/e:
selected 1: cal br:adcas: ed:a stations which would further increase the confusion :f the public and inhibit the public's
- rde; , res : :e :: : .e a::: dent. In fact, these delays were neted in the FE..A Exe::ise Report (Objective #13, Issue #2, page
- 19) :n my :pini:n, :hese delays and the resulting inconsistency and incompleteness :f the information which would have been broadcast is ind: cat;ve of egregious error in planning.
A further consequence of the SPMC's artificial distinction between News Releases and EBS Messages is the fact that the NHY CRO staff was consistently unable to print the messages on the correct forms, thus apparently confusing the Media Center and Joint Telephone Information Center Personnel (FEMA Exercise Report, Objective #13, Issue #3, page 218).
In sum, neither the procedures contained in the SPMC nor the manner in which they were executed during the June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise were adequate to ensure the uniform and timely dissemination of emergency information to the public from NHY ORO.
III. THE ADEQUACY OF THE COORDINATION OF EMERGENCY PUBLIC INFORMATION BY AND BETWEEN THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, THE NHY ORO, THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS AND LOCAL MASSACHUSETTS GOVERNMENTS AND'SEABROOK STATION.
A. BACKGROUND The primary case for the necessity of close coordination among the agencies and organizations involved in the response to an emergency situation lies in the need for the provision of consistent information to the public. As Dr.
":. -. nas Itated .n 2.: pre.::us test m:nv, the pub;;; ::
exp; red, :n an emer: enc , :: a m:x of information from a wide ar:ety of scurces. :'.; ; c :f this information will be 7n radictory and muer :f it will simply be in error. It is per=' ' hen, the-
/e. me information disseminated by
':ft: cia:" sources be as accurate and consistent as possible.
It is this informa:ior, ef:er all, which has the highest credibility with the public. If this information is perceived te be inconsistent, contradictory or in error, then the public is left with no credible source to which it can turn to determine an appropriate level of personal risk and, hence, no means to determine app Opriate protective actions. I touch upon this point in my earlier discourse on the inconsistent school information disseminated in release number 7
{ In my on-si:e wcrk for the National Weather Service during hurricane threa.3, the task of coordinating the evacuation orders issued by the myriad array of county, municipal and, en Occas;0ns, state governments is one which typically consumes the licn's share of my time. In such emergency situations, coordination means, quite simply, j discussions and.negotie::ons among decision makers. In most cases, because of limi;'d communication systems, this means one-on-one telephone c. ersations with numerous local officials. The work . .: u consuming, tiring and at times onerous, but it is : - thit is critical to guiding an i orderly public respon :: is also a task that is greatly facilitated by the pr: .3 falishment of a mechanism to accomplish such cc:'..
t
m..
, ' l P
" J
'a:
ne -f :ts : - 7- : hat has : me eu
- f -- .
j i::ence reseere'r -is . - "
)
'I .fluential efficials in +r l
, \' ..eescuation situat_:- :s .. iffi::.als, at the county and l 1
uni:1;al levels; .f
.:. faced by-NHY ORO in attempting TJ. e : -
- ;.sr f::- 3r emergen:- *
. .. . .. c r t : k- - i .. e . , the non-participate:n :'y Massa:.'.:-- :vernmental agencies--makes this task of the pr :- It- - C=ent of a coordinating.
mechanism extremely ::" 1.. a_ eit difficult. '
However, it is a given in NRC planning.;u;5e_.nes that state and local governments will resp;r - - *
..c emergency. As such, NHY ORO should have taken the af :ers:':ioned matter into account when it drew up. coordination r.P i -nd procedures.
B. EVALUAT*0N OF ~'n 5FMC AND THE JUNE, 1988 SEABROOK EXERCISE The SPMC has provia..,
for notification and communication j(- functions with both the st = and local governments of-Massachusetts through.the Offsite Response Director, the Massachusetts State Liaisons and the Local EOC Liaison .
Coordinator. These functions were tested or " simulated" during the June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise through the use of FEMA Control Cells.
Although' interface and coordination with Massachusetts could only be exercised through simulation, given the facts set-forth earlier regarding the inconsistencies between protective action recommendations of the state of New Hampshire and NHY ORO with respect to beach closinc and the failure of ORO to collaborate protective action recctmendations by referencing similar actions being taken in New Hampshire, I believe that
(, l
____.,.____,m___.__-__.____ _ _ - - -
a- .a' cdequate :: rd;na----
- , ::: x;;h an) respondi'? =*a -
cu;d nave been h gniy - n . . .e _ ; and zery problematic.
In f3.rt the 5FMC does not appear :: even recognize the need for the
- cerdination and collaboration Of protective actions with the state -f New Hampshire. Fi;ure 2.0-1 in the SpMC has designated New Hampshire as an integral part of the Offsite Response Organization but indicates that New Hampshire will provide "respense information" rather than " coordination." Indeed, the facts described indicate nc degree of adequate coordination.
It is obvious that the actions taken by state and local officials in New Hampshire and the protective actions they are recommending to New Hampshire residents and visitors will obviously be heard in the Massachusetts portion of the EPZ, and will also impact the actions of both the Massachusetts residents Thus, it is imperative that close coordination of e
and visitors.
these actions be maintained throughout the development of 'an accident at the Seabrook Station. This was not evidenced in the Seabrook Exercise.
nificantly, protions of the SPMC which deal with this matter seem spa e. The only real " coordinating" directive appears in section 2. ' of the implementing procedures. In short, section C of the "che list" calls for the ORO Public Information Coordinator to " denti. " himself to the state information representative Support for MA's finding on the Exercise Report (p.18, SC.5), that the "Public . ormation Coordinator / Adviser is responsible for assisting comme alth and
-3B-1 i
i l
J
k 1 cel 7:vernment,gificialr with public information and review I
- ntr:1 activities",
Q }1 is pu::14c;Nlight in of the abbreviated manner in which coordina::. n is dealt Qn .
( :n summary, the June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise did not establic.* that NHY ORC 13 ine capability to coordinate protective action recemrendations with any governmental agencies within Massachusetts a, also, demonstrated that NHY ORO does not have the capability :: establish and maintain such coordination with the 5 tate of New Hampshire.
IV. THE AvEQUACY CF TME FROCEDURES IN THE SpMC AND THE PROCEDURES ACTUALLY UT!L: ED DURING THE JUNE, 1988 EXERCISE FOR THE HANDLING OF THE NEWS MEDIA.
A. BACKGROUND In the nine on-site hurricane threats I have observed or worked on the greatest problem faced by local EOC operations
- g ~g
(
} was the disruptive influence of the news media, both broadcast and print. For example, in the Dade County, Florida EOC during hurricane David in 1979, the media essentially turned the operational portion of the EOC into a television studio. Local officials were forced to retreat to a back office to direct the county's response. Similar situations, though not as extreme, were experienced in Mobile, Alabama during hurricane Frederick in 1979, in Galveston, Texas during hurricane Alicia in 1983 and in Houston, Texas during hurricane Danny in 1985.
Instructively, no such difficulties were experienced in Dade k County during hurricane Kate in 1985, due in large part to the development of comprehensive plans for handling the news media after the disruptien experience by officials during the l i
\s_/ hurricane David inc. dent.
W:"5:ut tully devel: red plans, the news edia *: 12
':ec- e 3 disrupt.re St re du::n, a high!-/ *isible and
- ntr versial ine: dent. An extreme example of this was the
- nit: 31 press conference held in Beruit, Lebanon by the h arker: nf the TWA flight. The scene quickly turned into a near tiet.
R. EVALUATION NHY, NHY ORO and the state officials from New Hampshire and Massachusetts must anticipate a potentially disruptive and highly charged atmosphere in the Media Center during an actual incident at the Seabrook Station. While the FEMA Exercise Report noted a rather large number of problems which are apparently regarded as minor, my experience with the much less controversial hazard of hurricanes would lead me to conclude that serious credibility problems could arise if the problems noted were repeated during an actual incident.
In my opinion, the haphazard and delayed provision of EBS messages to the Media Center and the confusion of EBS messages with News Releases that wete noted above woul'd certainly be used by the more hostile members of the press as an indication that those in crarge of the Media Center, and the -
only visible representatives of the response agencies and organizations, were unable to adequately respond to the incident, As such, this is a serious problem. When such failures are coupled with the excessive delays between briefinge during periods of rapidly changing developments noted by the FEMA neport (page 219), the lack of regular update briefings by the media relations floor liaison (page 219) and <
3
-.e .s:4 :f sdequete display'~aps' .e:all:rg such Conren ir.f:: a:::n as evacuatiin'r":tes. e;3 cation centers and n *ete::510gical data (page 299), ; *. , situation could become .ery f:
- ense, hostile, disrupt:ve and cer:alnly not c nducive to effectice public response manageren '.
1
~It must be' recognized by NMT and NHY ORO and responding states ~that the news media represen; a critical link with the i'
public and, regardless of how troublesome they may become, it is essential to' continuously provide them with complete, accurate and frequently updated information on the developments of the incident. Media reports can seriously impede the ability of the responding agencies and organizations to effectively guide an orderly public response to the incident.
V. THE ADEQUACY OF THE TRAINING PROVIDED FOR THE NHY ORO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION COORDINATOR kw A. BACKGROUND As the official responsible for a timely and coordinated activation of the public Alert and Notification System, development of appropriate EBS messages, and coordination of EBS messages with New Hampshire and Massachusetts state and local officials, the public Notification Coordinator should, at a minimum, have'been exposed to the existing literature on the process by which members of the general public reach decisions on how to respond to emergency warnings, including the types of information that have been found to enhance or encourage such response.
p
- deed. -eo fede:E. E;en::es w;;h -".e cs*
e/: ens'.te experien e ruel;; e er;ency warnings--the Nat :.3'.
.we:ner Service (NWSi and the Federa'. Emergency Management A;ency (FEMA)- -have, for an extended period Of time, both
- er:;r.;;ed the necessity of such ::sining and, as a result, have ::utinely provided such training based on social science
- cses::. On the process of public response to warnings. This
~he NWS training program- " Warning--A Call to Action" was prepared in 1974. The FEMA training program, now presented th:0 ugh its Emergency Management Institute (EMI), consists of T.odules in mote general coarse materials which are contained in, but not necessarily limited to, the following courses: (1)
Evacuation planning and Response Actions Simulation, (2)
Integrated Emergency Management Course / Response and (3)
Radiological Emergency preparedness planning. In addition, a number of these courses are available at sites other than EMI.
- t appears that ORO does not require or provide for this type I of training.
i B. EVALUATION l The Seabrook Training Group's PANS ACTIVATION - MOD 3 course contains not a single reference to either the theory or practice of public response to emergency warnings or to the theory or practice of developing EBS messages. In fact, the entire course relates primarily to the technical procedures i I
required to activate the sirens and the EBS system.
i
l i
1 1
Ir. deed, :n the Depos:::en c: Gregcry Howard, a Em; -f t
[
't'
- H T : E O , F.r . Mcward adrits on pages- 112-113 that; a) he is nct familiar with "the literature on public emergency warning zystems,' b) he is not familiar with "the literature that has decel: ped en ESS messages.and their form," and c) his impression of the best form for an EBS message" has been guided by the pre-formatted messages contained in his packet-I'.sewhere in'his testimony, .Mr. Howard stated that he did not know whc had written the EBS messages in his packet or why certain items'had been included in or omitted from certain messages. In my opinion, Mr. Howard is not qualified to be a
, FNC.
Both FEMA and the NWS consider it sufficiently important for personnel engaged in developing public emergency;
- ( warning messages to undergo training in the theory and practice s
of such messages as to devote considerable resources to such training, yet NHY ORO personnel, and the pNC's in particular, have received no such training.
CONCLUSION In this testimony, I have reviewed the emergency public information procedures contained in the SPMC and the manner in which these procedures carried out in the June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise. In this review, I have focused on five specific issues:
- 1. The adequacy of the emergency messages, 1
- 2. The adequacy of the timely dissemination of
- *' consistent information to the public, t
2 T .e , d e q u a c '; :
-f e ::::d;na : n a.meng the resp:nd:n: 3;en::es and organizations,
- 4. The 3dequacy f -he handling Of the news media and
- 5. The adequacy of the training provided to the Public
- nft: at;on Coordina:Or.
In each issue, I have uncovered fundamental problems
.:: Only in the SFMC procedures, but also in the performance of MMY OFO during the June, 1988 Seabrook Exercise. Further, these fundamental problems are of such magnitude as to call nto serious question the ability of NHY ORO to provide emergency public information that is capable of fostering an rderly public response to an actual accident at the Seabrook nuclear power station. To address these problems, I believe that the-entire SPMC plan and procedure for formulating, coordinating and disseminating public information must be revamped, re-exercised, and then re-evaluated.
REFERENCES:
Perry, R.W., M.K. Lindell, and M.R. Greene (1981),
Evacuation Planning in Emergency Management.
Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books. Sorensen, J.H., B.M. Vcgt, and D.S. Mileti (1987), Evacuation: An Assessment of Planning and Research.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Oak Ridge N*tional Laboratory,
- 0NRL-6376.
nb: Attachments to this testimony are ORO NEWS RELEASES i
i (Attachment 11: SPMC TBS Prescripted Messages (Attachment 2). {
i
\
l l
l
(;
s
. ,-Q .
[ )^
' /-
UNITED STATES 0F AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before'the Administrative Judges:
Ivan W. Smith, Chairman Dr. Richard F. . Cole Kenneth A. McCollom
)
In the Matter of'- ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL
) 50-444-OL PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ) . (Off-Site EP)
OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, EI AL. )
)
(Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2)- ) April 10, 1980
)
f ATTACHMENTS TO TESTIMONY OF T. MICHAEL CARTER ON I BEHALF OF JAMES M. SHANNON, ATTORNEY GENERAf, FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CONCERNING CONTENTIONS JI'13B; JI 27G; JI 36; MAG EX-9 *
-Attachment il: Resume of Dr. T. Micheal Carter Attachment #2: ORO News Releases (numbers 1-15)
Attachment #3: SPMC Prescripted Messages (messages were designated in the SPMC as Attachments 1 - 27)
Department of the Attorney General Nuclear Safety Unit Public Protection Bureau One Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02108 (617) 727-2200 f~
.{
- - _ - - -. _ _ . ._ _ . . . .\
ATTACHMEST 1 /
Q 9) 1 CURRICULUM VITAE l December, 1988 i NAME: T. Michael Carter DATE AND PLACE OF BIRTH: October 27, 1940; Ann Arbor, Michigan ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER:
Corporate Response Group, Inc.
1146 19th Street NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 775-0177 FAX (202) 775-8912 FORMAL EDUCATION:
University of Wisconsin, Madison WI. 1969-1974 (Sociology).
Ph.D. 1977. (Dissertation: "The Effects of Educational Experiences in a Model of Social Allocation.") Advisor:
David L. Featherman.
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. 1967-1969 (Sociology). M.A. (Thesis: "The Radical Right: Sources and Dimensions.") Advisor: Virgil Williams.
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. 1966-1967 (Sociology). B.A.
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. 1962-1963 (Astronomy). No Degree.
University of the South, Sewanee, TN. 1959-1961 (Classical Languages). No Degree.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
1988 - Present Vice President, Human Factors Corporate Response Group, Inc., Washington, DC 1983 - Present Vice President and Director Hazards Management Group, Inc., Tallahassee, FL Principal Investigator of Behavioral Study of public response to hurricane evacuation orders in southeast Louisiana on contract with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1988-1989).
Principal Investigator of Behavioral Study of public response to hurricane evacuation orders in southern Oahu, HI J on contract with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1987-1988). }
1 I
i l
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . __m _
4 Associate Principal Investigator of Behavioral Study of 1 9 public response to hurricane evacuation orders in coastal areas of Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts on contract with l
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1987-1988). l Associate Principal Investigator of Behavioral Study of j public response to hurricane evacuation crders in coastal '
areas of North Carolina on contract with U.S. Army Corps of ,
Engineers (1984-1985)
Associate Principal Investigator of Behavioral Study of public response to hurricane evacuation orders in coastal areas of Mississippi, Alabama and Florida panhandle on contract with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1983-1984).
Instructor for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Emergency Management Institute's course on " Evacuation Planning and Response Actions Simulation." Course segments included: (1) Vulnerability Analysis, (2) Public Response Considerations and Public Information and (3) portions of Evacuation Direction, Control and Warning. (1985-1987)
Lecturer in a series of workshops sponsored by the Florida Health Care Association designed to provide nursing home administrators with technical information on the development of evacuation plans for nursing homes. (1986) 1980 - Present Visiting Fellow Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
- a. 1988 - Present On Contract to National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MC.
Project
Description:
Evaluation of experimental forecast and warning service improvements to state and local emergency management agencies and the aviation industry,
- b. 1986 - 1988 On Contract to National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD.
Project Descriptions:
- 1. Nationwide survey of county and municipal emergency management directors to examine source of weather information, minimal severe weather conditions, and perceived usefulness of proposed new forecast and warning G services.
2
3] 4
- 2. Qualitative evaluation of current National Weather
! Service forecast and warning services for state and loca emergency manogement agencies and development of guidelines for future improvements.
- 3. Development of hurricane evacuation decision-making strategy for state and local officials utilizing FEMA /CoE quantitative evacuation studies, official hurricane forecasts and forecast errors. !
- c. 1985 - 1986 On Contract to National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD.
Project
Description:
Nationwide quantitative evaluation of the National Weather Service's Hazard Awareness and Warning Coordination Program, involving a comprehensive analysis of the activities of 22 field offices.
- d. 1982 - 1985 On Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) Contract to National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD.
Project
Description:
(' Design and implementation of user-oriented aspects of National Weather Service's Hurricane Probability Program, including: (1) development of educational materials, (2) development and conduct of local training workshops for coastal officials and (3) on-site advisory and liaison duty during Hurricane Alicia (Galveston, TX - 1983),
Hurricane Diana (Wilmington, NC - 1984), Hurricane Danny (Houston, TX - 1985), Hurricane Gloria (Wilmington, NC -
1985) and Hurricane Kate (Miami, FL - 1985).
- e. 1980 - 1982 On Contract to NOAA/ Environmental Research Laboratories, Proto-type Regional Observing and Forecasting Service,
- Boulder, CO, Project
Description:
Design, development, implementati a and testing of a l micro-computer data-management syntom to increase the
) efficiency of dissemination of National Weather Service l
severe weather warnings to state and local emergency service agencies.
- O 3
1 M j $'l
,s 1974 - 1980
/ ) Assistant Professor !
(,,/ Department of Sociology i University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
- a. 1977 - 1980 Co-Principal Investigator.
" Community Response to Natural Hazard Warnings."
National Science Foundation Grant #ENV77-01452.
Defense Civil Preparedness Agency Supplementary Grant
- DCPA01-79-C-0214.
National Weather Service Supplementary Grant #NWS/ DOC NA80AAA03283.
Project
Description:
The purpose of this project was to develop an understanding of the processes and factors which govern (1) the response of local emergency service agencies to disaster warnings, (2) the dissemination of disaster warnings to community organizations and the general public and (3) the response of the general public to disaster warnings. To accomplish this, the project included three distinct research programs: (1) laboratory experiments focusing on the decision-making process of individuals and groups of interdependent individuals
[-~s under conditions of continuous information flow, (2) pre-
'N threat and post-threat field studies in twenty-six communities of the communication and coordination linkages between thirty to fifty emergency service ,
agencies and (3) pre-threat and post-threat field studies in the same twenty-six communities of the receipt of and response to hazardous weather warnings of a sample of two hundred households. The hazards examined were hurricanes, tornadoes, flash floods and earthquakes. In addition, on-site monitoring of agency response activities was performed during Hurricane Anita (Port Arthur, TX - 1977), Hurricane David (Miami, FL - 1979),
Hurricane Frederic (Mobile, AL - 1979) and Hurricane Allen (Corpus Christi, TX - 1980).
- b. 1975 - 1976 Principal Investigator.
" Racial Differences in the Process of Social Stratification."
Grant-in-the-Aid-of-Research, Graduate School, University of Minnesota.
/m 4
bl 1969 - 1974 Department of Sociology University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
- a. 1971 - 1974 Project Associate.
" Achievement in the Early Years of the Work Career."
National Science Foundation Grant #GS-29031 Principal Investigator: Archibald O. Haller.
- b. 1969 - 1970 Graduate Research Assistant.
"A Comparison of Cross-National Differences in the Rate and Patterns of Intergenerational occupational Mobility."
National Science Foundation Grant Principal Investigator: Donald J. Treiman
- c. 1969-1970 National Institute of General Medical Sciences Methodology Traineeship.
- d. 1970
(
1 Lecturer (Research Methodology).
1967 - 1969 Department of Sociology Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA ;
- a. 1967 - 1969 National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship.
- b. 1967 - 1969 Graduate Teaching Assistant (Statistics).
PUBLICATIONS, REPORTS AND PAPERS: )
1988 " Forecast and Warning Information Survey of County and )
Municipal Emergency Management Agencies." Report to l NOAA/ National Weather Service. Fort Collins, CO: '
CIRA/CSU. (December) 1988 "The National Weather Service's Forecast and Warning ,
Program: Current Procedures and Future Directions."
Report of NOAA/ National Weather Service. Fort Collins, CO: CIRA/CSU. (November)
< O 5
pm- - - - - -
, 1984 "The Role of Information,in Public Responce to
.j-~s Warnings." Pp. J39-J44 in the Proceedings of the 15th l i conference on Hurricanes and Tropical Meteorology.
's 2 Boston,.MA: AMS. (With Earl J. Baker) 1983 " Probability of Hurricane / Tropical Storm Conditions: A User's Guide for Local Decision Makers." Silver Spring, MD: National Weather Service.
1983 "An Automated Warning Data-Management System (AWADS)."
Pp. J19-J22 in the Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Severe Local Storms. Boston, MA: AMS. (With David H. George)
( 1983 " Household Response to Warnings." International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 1: 95-104.
(With Stephanie Kendall and John P. Clark) 1982 "The Design of Improvements in Severe Weather. Warning Programs Utilizing Concepts and Products Derived from PROFS: Detailed Documentation for the Automated Warning Data-Management System (AWADS)." Boulder, CO: NOAA/
Environmental Research Laboratories.
1982 "Public Response to Natural Hazard Warnings." Ch. 5 in David H. George (ed.), The Value and Use of Short-Range Mesoscale Weather Information. Boulder, CO: NOAA/
,.-w Environmental Research Laboratories.
.t
\- 1981 " Community Response to Natural Hazard Warnings."
National Technical Information Service, #PB82-111287.
Springfield, VA: U.S. Department of Commerce. (With Robert K. Leik and John P. Clark) 1980 " Community Warning Systems: The Interface Between the Broadcast Media, Emergency Service Agencies and the National Weather Service." Pp. 214-228 in Everett M.
Rogers (ed.) Disasters and the Mass Media. Washington, DC: NRC/NAS.
1980 " Response to Hurricane Warnings as a Process:
Determinants of Household Behavior." Pp. 19-24 in Earl J. Baker (ed.) Hurricanes and Coastal Storms.
Tallahassee, FL: Florida Sea Grant College. (With John P. Clark) 1980 "The Role of Coordination Among Emergency Service Agencies in Community Preparedness." Pp. 38-43 in Earl J. Baker (ed.) Hurricanes and Coastal Storms.
Tallahassee, FL: Florida Sea Grant College.
A
(
6 l
E } 01 ,
I 1980 " Constraints on Organizational and Household Response to Earthquake Predictions." In the Proceedings of the !
International Conference on Earthquake Predictions. '
Paris, France: UNESCO. (With John P. Clark and Robert K. Leik) 1978 " Social Factors Affecting the Dissemination of and Response to Warnings." In the Proceedings of the lith Technical Conference on Hurricanes and Tropical Meteorology. Boston, MA: AMS. (With Robert K. Leik and John P. Clark) 1976 "Significant-Other Influence and Aspirations."
Socioloav of Education 49: 12-22. (With J. Steven Picou) 1976 " Discontinuities in Schooling and the Socioeconomic Life Cycle." Pp. 133-160 in W.H. Sewell, R.M. Hauser, and D.L. Featherman (eds.) Schoolina and Achievement in Aperican Society. New York: Academic Press.
t David L. Featherman)
(With l
1975 " Status Attainment Theory and Black Male Youth." Pp.
23-40 in J.S, Picou and R.E. Campbell (eds.) Career Behavior of Scecial Groues. Columbus, OH: C.E.
Merrill. (With J. Steven Picou) 1975 " Occupational Wage Differential Among University Educated Technical Personnel in a Developing Economy."
Journal of Vocational Behavior 7: 113-126. (With J.
Pastore, E.E. Ceotto, A.O. Haller, and T.R. Quirino) 1971 " Robustness in Regression Analysis." Pp. 118-146 in H.L- Costner (ed.) Sociological Methodology 1971. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. (With George W. Bohrnstedt) 1971 "Further Comments on Boyle's ' Path Analysis and Ordinal Data'." American Journal of Socioloav 76: 1112-1132.
(With Morgan Lyons) 7 1 D 1
c -_
,o ,
WlgO NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Harnpshire Yenkee BCS IS A DRILL ***
DES IS A IRIIL *** DCS IS A IRIIL Release # 01 C3lo AcrivArrm Page 7 of 9j NDUNE:H, N.H. - 6/28/88- At 10:45 a.m., New Hampshire Ymkee's offsite Response Organizatial (NHY Cao) was activated foll6 wing the declaration of at: Alert at the Seabrook Staticn Nuclear Poker Plant operated by New Hampshire Yankee. -
q , s. ,Q,, '4
'Ibers haV9 nct been releases of radi ,starial frQBaf)3 plant.
According to New Haugehire Yankee fcur -v -y classifications that y to %, an Alertkle mclappiipui plants. tha'the second lo i Alert Maraticn regrosents a mi-6141 reductiqM plant safety.
.e;% $3 According to Petare Dir L.,
activated as a precautdm% ary i offsita the NHY CEO was CEO staff manhurs areM+ %gu3sure das sthe current plant anstguncy. NHY ;
the Bustgency Operations Facility in '
( '
4I. . , ,
n w M M b*'been officialkh :- )contact with Mnemactiusetts statatand %.S local
'Ib and questiana, toll f numbers have established 1%ib.
eh residents. 'Ihase Abpid be used ticfasck questionable about the .- %,
To receive infocustien, 1-800-111-2222.
rumi *[ call Faz reoceded are*4 m k 4t4mm m1v, rem 4% can call 1-603-111-2I11. :.
Fcur
-@ handmast33, residents can call 1-617-111'
(
rar hw h4---aen -Jag usw ammyshire, residents can can 1-603-ul-2us. is "4
b-O
{
1 I
k ;
L________ _ _
~
@@WHO NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page9of9j Members can call of the sgLia 1-800-111-2223. with questicais cri the h Whiru Yar*as IOfY @
Media currear in Newington, N.H. Members of the media are urged to oces to the !
/ r llll ,-
'IMIS IS A IRIIL*
Apgrt:mnd: -
Date/ Times f>
t Anwas: y w: g. .m_. .. .e
/ Time:
77fg g swn..
k+.
- s
>b
%$' [ ~~ 4 .
5.gENnW$$t. %
'(
. 5 j3 v kYA p'i ds# %',, 4s g'g u ,. V g5:c/.,1 4 ,g f. ,,\
g, s.{#k '
\
Y cfY:,
vi kg \
g a 13 Q*;.f/ .
s e i i
I L
Jl
___- I
r _P e ,
'2- %RNEWS. RELEASE 41aaggghusettsdii(feikkf ifaRettf OmJteidthpcr.chdew Hampsbsys Yadee nr m 0 9j Release 4 > SITE. AREA 4 Emrr,tcW - (SEPrctte e_Los@
NDCNGTIW, N.H. - 6/28/88_- At /d**0 7 New Haupahire Yankse's offsite F p se organization (NHY GC), bfauthority of the Gover:nor of F=*m.s, roomimandai that beach and state park azums fran e.aliehrry to Plum :sland be ciceed and that people leave those areas imarHathly.
According to Peter Stroup, offsite Response Director, the
- .vrmmarxiatim was nude as a precautionary measure due to the Site Area En u.pcf in effect at the Seabrook Station Nuclear Powetl Plant.
Thars have not been releases of zedioactive material fttan the plant.
Accordi!xJ to New Hampshire Yankee, a Si c higbest aestgarx:y classification that applie(s% ruclear power 'Ihis 'pf.tnts.KArea energency classification involves actual or li)taly ma.)ce failure of plant furctions needed for the rui ;.icrr6( the publist, e,,
NHY GC i-u.=1 are standing the ens Facility in Newington, N.H. , and ,,ctAset, facilities in Musses:tiumetts.
I r y.+ % 3 --y" R residents should listan to Per the latest O
radio staticru Mutt-FM (92.5) and M9W aN (149Q)q,,.theiz r local
.*t- e.., Durgency "y.
h To h ark establistsS,for Mrtsactiumet@.
c , toll-free ramber,s hand!b tgeresidents. chedk cpes-d 'p on about the amargency. (,('Ihese shculd be %p{ p To , Massactsumatts r==4h can call 1-800-111-222f(.' g \ ,.g, For recurded infernstien en seme4MW*4= residarzts can ,9.11 1-603-111-2111. Y Par rocceded'infe*1 g/ 1
%g
&'4dng , residents caen call 1-617-111-2112. 'd #(f
,s ~ 4,# y g*M of .
\g\ +* f,.
j, g fy
'\ .
.'%.;f v-O
___________________________.______:-___________________ __ _ ___-_- - - - - - - - - - - ----------------------l---
c A Md -J J NEWS RELEASE .
Q Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page //of ljf For r- 1 infennation concernin] New Hampshin, residents can call 1-603-111-2113.
Members of the EgLig with questions on the New Maneshim Yarkas 160/ CEO can call 1-800-111-2223. Membens of t% media are urJedeto ocna to the Media Qinter in Newingtcn, N.H. ~'*.-
/
iiii :*
DEIS IS A IRILbe\ */.. ' .
App:w.a Uplandb5M,M -
w:Mv g$.
\.a M. [8/d3YM A3ea wx h,g. e w =m:
.A y ,,e
'- y}); ., 's $,
\
-,N?Y'[ v $,4 <g
' '~
K. '+ >' A %, ,:<
- (&:, ,[r.ff i F
%3 . / f*
' f,'\
\
'k'((?
%k 6
- hi%Y [$.
Q#
1%
NN 4 Wh
- 4 g%*k.rg fi,, t),;,
R f'i[
.\ I
+,p.* f:f#
t ,.1 .t?' '
RJ v s
( __ l TOTAL p.32
n a W_ 2AJ -
EBS MESSAGE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page/ pot 9l 1HIS IS A DRILL *** THIS IS A IRIIL *** 7EIS IS A DRI1L SITE AREA DiDCDCY (SEAsotaL CLCSURE OF BEACHES N{D WILDLIFE REFU3E) fiESSAGE '
I (May 15 to Septeter 15)
Date Message Released 06/39/
Tine Message Released (*A*** / Q ,' Q Q < !, 3 l Release # 03 , , , ,
/ m *: ..
Released by :
"k NHY site NponsW'Dirg ',,,,
% %% .r n Thefo} r g} Broadcask'Systs/G M.Mas released by the
- p. liassachusetts offsit 4 pn:e GWz'hpi,on of New'Henpahlre Yankee, under lQ authority granted b of .
"A SITE AREA DtDCDCihas .. declared it Seabrook Nuclear Power Station.
A SITE ARFAEHERGDCY $piarenthhy'. ipos significant release.cf radioactive materialdl child',op::ur, eithough .c iy roleeses are not exam to go beyond levels" set by the tnited'4i tas Environmental Protection Qf, ecoopt near the Seabrook Station site , t. g S h, <A %,. s .4 The New Hanpahtts'QJhnkee offsite Response Org rkization has txM.ndtified is respondingst6Aho problem. 'Ihe New HangshiMYankee offsivd%ponse Director is IWiewing site conditiog at this tid, and is dias,ing the situation with Massachusetts t officials t j/*
As a precaution, the Govasnor. of has ve w.- ahd the closing cf beacit and park ari '~*frc64ali Plum Island, including the Parkar <
River National Wildl! ' Persons these beaches and parks or (
visitirq the nati i uge shod 1d leave those areas immediately.
%p'A
,A<..rs e,%s *%$. y V ;
1he closirgs etJthe Wildfife Refuge, beeches ard boating areas are precautionary wintres ba$ on plicy acbpted long before Seabrook Station q was eparteional.47ft cbes not mean that a release of radiaticn bag occurrai I I
cr d11 cxpur."[);
we "In additiot45tmargercy information brochures are nailed annually to I
( ^
residents of the comunities of 914 hav. ehnv. Marr4w.
Newbury West Newtury arr3 Nekturvoert. If you are in any of these towns, you should look Y_ j
w 1 Celd,'O -
EBS MESSAG Ma ssachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page Mof G )
up that energe:ry information. If these are unavailable, information also can be fourri in area telephone books. English and French Mecy inferration flyers also have been made available at beach facilities and recreation areas. 'Ihis information could be helpful in understanding future {
I nessages.
If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language probler.s, please inform them of this inessage. Q.,
once again, hW Station has declared a Sn2 ARIE ,
e
'Ihis message will be repeated frequently on this station unti). U,, ;,
V, inferration is available. Stay tuned to this IBF station for latest official information. Owt QA ,A.
If you are in any of the New corrnunities, you should..M
'W o sta Cbunty
% in How liespahire for ne 3 about your -=tW ,to a localp l
( Actions rects: mended are im 46d only for ym\ y v v t.fi %
< persons in
(!cII: s meses ) is pre-i Ged in Francil.)
M jl Approvat:
Q'
/rina:
^
/2 / t//
A mroved: Puw%/ NN /d "[#[^
Approved:
W :
C , 'f \ .
f% ;['.,
"'\ df
(
M
't i
I .
y O
_J 70 Tot P.e2
. e2R NEWSELEAG.
Massachusetts Offsite Response C ganization of New Hampshire Yankee Pageyof9)
MIS IS A DRUJ., *** DfIS IS A IRIIL *** D{IS IS A DRILL Palease # 4 US NT CDJtD INFtma N SAFET/ ZN E l NDGCItN, NH - 6/28/88 - At 12:53 p.m. , the U.S. COAST GGGD began the process of enforcinJ a fivumnile safety zone in the acman waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boatars near the plant arg&dvised to relocate to waters Azrther than five miles from the plant, ch. return to tra local rarinas. Boaters abould agr, rnenter thes ocean safety zone unt;fl furthe.r notice. \\ i,'" ~/
\,
For the latest information, lemsadiusetts ralsidents abould listan to their local F-y-cf Br**t Syrt' git.redio staf.ico FM (92.5) and WHAV-AM (1490). '?t ,\ $
r-Tc ad2ress est=hliched for Na runsars andhcris, tk@
" ~ J 2 idents. shculd free numbers be used to check have been questionable inf .
einergendy.
Tb r h inf f '
residents can c' kl 1-800-1 g p T*V } 't(.
For 2vs, t.im cri gy,atim entii&4rwis m1v, rea4Mrcs call
~
1-800-111- j.[ \'.. 4y/
Forrd "" atuation wa.- , residents can call 1-800-111-2112 '
For re23rded information - -
.\
."P -h4 , residents can call 1-800-111-2113. g%
h.
n e a s ac the. with ans en w- n.ep. hire vann m ma can call 1-400-111-2223.4 the media are urged to aces to the Media Omnts' at , .
- 4,,g
/ kt 1 Y ' '
~
V IIIst THIS IS A IRIIL*
m: 1 . ' rw oatans,,,00f , IGV.
meeme: M c tent ==: AE3blb llb6fM n, M'N onte,u , W W /: W O "
U l 7 L -
.. s
...~...=. ..- .. . _ ..
r P i MgHJ NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee I
Page Acf $/
mis Is A mut *** nIIs Is A mIII *** 'DIIS IS A DRIII )
c.
SITE AMA DERENCY a (SEMKNAL CLCSURE OF BDOG5 AND WITM"FE RERM)
Mnemars .
s
( W 15 to SeF -
) ,, ,
- '2' Release #5 / -
Data Massage 5 5,x et Tim Massage Q, Q,, .Q,,p,#
Released by: A \/ MS /
tai Dis .
s "A SITE AREA Sentrock N Pont Station.
k' A SI'IT AREA BSESGCY significant release radioactive matarials escur, releases are not 1
]
levels tad Protmetion M, to go , boycr:
except near
", y' p' oefsite nampmse crgm[Yastian has noenwiittfind arzt f?
m New is r ,' problem. '!be New Humpshire@ Offsite Itsperine Di m m is sita ce dities this is, d4 ==4 g the situation with. + -_ a ceficials.
As a pt-*4m, the af - g ^ 6 has
. r--- M the closirq of bence and armes ' 4 * *y lum Island, including the Perher River- me id14 beaches and parks or visiting es natimal As 14 those areas immediately.
In addition tmitad has been requested to enforce a f in near Sentrodt station. All offshore to reloosta to wtars further than five are
- toetses miles s ce to their local umrines. Scutats should not reencar gWsansuntilfurthernotics.
. c1e in,,V G14,. n.eu,., b ch.s .nd bassin, =.s - '
procznationary nuesMres bened cm policy = -p " lang before semmock Station 1 ws operatimal; It does not mean that a release of radiat.icn has casacred ;
or Mill ocxszt." 1 1
I k
? '
. Sqf-C Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee NEWS RELEASE PB98/hCf 9/
"In addition, -psf inforEnticr1 trechures 'are Emiled annually to residents of the cxzenunities of 414 *h"v. ' wv ^ N "- S W . Wert s Nee ard "- %r' vert. If ym.1 are in any of these towns, you should look ,
p that emartyeref information. If these are unavailabiai.,infarnatica also l an be found in area teleghale books. Dzflish and French.,umergency '
informatico flyers also have been made available at bendi*fecilities and rowdon areas. 'Ihis information could be helpful in undhcstanding future W. di 'e, p' If you )cew Af any r=4@he*1s or cc k-. vi hing or p:eclams, plasse inform them of thiEW. i. . g (21cm again, hahrock station has & a SIE t.
t.-
mis me==arr will be this station until new EBS statim for the latest
. tuned to information is av=41_, \ ,
official information.t m eastern Rockingham g
If
- you arggA' of tr for
.tv..v . 1 _ 1 - o st.u . in e#
to n-I' Actions r
= n this mammaga are intendes'ady for pers:W%hn fg % G ,*
erwartities %p* ' miles of senbecok statiemg w rt:
mi, b 1. a1.o J in rren i b g g o.t. m , 6 4 7 // m
) a?
~
o,tamaaAkflWP'bf"-
w##d %f y& 'N
% .g oat.m VM9d,
\\a h*V, t
'4,/
~N O
7: m . ,:
96 +9';198 14889 FROM T O M E D ! a C E ** f E R
@y0 NEWS RELEASES Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Harnpshire Yankee mis Is A aRIL1, ***
W IS IS A !R EL *** 'DCIS IS A IREL Release # 9.5 cmmat naar:ncy Armmvr enenas page /-yor g NDfINTKN, N.H. - 6/28/84 - At 2:05 p.m. , New Hagshirt Yankme's offsite Response organization (MDr Cao), under authority of the Gtwernce of Massachusetts, recommended that zimidents in the towns oflSaliabury and Ammatury be advised to evacmante das to the Ganstal assegency at the Seabrook Staticri Nuclear Power Plant. Residents in the towns et Matrimac, Newbury, West Newbury arxl Nmeuryport cro advised to tahm shelter tritil advised by local hy-uy BW System radio statierihi. that instructianp have G.- W . In addition, meiool cli-iman1= will be delayed in ths' towns of Salisbury, Amesbury, Natury, West Ne@ury, andi.Nedarygu. Marrianc schools will M =m4== at their r % (1 =imaal time etjjti15 p.m.
There have been relg of re ve frcus the plant.
hy-uy ratifioifikdh in ktowns of Salistury and Aamsbury /
Marrinne, Howtazry, Neath ,, Nedary r w were sounded at 2:17 p.m.
Residents in #M'M to the reception '
at the M=-~* ^IJ. Me*vic ,11D1 'nar:1 pike Imad (Route 4A), North AninerW. D %4 L3 h. _ r the Residents in Wi**ay aun eveausts to throomption canbetW Massadmasetta'ElepWic cruipany, 44 River Strust4tuverly, Mass.
- Residents advised to take ak Angs would need to runnin away frumi home for a for days,4 penwnal itans ani medical itums. They should %
r -v. cf acemaanse cuir tm ed to an M.
Upon d4the cri , if neoussary, residents can travel to ans at seversk cure facilities in Massectuastts if they have no to seek , Pets or fama anianis should be shaltered .at anddih food and water for moveral days.
Das ,beve re ni4 Iris of L-ei i.lan will be evacuated by bJoss whi4W'+ill be[irriving in their towns.
.. 3, Fur ttdMfb.th. d.icn, W==tts residersts should listan to their 1 coal Bau WEP-m (92.5) ans WAV-AM (1490).gyszy Ber=*==t System radio staticru According to Petse stroup, offsits ansponse otractar, the
_ s. .as to - at - -
Station Nutdaar Power Plant, Which wa s declared at 1:32 p.m.
4 .s
.~.-......
)
< x e- eff,'O NEWS RELEASE i Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page/fof 9/
A General hp y is the highest emergency classification that applies to nuclear power planta. mis upcf classificaticri involves an actual er ih. substantial failure of plant functions needed for the protect.icn of the public.
NHY GC hecf F=w..el are I-sding to suppcst this sheltarirq r N tion. NHY CBC parecnnel are staffing the E; 4cf operations Facility in Newington, N.M., reception centers, congregate' care centers and other energerry facilities in N. <1 j 2 addreas rtasrs ard questions, tell raabers have heuIn estahlinhed for Mmmaar*1 asst.ts residents. % alculd be usedb check questionable information abcut the tunergency. n m zuosive information, res call 1-800-111-2222. "t. w
- .v'g v 4.
For recorded ii Icf[gn menti
- 4+4e== cely, residents can call
,( 1-603-111-2111. 9 fl ror nyeresi int I .dng 6, rhiderrts can call 1-617-1p etif:;/,'g i
Q w
.t j.
For Tuscaded int concernirq , resid@Qcunn call 1-603-111-2L[%3. f.f ? %;p
'th
. h 4 e_/ -2223.
can call 1-
/ @ with Members of' on the \' \ "^ df media are*, '
tw YC NHY t*i come to the Media Centar in Newington, N.H. y 2
\'.
Mw f, i ff b, hhhh Ys
'd Is A tan!p I~
wi. % *@j tat. fame: MW f@p^
u Og o.t.fa.eM40 xo NL omes/ rime:6/k/ 3//d w yr i
~
A f4 HO NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee GENERAL DENG!NCY MESSAGE (EVACUEICE AIO SELTERING; SEASCNAL CIDSURE & BDGES AND WIIILIFE REEVGE)
T RADN'E MhM.)
anlanse # 7 Derta Message eased /28/
3,
.(0,.
Time Massage Relaaned Relemmed by: t ) [ VA ) 'T' x
of3 , fX #,
^
sita[" #
Tia fell % -[* W @s= --
t System \\M was relea) sed by the Maamarhaastts Offsite orgurd2ation of Miw Q Yan)oen, under authority granted by the Govemer otsW.fp
'98 \/
A GENERAL EMDGNCY was declared at 1skp.m. todaf,at Sentrock Raclear power Staticn. A GM' W that events are in progrums that cx:uld result in acessjuf$nif release radioactive aurberials with releases w w to ' evels set the 1211ted stacas Ehvircruental Protecticm p Station site . .
nto the air occurred at 45 p.m. '
A releas 6 peti g,
h Respcmma W on has db arsi is $s the problem. Massediumetts. of @* have been notifielib.. "t. l
%, e \\ /.
I
'Ihm Governor Mnemactuastts M the follh \
'* l 1
3
- i fM - .'" in en h v and
- Tnunediate evaCRMtiCn is 1--- -twv.
Per Aassharv, ths is 1- at the Massachusetts Electric racility at 1101 in Nc th Aid $over. Ptr saliskury, the j W4m center is et nectric Facility at 44 River l 1
stenart in .. %g, nm uni *2' ~ .has
.afee, in . n baan r - requested Rt.eion.to enforce au oef a fi.ve-sile hc.t :
near the to relocata er cbck in waters further than five-miles frtst g. .
<- *i.--m J
g -
--_ - .3 4 % g % y w , %w% %
pm Aa Rim g i rwnal Wildli fe Sirus . C il d i mmVm Il- -- - -~
immediately.
O c >
c ,
Mg-J Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee NEWS RELEASE j D)lOf i l GENERAL DIERGDCY M12iSME (EVACUkTICH AND SHIE2RDG; SDs201 CICSUME W BDOtES AND WIIILIFE REFtX3E)
(RELZhSE T BADICWCIIVE MtTERIAL)
(cxmtinued) A l T.",,
Y/
c\ s;/y. '?
\g s, mere is a gocd 4h414ty fee this assurgency[to petxtee a cxmtaminating w id m t. It is . 4 1y s , told to e0@ecna$$dt as a pewwtMen, persons leertig the hm go to their designated 6+:-d';gy . .wmitarirs).
j$W% .k v
qs.3 and IN all evacuses 9 Segvices incl inf
~
_w t.
A
~ ~ Mis fT andtiimanage M
^.
an; d"""* "44utica if Spessary;
- and refetTal to congregate custs omnt
- ses.
- f+ %\ (
persms iij!he oczquenities directed to evaeusta.g.are advised
^
the nest toh., ..; #
,amath to main routes - R1ute IA, Lt -= tar. 95 convenient or 495 - south in the d4Mi~n of ' W 'latf'Centers.
Traffic grMas' assist you. %] h.( ,.
are being evacuated All el= within the es to ocamanity in W11ch they are to the desicpstod for loostad. Parunts to most their citildren airca schools are now being are being tahan safely by bus directly to their scisool citildren will than be sent to me 1tast in A be picsoud 19 but do not have your own If you m -- 'm 'a ride frun a n=41*~ cr someone else, buses will M emmegancy routes to pir* a ";r and tales you to a W 4m . .
t for an eruzJnomment , _. : lng Wwt time buses will begdttravel emergency routes in E2 ocumsmity. Ptr acre id . r.icn bus and evacuation routes, icok up the energency infocuation 1:rochurus atxut sentrock statism which were mailed to you.
O e >
" -^--------.____%___m__ _ '
dt'es 4ses ia d. es.) 7 0 P'E 0 4 AGE m :6 A l l
m 7 A s M(g40 NEWS RELEASF, Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Peen 2/ofq/
GI2eRAL Be5GMCY MIBShGE (EVACGLTICE ABC SHEtJITRDCT SENEMAL CICSWtE T BEh0G5 AIO WIIMHZ REFUGE)
(RELEh5E OF RADIOACTIVE Mh2ERIAL)
(oortimes)
"h If you have a bedridden, handicapped er other paraan in ytp home to needs W al evacusticm help and who has not made ptwvious d 4 with New Wm Yanhoe, please on11 the New Itaqpubire Yanione offsitie,Ruspehme Eastgency operations omntar at 555-1234. If igu have alrundy W N , )
there is no need to on11 now; balp will socm IWW its way. V g
All perecns in the area to Da WM Ett ut9Edb P=i M and help cme another by sharing rides pechless.
with lanionge ce hearing If you xmw of whatf&ibey pe t less, pleans emergency and any neigtsmewer idhs%o be sutt psy have been interned of the abould .
M@b t Before you your '\ -AA' '- un on sure you !
out all fires and ' Indt all doors een Meave. Taha blanketsC,u p '
with ft ywr own use and any ti& you regularlf!pake. for severu Ifyc% stLwark outside thi' Pa'eiggn amma, but live inside Aycuany i(4 days. 'to and collect family memberg or maammary .
m 14mh ' h \,
'E Pucpic living M ties of W ashr/ ^^ ^- W/
be safer if tbsy IN PfAct y. This amans Namentvnart to remain indoces, staying indoacs yw inorummed from seabecak station. 'Ib get pyt- #% fusa r=veia==+4 ~
the greatest bumsfit by shaltaring, you e ld take the toLhuring actions t,
o asalter indoors. ,
o joelus ab ,2 xe elemed tigtely.
o Ig all wirskms and vents tilo you travel to o Turn all , heating or air conditioning systems if they bring in cutsiA .
you and move to the room with fewest windows and o Take a I doors. *'
O l
l a
i e4((] NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee GNElRAL DG5tatCY MESSAGE (EVACUhTICN A10 !BELTIRING:
SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BDGES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE)
(RELEh5E OF RhDIQhCITVE 192 TRIAL)
(ocntirued) o } teep all meews of your hcusehold irx$cces and stay pi to your local h p f W Systen radio statim.
o asunin indoces until told by local or state officiala N it..is ~ 41safe to go cutside, er until further prh acticms g are e ,ky schools, hospitals and other institutim s in 'ocummities advised to
. bef4a4-Mhave instructions sheltar are takinf similar shal in urtil emitaring for svt r.ing the children er other are zgg to on11 the is no longer necessary. Pararms and .. to the acticols to attempt to pidt schools er other institutdar%rne to wil
. sty better r-i * =1 if the scfacols up their children. oVEr TIM M SevW41IXRES.
are pS:Eitt8d to ' SIM1 and dairy operators the ocumamities
% tojB;pd;a off[ %=v. unet --w=v, y, s of c:m14=wme. - mw.1 E .
4 '..$
- teve 'aQnilk-grpchacing livestock incide (hern or other
- - r p p and Indzia scurons of
- Pri: wide with stcted feed and cutside their w'4'oi % t. />'
\f N
- M:,ve +4 4a feed --=14 a=
acpver P4hte.
w'4'd4gs armi ocpver cutdoor
, ap other of ocliected water.
m, Please do not use t2as casa d M 6
.y, .
lack ansm1 emergency infocustion mailed to p.
If W 1- or other pdaic wM'd4g, ctandt the N se 'addiI.icral information. 'Ihis infocustion oculd be useful in futanz ===7"*.
M ty ..
D L _
- -_ __=
Mg-O NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee GDERAL EMDGNN MESSAGE (LVJGATICN Atc SHEL'I15tDG; SEMiONAL C105GtE OF BDGES AND WIIILIFE RElviE)
(RELEASE OF RADIQhCTA'E MGRIAL)
(cattimmi) Q, Parunts with children attendig school within n=14=hnv. - N*v. M wv.
West F-%*v and "-N=W are advised that ill betheir kept;hlare untilcurrently itpis being safely maintasnad at actacol, wherit theytw\ 9.,%.#"
d.wh that tbay can be safely moved. v
\s
'Ihis N appdes to all public, private andNW_4=1 achools ard
'asion, gau.d
-,1 facilities within the affet$sd area. Wyvoff,'
r- t within the are urged 322 to attagt to pick up thdhir dildrun* '- -
afracted area. est To repost: saat=uck %@5spid,,seneral namesency acreition.
W W Mf to this EBB station 19$(
i A tien 41 =h1 =
'V^ ' ' - the latest l
..hn. \'\
- official (i Qi any of the eastern .c4 If you arts in New for ctamamitiesi ,
tune to a local radio 2' ty. l news about ,.
wf= =-! h M 9:N Ph w 4%:a
-anIV#
Ut
_J2EE L/,, N ,_
D.t.m,.:
m.mi A
.o r
4 \..
% +f ,
ea v! sp
( g
< A 5
p MHC Q
NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee
)
f U GS IS A DRIIL *** THIS IS A IRIIL *** THIS IS A IRIII MAFMC CNm0L MDarrTmm peggpfog9]
Release # 08 i ,i NDEV. JICN, N.H. ~ 6/28/88 - New Hampshire Yankse's ttffsite Resp:rlse organir.aticn (NBY CIC) is urgig notorists in 5-+%4surroundirq , /' y the Seabrock, NE area to avoid travelling tW..45e towns of h14=hn, P=chwy, Harrimac, Ne@ury, West Whibury and NMt. mese areas should be kept free of w-nf traffMto facilitate the cancuation cf Salisbury and P'--hm(,. 'd ,.~.
~
, tuotorists' to use Rt.128 If traffic r=2abourx1 is i
Route 4 in New to I-93. M2crists hi (d then use HangshL7. From Boute p '~# %,.
"p \* Routh 3 cr I-93Q+ , pMto K taka I-95 North. S g ,g V
' New y % y u continue to nordtor the situation at
~
control asesures viiEbe announced as Se:Jacok stainime .#
'%h. .,
x they yg ' uadiiw" \s listan'to j Fcr thm,1rtene int , Messochusetts memiriar1tsMLYI'-FM shoulk(.92fS')an their lccal ,8sergardtf*
l Broad:ast System reito st,aticru V WHAV-AM (1499 h g \\
Tb and questions,hil-free Jai)sa been used to check es**hlimbed fer Massachumatts ticri atxnt the residarttsA mese shad 54' qMe iM A% :en can V
Ib receive 1-800.-u l-2222. *%.f h4M[9===tts 4cm enrriitiema emiv, residents can call Per roccedm1 Y 1-800-111 h, '
a _ uch _ _ a m m . m . m . , r.sid.nes e.n ca u
=
. .(
1-600-ni %.\Fce W tion,$ yid New Haapabirn, zgsidents can can wArdng l
l-800-111-2n3kj?" l l
r
\
i
- r. MfA-C NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization cf New Hampshire Yankee -
i !
Po9sMot1/
Mernbers of the nadin with questicns cn the New Mire Yarw Iset ac can call 1-200-111-2223. Members of t!m media are urged to cuna to t!L Media cantar in m'irgtm, N.H.
tilli \l,\.
'DC.S IS A IRUL* 'u,
,< 0 b /fh
- p. . Data / Time:
1
- w. % ) b in,s:J W 's:9hm
' N ,
.Ys 3
f e? R{\, 4
'%,*e.
('/ y s
I{%, %
4bA4vs e
kp 3 '[t a[S8' g. '$g.;.g v.
h A \ ;
v3 sfs/,
4
$(s?f,
- r. e.,, \,s
\\ fl hlyshrf
's/
m J O .
707 %
- 02 g!'
~
___ _ _,----.- - w, ew- 3 vuq 2 3 s y z--- 70 0C TO MEDIRCEW7ER c
n V
Mp0 NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Pagelof CH THIS IS A IRIIL *** 1HIS IS A IRIIL *** '1HIS IS A IRIIL Balease f 09 US CDMff 2 RED BRUK2B SiWEIY R2tB - tBERTE NBfDamE,161 - 6/28/88 - At 2:35 p.m., the U.S. Quest G ard extended the safety zone in the oceer:1erters near Sestrook statichTrem five miles to tan miles. All offshcre besters rear the plat are advised.to relocate to waters further then tan miles from the plart, or return to %e local marines. Boatars ahmid Ell; reenter the oamen safety anne witil Dat$mr notice.
Tpi #
For the listast infocustion, rWaidents , h_id listen tu their local Dergency Scoutest radio shetikt. @ (92.D) ard IGRV-AN (1490).
Tb e Mress riamars a g g ens, raabers have been estahlimbed for .- _ d'_ M . It30uld be used to entk questionable infw- .
7b p. _ 2- -
inf V J- rasidunts cart ik 1-600-11 hf\
%% A;r
, yde semorded
)$ k;-I.- -t.i en "i'm cred1 Hema emiv,
- a. gg p 4,,ege call y g, ,
, .a . p For crustim --..ing , resider:Os can call 1-600 -111-2112'.b #~ i !
Per racceded information w A' , residents can call l 1-800-111-2u3. {
\ !
Mautnes of the with an Maar lamsmetirn Yankan letr GD l can call 1 400-111- ttie undia are urged to otun to the Media centar in i _,
m -
v'DIIS IS m ,,
A IRIIM Approved: Date/ Time "5 WAA4 ,
Qt A *b p
w fh/7.(A/Abf(/ o.t. ifs, , b%f- 40 a q ,,
i 6 . g
..,..,,,.. ..... . a L1 75 M i d i 'a s E n i i 4
-i
_ P
< @e(gHJ NEWS RELEASfs
_ Massachusetts Offsite Ajsponse Organ @ation of New Hampshire Yankee , , , ,
Release # 1D GM'L D5!RC. - NMTN OF MN TG PageMof$j NDrDC1W, N.H. - 6/28/88 - At 3:40 P.M., New Hampshire Yankee's offsite IQ-E Organization (NEY CRO), under authority of the Goverrx:rr of Namw+1usertta, no:aumanded that residents in the towns of Salisbry, Anasbury, Merrimac, Newbury, West Newtury and NewbLtryport be advised to evacuate due to the General he ycat the sentra:k Station Nuclear power Plant.
4.'
'Diere hame been relenses of radimive matailsl frt;mNthe plar,t.
hecy n:: ratification sirens in the tq cf Salisbry'aniMasbury /
Mornac, Newbury, West Newtury, Newburypxt p seursind at 3)p).m.
s3 Residents in Amanhmy, Marrimes", and West Heiintury pan evaotante to the ruagtion cantar at the Massachusettaj:lectric 601 'ntenpike Road (Route 114), North An@vur, Mass.
(r 1
Residents in a=14**y can emecuate to the recep:im cantar at g. --_ 4 El Beverly, Mass. .
Cumpany, 44 River Street, g N,.lg s '
,%(% h l
remain assi b '
any idhid need to teme for days, esctra personal itasas aC wititsms. should kamp their our radio to an c
he y W'A _ 1$ysten station. p* G Upon r h '- ^g4f, at the A- g % centersb naammmary, f %;,f travel to oneVWnnural etzigrugate residents can have no other peace to anak abelter.
facili Immenchusetta if they ce fara . *mhm1d be sheltered and left at has with and several days.
Fta- the latest their local Buergency
" ^ ~- d=--l- residents should listen to
, stations: MLYP-FM (92.5) and leRV-AM (1490). v.; .e.
gy.
.t.-_ r = *e Peter
< - ansponse cir t , the
- = " ande as maneure to to the General 6 the Ntaclear Power Plant, tetid 1ses declared at 1:32 p.m. . .
p A f is the highest assrgency r1===ifiaticm that applies to M plants. 'Ihis amargency riammification involves an actual er imairiasit sei iJ.a1 failure of plant ftmetiens needed for the pcotectic:n of the public.
{
l
\ _ _ _ _
. . . ~ . - -. _
f ~
N[3
~
c
(
NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hempshire Yankee P*98 % Df 3l NHY 00 -y-cf personnel azw r+.iing to support this sheltering r m ..w lation. NHY CEO persurinel are staffing the Ly-cf Operations Facility in Newington, N.H. , receptim oenters, mg.cp.te care centers and other amargency facilities in Massactaasetts.
'Ibe NHY GC has been in omtact with Massactaametts" tate and local officials. Mr ,,
Ib address rumars and questions, toll-free rsadws have been,< 'l established fer Massectiusetts residents.
questionable information about the emancgen%cy. ( should be -
To reonive infccmation, resi b ,cudtall 1-800-111-2222. a g/
acrriitiens m1v, residents can call Fer recorded/infotinstiig{en 1-603-111-2111.
g sta+4
'4 ,,
I Fbr r w M inf Mamma @umatta, residents con call
( 1-617-111-2
,,e
-- g /
'S v*
\
\
@ p.uu}daf an, au m wam, r hes c.n.can 1 # 3~111
- sS f h..:.;['
uk es can can 1 223. % of .113 qu.stico,
-nen sg to cc ts. - - -
= v_
to th.
my &
Media cantar ik , N.H. .
"4
\
a 4
Y%
aw an
_ m ,,,, G 1 2 1 W % y .
pgawed R' i
-' onte/ Time:
/ ' !#[5B/7 i\ f!,
%;\.s,q3 y
9 1 j
- e. 2 m ... ..... sw n ne w s,a u ,
i f_ r +
@.q-0 NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee l f g fl?lOrl'I7f AldWh 2did455 i
Page2'j of q j
- EIS IS A DRILL ** **EIS IS A IRUL** ** MIS IS A CREL**
GDERAL DER 2NCY MESSAGE (EVACGLTICNt SEMD01 CIDSURE CF BEpGES AND WTTnrTPE RE R.1GE)
(RELEPSE OF nnIQhCTIVE MATERIAL) Y,.
f 3 ;,
anlease #
Data Massage
//
28/8
/ \\
0
./
Tim Massage piM
~
gyY,,.
na1 m by: _ - / { CV % y ,.
1
^ - - y N.'g , eg.
'Ihe fell y-sy released by the m oned mmetts of Rssytnea, orgerd - -_ of New Hampshire Yankee, under autturity vow by geode:npr of ." "m.
'f A GDERAL DERGENCY k at 1 32 p . today at Santxtok Nuclear Pcuer StaticDqh GENDtWS namns that events are M programs that could resukJ.ngsmo si Meuse of radioactive nurtime: ials with '
rulemmesr@wfg go bdgsqs levels set by the twited statsstawirmmental Protectic4hpuncy outside tituF mehreck Staticn site boundary.Q .A A reles m facii ve material into the air at14
'Ihe New I ankee Offsite organi to the pechlm. Massadmootts govemuunt =1= have ied.
l
'Ihm Governce of : - ---- -t : f =+_-
kk a---- following actions. l J
Dunediate evacuation- for in salists.try/ Ammaburv/
Marr4 = / -^ =v/ - - ' ^-- W ^ m = - i..
- == - " " % '
Ftr the Wim Centar is located at eetric ty'at 1101 'Argike Street in North For m14 NM armi - - S = + - - i, the Pelon Omntar is at the I mamadusetts.,8D-- "-IL Facility at 44 River Striset in Beverly.
'Ihe thited Guard has been requested to enforce a tarMaile safeey m m im o m n -t.r. n ~ m . m .u.s.re - t.r.
naar the plant are advised to relocate or dock in wters further than tan-
- siles from the plant.
e '
s
< P-NgiO Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee NEWS RELEASE
- m s IS A CRE L** **DEIS IS A IREL** **EIS IS A IREL**
GDGRAL IMEIGNCY MESSAf2 (EVActRTIN; H
SEASCNAL CLCSURE OF BDGES AND WIIDLIFT RI21XE)
(RELEASE OF RADIQhCI'1VE Mh311 RIAL) ,
(contirmad) g ue at t-- t and wk ar=== r c=14=hv to Pite T=N irebv44m the
. e- M i==ve ^ ' - --- ------- . r, Parker River Natiemal Wild 1ifa w d' iunarii n+ml y, 0
3 r, % v Services offered at the Rec:sption Centers ani turnamurded for all eveman irclude: nenitariny for w(Mr 4.uhmanatiog ~
necomsary; omre cantars.
information ard raessage centers; and%eferral to Perstms in the conpunitiesiddracted to are advised to take the East convenient roads south.5 '
- 1, Beute IA, Interstates 95 or 495 - ard travel , . in' direi_ the Maception centers.
Traffic guides will assist % > g All schoo 32bkIWthe ' t4 h W to svecuate arN heing evacuated
~ ta& G -:-- {l W located. 9srents should to the Mverot to actcol*h fw tothepast oceaunity in titi6tt,they their chi)qiken since are
'tus schools are? bairg. evacuated and cnildren aAbain; taken directly to* E School chil will then 'sent to ccr. +ta cum *p~ ggeptim A in Walthamcenters. where they pi M up.
Q- f,
\p If you have been advised to evacuate do not havn.
acemens else, h===
tu W t.icn and cannot get a ride a nai e up and take you to a will travel along main routes Reception contar. Dani test time buses will begin traveling thnee in town. Ftr a:re informatim look up eemegency information on the bus and em were mailect to you.
bcechures about Seetzcaid
/'
If you
, k h; ;-- pz w other person in your home sto needs a -4 =1 and has ret ande gravious mm, h with New
'the New Hoopshire Yankee Offs .ta Response Hespehire Essegancy Ops , kationg) enter at 555-1234. If you have alzsedy registered, there is to hohd t;p fall now; help will soon be cri its way.
Yv.ty All >= in 'the area to be evacuated are urged to be good na4M and help cm,0 ether by sharing rides and helping others with prtblems.
k m
A r,
b f OpJ NEWS RELEASEis
.. Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee I
% 3/ of 9/
i **EIS IS A CRIIL** **EIS IS A IRILL** ** MIS IS A IRIIL**
gag lRAL DGRGENCY MIESAM (EVACUAITEN; 593201 CLOSURE OF BEPGES AND WILDLIFE RElviE) y3 (RELEASE OF RADIQPCTIVE MICERIAL) 6 l (continued) 'c i '. , .: '"bb If you krm of any neighters ce cc wk.. wik,Manguage or M, problems, please check en them to be.sure they have been informed of the s.-pc,/ armi tnb..srx1 that they sticuld do. '
\
Before you leave your home or W1=QAnaks Dutz have put cut allsure$'yj$*p fires and ciceed fireplacob$impers. IceK all doces when leave. Taka blankats and pillows wi chies whicts you regularly take. Pack lin$1dtWJer
$ ugh c$qthirqyourforousip and days.
impural any ==d If you are at work f outside the evacuatier6aites; live insida it, you umy return hans to mlish thage chores %nir, family members ce neousitary balcngings.
%\ *Q W'fia.ii %
of e%p Stah'officia%"
t fanaers arzt dairy %.6. iriW communities
. r %. --
n utury, w newtury, and p, should: 4g. V
.gg
- Moveal$k d'ig livestcdc inside a or aholtar.
- Provide the animals with stored and water'sh "pedkace ocurtes of cutside air into their W idh gs. \f
- Move cutside feed Nndeces thma, if W hie.
- Stors back-up ' tis og inside ' 1 dings and cover outdece walls, rainberrels, Asihar sources of collected water.
Plenas 52 w case af personal amargency.
If you areN hans,4(ake with you the arrmal emurgency infocantion asiled to you, which inctludes}.wacuation routes and ph. If thsee are unavailable, g(ttub local telephena book for additional infonaution.
Ib rupest: Sea'istidok Station has AmMared a General E; w yc a:indition. I
(
q :s. ),
.._.~... ..., _ _
e c Mf-C NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page9 of 9/
- IMIS IS A IRII.L** *6 IS A IREL** **IHIS IS A IRILL**
GmIRAL D2EENCY MCSSAGE (L'VACKATICE AND SHEllIIRING; SEASC2RL CLOSURE OF BEhCHE!S Alc WTTrr.TTE RENGE)
(IELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL)
(contimed) q '
' mis message will be repeated every fifteen mimtes or u nN.1 new intw. tion is available. Esop tuned to this EBS station for the latest official infcannat.icn. C' -
\. ' . s. -:s e'
.y @' %.% g Approved: ; t. t s catenime:
w: $DM/g
( ostenim.: 2bdelrr97 aspyt,,
.( .M k ra ii, s
if 9 o.tegi
- MIS Is ! ;j.
- ms Is A tmIII**
, $., **mkipg...rmIIL**
. v
';.:*.s/ n' : \.\.
*h*',,f- "O*
6+ , \ ;; .
WN 3'(g
.g,rh'#*j?? *(*)
.,g.i:A
>h?%
I 'h M.,
v .'g b
$ 's, . .I Y.sY[,'
. .y-v L - - _ _ . _ _ _ - - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _)
- ~ - - a....=.,..
i P
i
. M4HO M NEWS RELEAS(
Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page 33cf q f
- 2{IS IS A DRI'i.,** .**DIIS IS A IRILL** **EIS IS A DRILL **
\
gas gygg m *@
(\, .;. 3 3 Release # /4 \\ '/'
Data Massage Released 06/28/88 Yh, Time Maamage Peleased 3./ e ,i *-, .<;)
Relaa w by: e NHY'offsi f 0 Dil & d h
(. . . . i.4
, 22 followinJ T y=4
'uM1 SystemOfmammage was rpleased by the
- f. Ma % ,pffaita 5 ,2ation of New authority --?- the G Jc dMa-mar +1usetts.Wyankee, y under attention,wamq 9u mmy, resfeines anddiaitors without 2%wuan sgtb. town '
duty,sp,nNewtay, west Ndiibury, and Newkx.D#'i.T" Buses will begip#pu g emergercy reutas at: -\ .. i
?~Nwy v/g Salisbury/1 g4:45 p.m.
4:05 p.m.
(\O \g\
\, /
Marrimac 5:15 p.m.
Nedury 5:15 West Naneury 5: 1 Nedurypcet consult the amargency..#
5 1.1 p.m.
." s ed to you for street names and locaticns dat'tas.
dtK A; pain, Wwill emergency routes in the towns of pu-s y, p , Newtmy, West Newtury, and Neduryport at:
y j; Salistmy({#'g4:45 p.m.
?~w ay 4:05 p.m.
Marrimac 5:15 p.m.
Newbury 5:15 p.m.
West Newtury 5:15 p.m. ~
7, Neturypcrt 5:15 p.m.
i Y
. . ~ ..
A
, s
$A4HJ g- NEWS RELEASE
( Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee l
)
j Page3fof}l '
- ':ms IS A DRII.L** **TES IS A IRILL** ** DES IS A ERILL**
BUS BCUIES ..
(cer:tirued) 'd.,
- -s ,
App:Uva:1: f cDate/ Time: I.s Apprmind: te/ Time:
- /b Apptuved:
- e. G .
4
,ls ,, Date g% yjI*/
- 2IIS IS A IRILL** ** g ,,IS A % * **TUS IS A IRILL**
4 %xo
- c. u.
v.
\
, ,en ,, %;&j$1%'Q %.
q y ,.,s..vg+ . v c. 1 n >,
+.,
4 '03f s,, ,-
%A...
1 . <%s i
3-
'I',%. .[./e. 'w\ '\
- i b%#'
%# ' 37 % \\
. ## j,
\, 'g #
.es N
, k'
,[dhy
- % \
4.r \
\%
- N
- \
F .
l cs k *s I
- v/e-
'gg' i
lO l
, _ , . .. .. nf pf ;g.. 999 .gse; re:. ?O MEDIACEN'E8 ps n
@ toc V NEWS RELEASES Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page.3$of $/ I
- 'IMIS IS A IRIIL** **'IMIS IS A IRIIL** **'IHIS IS A IRIIL**
EVACATION OF TDHGIE )RSSAGUSEITS EPZ CWIINUES 4
%. 2, )
Belease # /3 r, >
t Date Meesage Released 06/28/88 'V.'s Time Massage Released 4:44 e f,
'C'g Y fp, i
3+ 4v.' tf l
Dracuatim of . k plaming zone o:ritinues urder the df =ction of tns'- ,us censunities witpLys w af the ten mile )
4 Offsite ]
Response Organizaticri of New QManhas. % '/ !
ccpected time to oempitta evacuatihp 11:00 h.m. Residents of the l- cannunities being qatiikas .edvised pse the evacuation bus routes and e
ax 5-*=v. West *" ' ",h wi :r- 1 #
at the "- _' :m the Deceptieripunter is located
% Elecf:ric Facility at 110133:mpihm Streb in North Andc" Y M % '%, .
For banv I. - ^ wy arrs .- ^=~s.. .a. h neception Massachusetts p F eility at 44 River 'at the in Beverly.
rru th. d en centers e nees heunireira d ing rarered to cs W ta care ounters: 'g \V Frcan Salisbury, & ^=L_, .
they ara being sent to cs.g.+te
- Care cantar #1 in ,
rras ammatury,
- c '*an- lr, #nlLwast Newbury they are assignes to w ( M
%pu*r o,.es.E1 o.t.,m , u er -inm- f.A,*
m,2(fR o t.in ,e, ihroep
- s.iX452d/ , o.t.in ,M&Tc 97 i
l l t
86e 9/1988 18t?# F# m to MED:# CENTER
$0f-J Massa NEWS RELEASE usetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee Page_4 of c)j nIIS IS A TRILL 'IEIS IS A IRILL DIIS IS A IRILL RCtIASE # d SCMtERY OF DN!NTS NEWDCIOi, !GI - 6/28/88 - The followirg represents"t,'Susanary of Events followirq the Gereral hy.cf at the Seabrook Station Nuclear POWar Plant.
At 09:09 a.m. , an alert was declared at'}
f 'g /
- 1. 4 Statione / ;#
- 2. At 11:46 p.m., a site area nas Nazzid.4 The Governca cf Massachusetts recommended cl all the beach and stata park areas from N4*wy to Plombpland. @16,,peleases at this time e wed. \,
A,j p g#Aps.
- 3. At 12:53 p.m. , yhpf tJS Oquist Guard enforcirq a five-mile safety zone in coenn heters tion.
^
- 4. At 1 ses declared at 3,taticn.
- 5. Ath:46,aEgbesseo - 4 W ye antarial nos rol ifnto thafair.
?~, ;y 6, Q,qr
- 6. 201 w%ee under authority of the+#ernce of a reocumarded At 2iiW, fan atgt'~the residents of a='4**y athq Raisidents evacuaA4 Amesbury. in the aevi. ed% %, e m m ee,r at W % nurt
,,,j
- 7. At 2:17, L y cf catical s in the trains of Aa14ahwy, Amesbury, Marr , , and Neduryport were sounded. -
, .c
- 8. At 2:55, the its ocean water safety acne around
% Plant ,
- 9. At authority of the M4 Govutnor, reocassended
, townk p L d 'the 10 mile zone evacuata due to the General h v. y. *0 k%k J 3 cts is y . # nizS zs A tmztt acts zs A -
6 x
lb' L s J;
i L ____ . ____ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ t
ed4 ^V HO NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee PageNorgj E IS IS A IRIII MIS IS A IRILL 'IHIS IS A IRIIL SUPMhRY & IM!NIS .r .3 (carThinued) 4,. \
%'s,
- 10. At 3:57, sirens in the six towns wre sourde$. For M -7 ,A ut Newbury and Marrimac, the F- y W Center is located at.4 W M Electric Pacility at 11:01 Turnpike Str4wh in North AndcNup?' B: 2r h14%, Newbury, and Newburypcet, the the MA Electric Facil.ity at 44/ River StingBeverly.%, Center is at Appece d: $ % ,. ( : M Appn m a: bb'# #, $ T@, Intenim.: ////SA s Appecae: Md8 oatensa t I I N [re f 4
-t{Km ff y,* @"\'Y)
T; = ^ -
V, h
3;~ u g.== =^ 7b, n" .
y
\, k, N ( V ;)
cC% ~f
- u %'t $$N>>.
Mf
. ye 1
O
.._.~...._ . . - ,
r r _
t
@E4HJ J NEWS RELEASE Massachusetts Offsite Response Organization of New Hampshire Yankee D S$0f il RELEASE # /[
OVERIURN IINBER TRLX:K BIDCICS I-95 West Newbury, June 28,1988, 5:45 pen. . .
'}.
An overturned Scotland Road is blocking lumber traffic truckflow on Route I-95 southbound ah the 7.inc:ticr1 of emergency planning zone has been tutuutxd Traffic "auti, ofythe the Ne!ag .tYaffic is bahn detoured south cal Highfield Raad to Midd!L 1.Ibed to Orchard Street to Central Stzset then repining Rxzta*I-95. \+ ,,wt .
T *. g \,jh#'
/ p?$2fg Approved:
m :d@b ,*f outerrimm:
- o,e.im,,: liar /7m Eff 'Fl
- 4 O -,blACd/M%. o.e.,m,,: iW /Mr g%
~
g , y.i, ' q;R,f
% ,er %x x
$ '" qs
\(Qr4 4
{%,
/'
k> fQ v., 9 - y.,, j
- s. % '.,:q..e,[,.
wf , E _ _ - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- --
ATTACMINT 3 39 g Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 12 Rev. O Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2 MESSAGES INDEX Attachment Titl !
- 1. Mee? ages Index 2.
Prerecorded Generic Alerting Message 3. Prerecorded Beach Clocing Alerting Message l 4 Prerecorded EBS Activation Advisory Message
- 5. Prerecorded Alert Message 6.
Alert Message (No Release of Radioactive Material) 7. Alert Message (Release of Radioactive Material) 8. Prerecorded Site Area Emergency Message 9. Prerecorded Site Area Emergency (Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) Message (May 15 to Septoseer 15) 10. Site Area Emergency Message (No Release of Radioactive Material; Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) l 11. Site Area Emergency Message (Release of Radioactive Material; Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) l 12. Site Area Emergency Message (Sheltering / Communities; Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) (No Release of Radioactive Material)-
- 13. }
Site Area Emergency Message (Sheltering / Communities; Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) (Release of Radioactive Material) 1 14. Prerecorded General Emergency Message 15. Prerecorded General Emergency (Seasonal :losure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) Message (May 15 to Septemoer 15) 16. General Emergency Message (Sheltering / Communities; Seasonal' Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) (No Release of l Radioactive Material) 1 i i _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - - - - = - -
/0f#//
.7 Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 13 Rev. 0 Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2 1
l
\
MESSAGES INDEX ! (continued) Attachment Title
- 17. General Emergency Message (Sheltering / Communities; Seasonal Closure of Beeches and Wildlife Refuge) (Release of Radioactive Material)
- 18. General Emergency Message (Evacuation and Sheltering; Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) (No Release of l Radioactive Material)
O 19. General Emergency Message (Evacuation and Sheltering; Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) (Release of Radioactive Material) l
- 20. General Emergency Message (Evacuation: Seasonal Closure of Besches. and Wildlife Refuge) (No Release of Radioactive l Material)
- 21. General Emergency Message (Evacuation Seasonal Closure of Beaches and Wildlife Refuge) (Release of Radioactive Material) ! i
- 22. Downgrading of Emergency Message
- 23. Termination of Emergency Message
- 24. hissentalMessage1-BusRouteTimes
- 25. Supplemental Message 2 - Parents with School Children in Evacuating Areas
- 26. Supplemental Message 3 - Precautionary Actions for Farmers, Farm Workers, Food Processors and Food Distributors
- 27. Supplemental Message 4 - Emergency Actions for Farmers, Farm Workers, Food Processors and Food Distributors
---_m__-__-m___. _ _ - . _ _ . a a
" Page 14 23 A " of 1 pgg, GENERIC ALERTlHG HI PRERECORDED Date Message ReleasedTime esponse rector Message Released site on your Released by: NHY Turn Nuctsar Power Station, a problem at Seabrook t'
There is
'-
- Attention.more information, radio for e
6
.=
l l
Y) l 5 i Amendment 4 [ IP 2.13 Page 15 Rev. O Attachment 3 Page 1 of 1 PRERECORDED BEACH CLOSING ALERTING MESSAGE (English and Canadian French) I Date Message Released Time Message Released Released By: NHY Offsite Response Director
" Attention. There is a problem at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. Leave the beach area at once and turn on your radio for more information.",
l 9 iLi - 1
'b l Of Amendment 4
. IP 2.13 Page 1 Rev. O Attachment A Page 1 of 1 PRERECORDED EES ACTIVATION ADVISORY MESSAGE Date Message Released Time Message Released , Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director "We interrupt this program because of a local emergency. Important information will follow. This is not a test." ( (TONE)
"We interrupt this program to activate the local Emergency Brosocast System at the request of the Governor of Massachusetts and public health officials. This message is directed to persons in the communities of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, West NewOury and NewburVDort.
This is not a test." I il O\ l l l 1
c,.
'/vf gj f-~3 Amendment 4
(\- ') IP 2.13 Page 17 Rev. O Attachment 5 Page 1 of 2 PRERECORDED ALERT MESSAGE Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director I l "We interrupt this program to bring you the following message. Important infor- I mation for the communities of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, West l Newoury and Newouryport will follow. This is not a test. There is a problem at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. It has been classified r'~'g as an ALERT An ALERT pres ~ents no danger to public health and safety - any l ( ,/ release of radioactive materials would be limited to levels well below those set by the Unitec States Environmental Protection Agency. The Governor of Massachusetts recommends that no action is required by the general puolic at this time. The purpose of declaring an ALERT is to make sure that emergency workers are available to respond if the situation becomes more serious. The alerting system for Seacrook Station -- which includes sirens, tone alert radios and emergency messages -- will be put into action if plant safety is threatened.
~
In addition, y information brochures ace mailed annually to residents of the Massac s communities of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrisec, Newoury,_ , west NewourY PVDort. If you are in any of these Communities, you should look up that emergenc reation. If these are unavailable, infor-mation can be found in are telephone boo This information could be helpful
]><C in understanding future mes es.
If you know of any neighbces or co-workers with hearing or language problems. please inform them of this message. Once again: An ALERT has been declared at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station." O
k([ 4 / 1 ! l Ameadment & I t IP 2.13 Page 1 Attachment 5 Page 2 of 2 l PRERECORDED ALERT MESSAGE (continued) i l l "This message will be repeated f-aquently on this station until new information is evailaole. Stay tuned to this station for the latest official information. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, l you should tune to a local radic station in New Hampshire for news about your
- community.
l Actions recommended in this message are intend 6d only for persons in communities within ten miles of Seabrook Station." O O. 0; - O
l
% *)s ,
I Amendment 4 1P 2.13 Page 19 I Rev. 0
, Attachment 6 Page 1 of 1 ALERT MESSAGE (N0 RELEASE OF RA0!0 ACTIVE MATERIAL)
Date Message Released Time Message Released l l Released by: i NHY Offsite Response Director "An Alert condition was declared at - (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. An ALERT presents no danger to public health and safety - any release'of radioactive materials would be limited to levels well below those set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The Governor of Massachusetts recommends that no action is required by the general puclic at this time. For additional emergency information, residents of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury and NewburvDort should look up the annual emer-gency information brochures about Seabrook Station which were mailed to them. If these are unavailable, information can also be found in area telephone books. This information could be useful in understanding future messages. If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language problems, please inform them of this message. - Once again, Station is in an Alert condition. There has been no release of r . No release of radiation is about to occur. This message will be repeated every fif m n minutes or until new information is available. Keep tuned to this station for the latest official inforr Fion. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, l you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news acout your community." l 4
'~
- - - - - . _ . 2-
Y7 5/ Amenement 4 IP2.13-Page2gj ' Rev. O Attachment 7 i Page 1 of 1 ALERT MESSAGE (RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director "An Alert condition was declared at (time) today at Seacrook Nuclear { Power Station. An AL'EST presents no carger to public health and safety - any releases of radioactive material would*be limited to levels well below those se p by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. A limited release of s radiation into the air did occur at (time), but it does not present a danger to people near the plant. l The Governor of Massachusetts recommends that no action is required by the general public at this time. For additional emergency information, residents of $slisbury. Amesbury, Merrimac, Newoury, West Newbury and NewburVDort should look up the annual emera-gency information crochures which were mailed to them. If these are unavail-anie, information can also be found in area telephone books. This information could be useful in understanding future messages. If you know neighbo'rs or co-workers with hearing or language proeless, please inf of this sessage. Once again, Seabrook Station is in an Alert condition. There has Deen a limited release of radiation at the plant site. It does not present a danger to people near the plant and is well below levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes until new information is available. Stay tuned to this station for the latest official information.
, If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, t you should turn to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your ,
community." l !
Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 21 Rev. 0 ' Attachment B l Page 1 of 2 l i l j PRERECORDED SITE AREA EMERGENCY MESSAGE
, Date Message Released Time Message Released !
Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director "A SITE AREA EMERGENCY has been declared at Seabrook Nuclear P 'ower Station. A SITE AREA EMERGENCY means that some significant release of radioactive materials could occur, although any releases are not expected to go beyond levels set by O the United States Environmental Protection Agency, except near the Seabrook Station site boundary. The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has been notified and. is responding to the probles. The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Director is reviewing site conditions at this time and is discussing the { situation with Massachusetts government officials. The Governor of Massachusetts recommends tho' followings, , The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enfor:e a five-mile safety zone in the plant are meters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the to relocate to waters further than five miles from the plant, or return to6- local marinas. Boaters should not reenter the ocean safety zone until notice. In addition, emergency information brochures are mailed annually to residents of the communities of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrisec, Newbury, West Newbury, and Newburvoort. If you are in an of these communities, you should look up that emergency information. If these are unavailable, information can be found in area telephone books. This information could be helpful in understanding future messages. If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language problems, please inform them of this message."
99 9! Amendment a !
. IP 2.13 Page 22 Rev. O Attachment 8.
Page 2 of 2 1 I i PRERECORDED SITE AREA EMERGENCY 1 MESSAGE (continued)
"Once again: A SITE AREA EMERGENCY has been declared at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station.
This message will be repeated frequently on this station until new information is available. Stay tuned to this EBS station for the latest official infor-mation. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your
': community.
Actions recommended in this message are intended only for persons in communities within ten miles of Seabrook Station." 4 0 4 t-l I
=
0, t. I
$d } 9/ '
Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 23 Rev. O V. Attachment 9 Page 1 of 2 PRERECORDED SITE AREA EMERGENCY (SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) MEssAot (May 15 to September 15) Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director "A SITE AREA,EMEPGENCY has been declared at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A l
' SITE AREA EMERGENCY means that some significant release of radioactive materials could occur, although any releases are not expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, except near the Seabrook Station site boundary.
The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has been notified and l is responding to the problem. The New Hampshire Yankee Offaite Response Director is reviewing site conditions at this time, and is discussing the l situation with Massachusetts government officials. As a precaution, the Governor of Massachusetts has recommended the closing of beach and park areas, from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge. Persons at these beaches and parks or visiting the national wild 1 refuge should leave those areas immediately. In addition, ited States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile sa ' anne in ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore l boaters near ' plant are advised to relocate to waters further than five miles from the plant, or return to their local marines. Boaters should not reenter the ocean safety zone until further notice. The closings of the Wildlife Refuge, beaches and botting areas are pre- l cautionary measures based on policy adopted long before Seacrook Station was operational. occur." It does not mean that a releas.e of radiation has occurred or will I ts >
5/} gj 'i Amendment a ' IP 2.13 Page 24 ' Rev. O Attachment 9 Page 2 of 2 l i PRE-RECORDED j SITE AREA EMERGENCY (SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) MESSAGE (Hay 15 to September 15) (continued) 1 "In addition, emergency information brochures are mailed annually to residents l of the communities of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrimac, Newtiury, West Newbury and Newburvoort. If you are in any of these towns, you should look up that emergency information. If these are unavailable, information also can be found in area telephone books. English' and French emergency information flyers also have been made available at beach facilities and recreation areas. This infor-mation could be helpful in understanding future messages. It' you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language problems, ! please inform them of this message. - Once again, Seabrook Station has declared a SITE AREA EMERGENCY. This message will be repeated frequently on this station until new information is available. Stay tuned to this EBS station for the latest official infor-mation. J i If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, l you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community.
]
, l Actions recommended in _this message are intended only for persons in communities 1 within ten mil of Seabrook Station." )
(NOTE: This message is also pre-recorded in French.) l l O 1
Sp 9) Amendment 4 I IP 2.13 Page 25 I [ Rev. 0 ( Attachment 10 Page 1 of 2 1 SITE AREA EMER0ENCY MESSAGE (NO RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF SEACHES AND WILOLIFE REFUGE) l Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director
. ~
"A SITE AREA EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. l A SITE AREA EMERGENCY means that some significant release of
/ radioactive materials could occur, although any releases are not expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, except near the Seabrook Station site boundary. At this time, there has been ng release of radioactive material. As a precaution, the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has been activated and is responding to the probles. The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Director is reviewing site conditions at this time and is discussing l the situation with Massachusetts government officials. The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following: The United S t Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the unters near Seabrook Station. All offshore
- boaters near the plant are adv to relocate to waters further than five miles from the plant, or return to their local marinas. Boaters should not reenter the ocean safety zonc until further notice.
. l Beach and park areas fros' Salisbury to Plum Island, including the Parker River i Nations) Wi.1dlife Refuge, tre now closed. Persons at these beaches and parks or visiting the national wildlife refuge should leave those areas immediately. The closings of the beaches, boating areas and the wildlife refuge are precautionary actions based on policy adopted long before Seabrook Station was put into opera-tion."
k
- 1
b[# // Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 26 i Rev. O J Attachment 10 i Page 2 of 2
]1 SITE AREA EMERGENCY MESSAGE 1 1
(NO RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE puTERIAL; l { SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l J (continued)
~
l For additional emergency information, residents of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury and Newburyport should look up the annual emergency information brochures which were mailed to them. If these are unavailable, information can also be found in area telephone books. This infor-mation could be useful in understanding future messages. If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language problems, ' please inform them of this message. Once again, Seabrook Station has declared a Site Area Emergency. (Seasonal only) As a precaution, beach and Dark areas from Salisbury to Plum Island, includinQ the Parker River National Wildlife Refuoe, have been closed. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information is available. Keep tuned to this EBS station for the latest official information. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, you should turn to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community. m,' . O
( h['9/ Amendment 4
~ /s IP 2.13 Page 27 Rev. O Attachment 11 Page 1 of 2 31TE AREA EMEAGENCY MESSAGE (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL; SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by:
NHY Of f site Response Director l A SITE AREA EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear
\ Power Station. A SITE AREA EMER,GENCY means that some significant release of radioactive materials could occur, although any releases are not expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, except near the Seabrook Station site boundary.
There was a release into the air of radioactive materials from the Seabrook Station at (time). The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has'been activated and is responding to the incident. The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Director is reviewing site conditions at this time anu is discussing the situation with Massachusetts p nment officicis.
- r. :
TheGoverncee@Massachusettsrecommendsthefollowing: The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advised to relocate to waters further than five miles from the olant, or return to their local marinas. Boaters should not reenter the safety zone until further notice. j Beach and Dark areas from Salisbury to Plus Island,' including the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, are now closed. Persons at these beaches and oarks f'~'s or visiting the national wildlife refuge should leave those areas immediately.
\ The closings of the beaches, boating areas and the wildlife refuge are precau-tionary actions based on policy adopted long before Seabrook Station was put into operation.
$gf gj Amendment 4 l IP 2.13 Page 28 l Rev. O Attachment 11 Page 2 of 2 SITE AREA EMERGENCY MESSAGE (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL:
CLOSURE OF 3EACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (continued) For additional information, residents of Salisbury, Amesbury, Metaimac. NewburV, West Newbury and Newburvoort should look up the annual eme?gency infor-mation brochures which were mailed to them. If these are unavailable, informa-tion can also be found in area telephone books. This information could be use-ful in understanding future messages. If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language problems, please inform them of this message. Once again, Seabrook Station has declared a Site Area Emergency. (Seasonal cniv) As a crocaution, beach and Dark areas from Salisbury to Plum Island, includino the Parker River National Wildlife Refuoe, have been closed. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information becomes available. Stay tuned to this EBS station for the latest official information. . 1 l If you are in any of the New Hemoshire eastern Rockingham County communities, you should turn,to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community. j O
56 l 9l 9 Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 29 Rev. O Attachment 12 Page 1 of 2 SITE AREA EMERGENCY MESSAGE (SHELTERING /COMUNITIES; SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (NO RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Message Released I Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director "A SITE AREA EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A SITE AREA ENERGENCY means that some significant release of radioactive materials could occur, although ariy releases are not expected to go beyond levels set by the United' States' Environmental Prot 6ction Agency, except near the Seabrook Station site boundary. There has been no release of radioactive material from Seabrook Station; however, it is possible that one could occur. Based on conditions at the site, the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has been activated and is responding to the problem. The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Director is reviewing site conditions at this time and is discussing the situation with Massachusetts government officials.
. The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following:
The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the oc p waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advted to relocate or dock in waters further than five miles from the plant. Beach and park areas from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, are now closed. Persons at these beaches and parks or visiting the national wildlife refuge should leave those areas immediately. Residents in the communities of (edit as appropriate) (Salisbury /Amesbury) (Merrimac/Newbury/ West Newbury/Newburyport) are advised to SHELTER IN PLACE. This means you should remain indoors. Staying indoors will provice you with increased protection from radioactive material released from the Seabrook Station. In order to get the greatest benefit from the protection pr3vid2d by sheltering, you should take the following actions:
[ 9/ Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 3 Rev. O Attachment ',2 j Page 2 of 2 { t i SITE AREA EMERGENCY MESSAtiE (SHELTERING / COMMUNITIES: i 1 SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) (NO RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) o Shelter indoors. o Make sure all windows and doors are closed tightly. o If you are in your car, close all windows and vents while you continue to travel to your destination. o Turn off all fans, heating or air conditioning systems if they bring in outside air. o Take a radio with you and move to the room with fewest windows and doors. o Keep all members of your household indoors and stay tuned to your local Emergency Broadcast System radio station, o Remain indoors until told by 1 peal or state officials that it is safe to go outside, or unti.1 further protective actions are recommended. f s Schools, hospitals and other institutions in the communities advised to shelter are taking similar sheltering actions. Officials have instructions for pro-tecting the children or other persons in their care until sheltering is no longer necessary. Parents and relatives are advised not to call the schools or other institutions, nor to drive to the schools to attempt to pick up their children. Communit'y safety will be better protected if the schools are permitted to con-duct sheltering activities over the next several hours. Please do not use the phone except in casta uf personal emergency. If you are at home, look up the annual emergency information mailed to you for i further inforestion. If you are sheltering at your workplace or other public building, c the local telephone book for additional information. This information be useful in understanding future , messages. If you know o famy neighbor.s or co-workers with hearing or language problems, please be sure they are aware of this message and understand what they should do. To repeat: Seabrook Station has declared a Site Area Emergency. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information becomes available. Stay tuned to this EBS station for the latest official information. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community,. l
Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 31 Rev. O
\s_ Attachment 13 Page 1 of 2
$1TE AREA EMERGENCY MESSAGE (SHILTERING/ COMMUNITIES:
SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACMES ANO WILDLIFE REFUGE)- (RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite'.tsponse Director "A SITE AREA EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A SITE AREA EMERGENCY means that some significant release of radioactive materials could occur, although any releases are not expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, except near the Seabrook Station site boundary. A release of radioactive material into the air occurred at (time).
.[N The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Ofrector is reviewing site conditions at this time and is discussing the situation with Massachusetts government officials.
The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following: The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant'are advised to relocate or dock in waters further than five miles from the plant. Persons at beach and park areas from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River Nee $onal Wildlife Refuge, should evacuate those areas immediately. If you are atueetoech in Salisbury or Plum Island, or at the Wildlife Refuge, but do not heueryour own transportation, wait at the nearest inside location for a bus. Wait for a message over this station announcing what time emergency buses will take you to a reception center outside the evacuated area. Reception centers will provide help and temporary shelter. Residents in the communities of (edit as appropriate) (Salisburv/Amesburv) (Merrimac/Newoury/ West Newbury/Newburyport) 5
. 'are advised to SHELTER TN PLACE. This means you should remain indoors. Staying indoors will provide you with increased protection from radioactive material released from the Seabrook Station. Also, in order to get the greatest benefi from protection provided by sheltering, you should take the following actions:
1
Y'] 41 Amendment 4 i IP 2.13 Page Rev. O Attachment 13 Page 2 of 2 SITE AREA EMERGENCY MESSAGE (SHELTERING /C00000NITIES: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) o Shelter indoors. o o Make sure all windows and doors are closed tightly. If you are in your car, close all windows and vents while you continue to travel to your destination. o Turn off all fans, heating or air conditioning systems if they bring in l outside air. e o Take a radio with you and move to the room with fewest windows and doors. Keep all members of your household wdoors and st'ay tuned to your loce4 Emergency Broadcast System radio station. o , Remain indoors until told by local or state officials that it is safe to go , outside, or until further protective actions are reconsended. Schools, hospitals and other institutions in the communities advised to shelter are taking similar sheltering actions. Officials have instructions for pro-tecting the children or other persons in their care until sheltering is no longer necessary. Parents and relatives are advised not to call the schools or other institutions, nor to drive to the schools to attempt to pick up their children. Consunity safety will be better protected if the schools are permit-ted to conduct sheltering activities over the next several hours. Please do not use the phone except in case of personal emergency. If you rre at home, look up the annual emergency information sailed to you for further inf building, c If you are sheltering at your workplace or other public local telephone book for additional information. This 3 information be useful in understanding future messages. If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language problems, please be sure they are aware of this message and understand what they should do. To repeat: Seabrook Station has declared a Site Area Emergency. This message will be repeated every fifteen sinutes or until new information becomes available. Stay tuned to this EBS station for the latest official information. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockinghes County communities, you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news,about your consunity. l
Go g G) Amendment 4 i ( ( IP 2.13 Page 33 l
' Rev. O {
Attachment la Page 1 of 2 PRERECORDED GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director "A GENERAL EMERGENCY has been declared at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events are in progress that could result in some significant' release of radioactive materials with releases expected to go beyond levels sat by the United States Environmental Protection Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary."
"The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has been notified and is responding to the emergency. The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Respon,se Director is reviewing the site conditions at this. time and is discussing the situation l
[' with Massachusetts government officials. l t ' The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following: ,
"The United States Ccist Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advised to relocate or dock in waters further than five miles from the plant.
"In addition, emergency information brochures are mailed annually to residents of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury and Newburvoort. If you are in any of these communities, you should look up that emergency information.
If these are unavailable, information can be found in area telephone books. This information co d d be helpful in understanding future messages. Persons at beech and park areas from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, should evacuate those areas immediately. If you are at a bese but do not have your,h ownintransportation, Salisbury,or Plum Island, wait at theornearest at the Wildlife Refuge, for inside location a bus. Wait for a message 'over this station announcing what time emergency buses will take you to a reception center outside the evacuated area. Reception centers will provide help and temporary shelter.
" Residents in these communities are advised to stay indoors and stay tuned to this station until offical instructions are provided, j
- k. "If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language proolems, l j
please inform them of this message. ! l
N 9/ Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 34 Rev. O Attachment 14 Page 2 of 2 PRERECORDED GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (continued)
"Once again: A GENERAL. EMERGENCY has been declared at Seabrook Station.
"This message will be repeated frequently on this station until new information is available. Stay tuned to this station for the latest official information.
"If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, l you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your l community. l Actions recommended in this messaQs,are intended only for persens in communities 1 within ten miles of Seabrook 3 tab on. .
i ( c
- p ap 4 l
4 4 I l l 01 wK_-____._.-__________-__-.-_-____ _ ._ __ _ . _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ - _ - - . - - - .- - m ,a.,-
i I i N)l Ol 1 Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 35 f 4 Rev. 0 Attachment 15 Page 1 of 2 PRERECORDED GENERAL EMERGENCY (SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILOLIFE REFUGE) l MEESAGE (May 15 to September 15) Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director "A GENERAL EMERGEN0Y has been declared at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events are in progress that could result in some significant release of radioactive materials with releases expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary."
~
The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has been notified and is responding to the emergency. The New Hammshire Yankee Offsite Response Director C is reviewing site conditions at this time and is discussing the situation with l Massachusetts government officials.
"The Governor of Massachusetts has recommended the closing of beach and park areas, from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River National Wild-life Refuge. Persons at these beaches and parks or visiting the Nationti Wild-life Refuge should leave those areas immediately.
In addition, the United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advised to relocate or dock in waters further than five miles from the plant. Persons at and park areas from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River ional Wildlife Refuge, should evacuate those areas immediately. If you are at a beach in. Salisbury or Plus Island, or at the Wildlife Refuge, but do not have your'own transportation, wait at the nearest inside location for a bus. Wait for a message over this station announcing what time emergency buses will take you to a reception center outside the evacuated area. Reception centers will provide help and temporary shelter.
"In addition, emergency information brochures are mailed annually to residents of the communities of Salisbury, Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury and Newburyport. If you are in any of these communities, you should look up that emergency information. If these are unavailable, information can be found in area telephone books.
English and French emergency information flyers also have been made available at beach facilities and recreation areas. This information could be helpful in understanding future messages.
b 9/ Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 1 Rev. 0 Attachment 15 Page 2 of 2 PRERECORDED GENERAL EMERGENCY (SEASONAL CLOSURE OF SEACHES AW WILDLIFE REFUGE) ll MESSAGE (May 15 to September 15) (continued)
"If you know of any neighbors cr co-workers with hearing or language problems, please inform them of this message.
"Once again, Seabrook Station has declared a GENERAL EMERGENCY.
This message will be repeated frequently on this station until new information is available. Stay tuned to this station for the latest official information.
"If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, !
you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community. , l Actions recommended in this message tre intended only for persons in communiti within ten miles of Seabrook Station. , ( N0'TE: This message is also pre-recorded in French.) f 4
b 9/ Amendm:nt 4 IP 2.13 Page 37 O Rev. O Attachnent 16 Page 1 of 2 GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (SHELTERING / COMMUNITIES SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) (NO RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director
)
A GENERAL EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events are in progress that could l result in some significant release of radioactive materials with releases ! expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection l Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary. ' There has been no release of radioactive material from Seabrook Station; ! however, it is possible that,one could occur. l q Based on conditions at the site, the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response (V 1 Organization has been activated and is responding to the problem. The New , l Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Director is reviewing site conditions at this ! time and is discussing the situation with Massachusetts government officials. ' The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following: The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advised to relocate or dock in waters further than five miles from the plant. Persons at beach and park areiss from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River Mejtional' Wildlife Refuge, should evacuate those areas immediately. If you are beach in Salisbury or Plus Island, or at the Wildlife Refuge, but do not your own transportation, wait at the nearest inside location for a bus. Wait for a message over this station announcing what time emergency buses will take you to a reception center outside the evacuated area. Reception centers will provide help and temporary shelter. Residents in the communities of (edit as appropriate) (Salisbury /Amesbury) l . (Merrimac/Newbury/ West Newbury/NewburvDort] i s are advised to SHELTER IN PLACE. This means you should remain indoors. Staying indoors will provide you with increased protection from radioactive material released from the Seabrook Station. In order to get the greatest benefit fecm , the protection provided by sheltering, you should take the following actions: l l
?
2
. _ - _ _ -__ ____ L O
% l C;j Amendment & !
IP 2.13 Page 38 Rev. 0 l Attachment 16 l Page 2 of 2 GENERAL EMERGENCY NESSAGE (SHELTERING / COMMUNITIES; l SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) j l l (NO RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) o Shelter indoors. o Make sure all windows and doors are closed tightly. o If you are in your car, close all windows and vents while you continue to travel to your destination. o Turn off all fans, heating or air conditioning systems if they bring in outside air. o Take a radio with you and move to the room with fewest windows and doors. o Keep all members of your household indoors and stay tuned to your local Emergency Broadcast System radio station. o Remain indoors,until told by local or state officials that it is safe to go
, outside, or until further protective. actions are recommended.
( Schools, hospitals and other institutions in the communities advised to shelter I are taking similar sheltering actions. Officials have instructions for protec-ting the children or other persons in their care until sheltering is no longer necessary. Parents and relatives are advised not to call the schools or other institutions, nor to drive to the schools to attempt to pick up their children. Community safety will be better protected if the schools are permitted to con-duct sheltering activities over the next several hours. Please do not use the phone except in case of personal emergency. If you are at home, look up the annual emergency information meiled to you for further info . if you are sheltering at your workplace or other public building, c local telephone book for additional information. This information useful in understanding future messages. If you know of any neighbors or co-workers with hearing or language problems, please be sure they are aware of this message and understand what they should do. To repeat: Seabrook Station has declared a General Emergency. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information becomes available. Stay tuned to this EBS station for the latest official information. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern RocM ngham County communities, you should tune to a local radio station in New Hamphire for news about your community. , l
6&l C;; Amendment 4 f IP 2.13 Page 39
\ Rev. O ,I l
Attachment 17 Page 1 of 2 GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (SHELTERING / COMMUNITIES: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILOLIFE REFUGE) (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Messege Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY offsite Response Director A GENERAL EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events are in progress that could result in some significant release of radioactive materials with releases expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary. A release of radioactive material into the air occurred at (time), b
\
The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Director is reviewing site conditions at this time and is discussing the situation with Massachusetts government officials. ! The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following: The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advised to relocate or dock in waters further than five miles from the plant. Persons at beach and park areas from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River one) Wildlife Refuge, should' evacuate those areas immediately. If you are at h in Salisbury or Plus Island, or at the Wildlife Refuge, but do not havdyeur own transportation, wait at the nearest inside location for a bus. Wait for a message over this station announcing what time emergency ouses will take you to a reception center outside the evacuated area. Reception centers will provide help and temporary shelter. . Residents in the communities of (edit as appropriate) l (Salisburv/Amesburv] (Merrimac/Newbury/ West Newburv/Newburvoort) are advised to SHELTER IN PLACE. This means you should remain indoors. Staying indoors will provide you with increased protection from radioactive material l released from the Seabrook Station. Also, in order to get the greatest benefit f rom protection provided by sheltering, you should take the follotving actions: , l
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ ~
$)
i Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page Rev. O Attachment 17 Page 2 of 2 GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (SHELTERING / COMMUNITIES; SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) o Shelter indoors, o Make sure all windows and doors are closed tightly. o If you are in your car, close all windows,and vents while you continue to travel to your destination. o Turn off all fans, heating or air conditioning systems if they bring in 3 outside air. j o Take a radio with you and move to the room with fewest windows and doors. ! o Keep all members of your household indoors and stay tuned to your local Emergency Broadcast System radio station. l o Remain indoors until told by local or state officials that it is safe to go j outside, or until further protective actions are recommended. Schools, hospitals and other institutions in the communities advised to shelter *
, are taking similar sheltering actions. Officials have instructions for pro- '
i tecting the children or other persons in their care until sheltering is no longer necessary. Parents and relativeo are advised not to call the schools or other institutions, nor to drive to the schools to attempt to pick up their children. Community safety Hill be better protected if the schools are per-mitted to conduct sheltering activities over the next several hours. Please do not use the phone except in case of persotsal emergency. If ycu are at home, look up the annoel emergency infcreation mailed to you for further information. If you are sheltering at your workplace or other public , building, check the local telephone book for additional information. This information could be.useful in understanding future messages. If you know neighbors or ec-workers with hearing or language problems, please be s , are aware of this message and understand what they should do. To repeat: Seabrook Sta' tion has declared a General Emergency. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information becom s available. Stay tuned to this EBS station for the latest offi<:ial information.
^
If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community. l 1
M u f9l Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 41 i ('" Rev. 0 Attachment 18 Page 1 of 4 l l GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING: 1 SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) ! (N0 RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director A GENERAL EMERGENCY was.declar+d at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear i Power Station. A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events are in progress that could result in.some significant release of radioactive materials with releases expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary. [ There has been no release of radioactive material into the air from Seabrook Station; however, it is possible that one could occur. . The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Respense Organization has been activated and is responding to the problem. Massachusetts government officials have been noti-fied. The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following: The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the ocean waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advised to relocate or dock in waters further taan five miles from the piant. -
)
K. Persons at M and park areas from Salisbury to Plus Island, including the Parker River Nationel Wildlife Refuge, should evacuate those areas immediately. If you are at a beach in Salisbury or Plum Island, or at the Wildlife Refuge, but do not have your own transportation, wait at the nearest inside location for a bus. Wait for a message over this station announcing what time emergency buses will take you to a reception ce' iter outside the evacuated area. Reception centers wi'<1 provide help and temporary shelter. Immediate evacuation is recommended for people in (edit as appropriate) (Salisourv/Amesburv) k (Merrimac/Newbury/ West Newburv/Newburyport).
h9 C)) Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page t Rev. O Attachment 18 ' Page 2 of 4
)
GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (N0 RELEASE OF RA010 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) (Edit text on Reception Centers as appropriate) (For Amesbury, the Reception Center is located at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Andover. For Salisbury, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River Street in Beverly.] [For Newbury and Newburvoort, the Reception Center is located at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River Street in 8everly. For West Newbury and Merrimac, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpike Street in Nerth Andover.] .( Services offered at the Reception Centers and recommended for all evacuees include: monitoring for contamination; decontamination if necessary; infor-mation and message centers; and referral to congregate care centers. l, Persons in the communities directed to evacuate are advised to take the most l convenient roads south to main routes -- Route 1, Route 1A, Interstates 95 or 495 -- and travel south in the direction of the Reception Canters. Traffic guides will assist you. All schools within the communities directed to evacuate are being evacuated to the designated Reception Centers for the community in which they are located. Parents being should not drive to school to meet their children since schools are now evac Reception and children are being taken safely by bus directly to their in School children will then be sent to the where they may be picked up. 4 If you have been advised to evacuate but do not have your own transportation and cannot get a ride from a neighbor or someone eise, buses will travel along main emergency routes to pick you up and take you to a Reception Center. Wait for an 4 announceetnt stating what time buses will begin traveling these emergency routes in you: community. For more information on the bus and evacuation routes, look l up the emergency information brochures about Seabrook Station which were mailed to you.
- G.
l l l 3
4 4,
' Amendm3nt 4 IP 2.13 Page 43 Rev. 0 9 Attachment 18 Page 3 of 4 l
GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l, (N0 RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) If you have a bedridden, handicapped or other person in your home who needs special evacuation help and who has not made previous arrangements with New Hampshire Yankee, please call the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Emergency Operations Center at [ - -
). If you have already registered, there is no need to call now; help will soon be on its way.
All persons in the area to be evacuated are urged to be good neighbors and help one another by sharing rides and helping others with problems. If~you know of any neighbors or co-workers with language or hearing probiems, please check on them to be sure they have been informed of the emergency and understand what they should do. Before you leave your home or workplace, make sure you have put out all fire:. and closed fireplace dampers. Lock all doors when you leave. Take blankets and pillows with you for your own use and any medicines which you regularly take. Pack enough clothing for several days. If you are at work outside the evac-uation area, but live inside it, you may return home to accomplish these chores and collect family members or necessary belongings. People 1?ving in the commu'nities of (edit as appropriate) l [ Salisbury /Amesbury] (Merrisec/Newbury/ West Newbury/Newburvoort] will be safer if they SHELTER IN PLACE i M istaly. This means to remain in-doors. Staying indoors will provide you with increased protection from radio-active material released froca Seserook Station. To get the greatest benefit from protection ;.rovided by shelterir.g, you should take the following actions: o Shelter indoors. o Make sure all windows and doors are closed tightly. o If you are in your car, close all windows and vents while you travel to your destination. O
*/ 9/
Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 4 R?v. 0 Attachment 18 Page 4 of 4 GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVAWATION AND SHELTERING: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (N0 RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) o Turn off all fans, heating or air conditioning systems if they bring in outside air. o Take a radio with you and move to the room with fewest windows and doors. o Keep all members of your household indoors and stay tuned to your local Emergency Broadcast System radio station, o Remain indoors until told by local or state officials that it is safe to go outsiae, er until further protective actions are recommended. Schools, hospitals and other institutions in the communities advised to shel,ter I are taking similar sheltering actions. Officials have insiiructions for pro-tecting the children or other persons in their care until sheltering is no longer necessary. Parents and relatives are advised not to call the schools or other institutions, nor to drive to the schools to attempt to pick up their children. Community safety will be better protected if the schools are per-mitted to conduct sheltering activities over the next several hout s. Please do not use the phone except in case of personal emergency. If you are at home, look up the annual emergency information mailed to you. If 4 you are sheltering at your workplace or other public building, check the local I telephone book for additional information. This information could be useful in understanding future messages. To repeat: Station has declared a General Emergency condition. This :nessage i be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information is i available. Keep tuned to this E53 station for the latest official in*ormation. If you are in any of the New Hemoshi.'e eastern Rockingham County communities. l you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for nec about your community. l
Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 45 9 Rev. O Attachment 19 Page 1 of 5 GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Message Releared Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director i A GENERAL EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events are in progress that could result in some significant release of radioactive materials with releases e expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary. A release of radioactive material into the air occurred at (time). The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization has been activated and is responding to the probles. Massachusetts gevernment officials have been noti-Pied. The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following: The dnited States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the waters near Seabrook Station. A)1 offs %re boaters near the plant are plant. ,- to relocate or dock in waters further than five aDes from the Beach and park aress from Salisbury to Plue Island, includicg the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, are NOW closed. '/erAons at tMeSe beaches and parks or visiting the national wildlife refuge should leave those areas immediately. Immediate evacuation is recommended for people in (edit as appropriate) (Salisbury /Amesbury) ($ rrimac/Newbury/ West Newb_ury/Newburyport].
f 9, Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page Rev. 0 Attachment 19 Page 2 of 5 OENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) (Edit text on Reception Centers as appropriate) (For Amesbury, the Reception Center is located at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Ano0ver. For Salisbury, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River Street in Beverly.] [For Newbury and NewburVDort, the Reception Center is located at Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River Street in Beverly. - For M Newbury and Merrimac, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Andover.] 1 NOTE: THE FOLLOWING IS TO BE READ ONLY IF ADVISED BY THE NEW HAMP YANKEE OFFSITE RESPONSE DIRECTOR THAT TV'S INCIDENT MAY O A CONTAMINATING ACCIDENT: There is a good possibility for this emergency to produce a contaminating accident. It is strongly recommended that as a precaution, persons leaving the towns monitoring. told to evacuate go to their designated reception centers for Services of includc at the Reception Centers and recommended for all evacuees monitoring for contamination; decontamination if necessary; infor-mation and message centers; and referral to congregate care centers. l Persons in the corsounities directed to evacuate are acvited to take the most l convenient roeds soutu to main routes -- F.oute 1, Route 1A, Interstates 95 or 495 -- and travel south in the direction of the Recept *;on Conters. Traffic guides will assist you. O
l l Amendment a p IP 2.13 Page 47 Rev. O Attachment 19 Page 3 of 5 GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF PARKER RIVER NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE)
]
i i (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE NATERIAL) (continued) l I All schools within the communities directed to evacuate are being evacuated to. the designated Reception Centers for the community in which they are located. Parents should not drive to' school to meet their children since schools are now being evacuated and children _are being taken safely by bus directly to their Reception Centers. School children will then be sent to the in where they may be picked up. If you have been advised to evacuate but do not have your own transportation and ) cannot get a ride from a neighbor or someone else, buses will travel along main -
)
emergtincy routes to pick you up and take you to a Reception Center. Wait for an 1 announcement stating what time buses will begin traveling these emergency routes in your community. For more information on the bus and evacuation routes, look , up the emergency information brochures about Seabrook Station which were mailed I to you.
)
i If you have a bedridden, handicapped or other person in your home who needs special evacuation help and who has not made previous arrangements with New
. Hampshire Yankee, please call the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Emergency Operations Center at ( - -
). If you have already registered, 1 there is no need to call now; help will soon be on its way. 1 1
All persons in the area to be evacuated are urged to be good neighbors and j help one anothesyby sharing rides and helping others with probloos, j at 1 If you know oflgy neightices or co-workers with language or hearing probicas, piense check on them to be sure they have been informed of the- emergency and understsnd what tr.ey should do. Before you leave your home or workplace, maka sure'you have put out all firars ! and closed fireplace dampers. Lock all doors when you leave. Take blanxets and pillow's with you for your own use and any medicines which you regularly take. Pack enough clothing for several days. If you are at work outside the evac-untion area, but live inside it, ycu may return home to accomplish these chores and collect family members or necessary belongings. ls _ _ - - _ - _ - _ _ - - - - - - _ - . . i
fOf I Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 48 Rev. O Attachment 19 Page 4 of 5 I l GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l 1 (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) People living in the communities of (edit as appropriate) l (Salisbury /Amesbury] (Merrisec/Newbury/ West Newbury/NeWurvoort] will be safer if they SHELTER IN PLACE immediately. This means to remain indoors. Staying indoors will provide you with increased protection from radioactive material released from Seabrook Station. To get the greatest benefit from pro- { tection provided by sheltering, you should take the following actions: o Shelter indoors. o Make sure all windows and doors are closed tightly. o If your are in your car, close all windows and vents while you travel to your destination. o Turn off all fans, heating or air conditioning systems if they br-ing in outside air. o Take a radio with you and move to the room with fewest wir> dows and doors. o Keep all members of your household indoors and stay tuned to your local Emergency Broadcast System radio station. o Remain indoors until told by local or state officia % that it is safe to go outside, ourwrtil further protective actions are recreuer4ed. Schools, hospi end other institutions in the communities odvised to shelter j are taking tieffer sheltering actions. Officials have instructions for pro-tecting the children er other persons in their care until sheltering is no longer necessary. Parents and relatives aret advised not to call the schools or other institution, nor to drive to the schools to attempt to pick up their children. Community safety will be better protected if the sebecis are per-mitted to conduct sheltering activities over thh next several hours. Please do not use the ahona except in case of perscrial emergency. ( If you are at home, look up the annual emergency information mailet+ to yc). If i you are sheltering at your workplace or other public building, check the local telephone book for additional information. This information could be useful in understanding future messages.
, .4 - ___ _
7E f9/ l
- Amendment 4
. ;[ IP 2.13 Page 49 L\ Rev. 0 Attachment 19 Page 5 of 5
' GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION AND SHELTERING:
SEASONAL CLOSURE OF 8EACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL) (centinued) To repeat: Seabrook Station has declared a General Emergency condition. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information is available. Keep tuned to this EBS station for the latest official information. If you are in any of the New Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities, l you should ttine to a local ' radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community. l b (
'W sp i
I t v 1
l l l i l Amendment 4 ' IP 2.13 Page 50 Rev. O I Attachment 20 Page 1 of 3 l GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) f l i (N0 RELEASE OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL) l l Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director l A GENERAL EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at.Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events.are in progress that could result in some significant release of radioactive materials with releases
; expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection 1
Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary. ' There has been no release of radioactive material from Seabrook Station; ho.ever, it is possible that one could occur. j 1 i i The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization is responding to the problem. Massachusetts government officials have been notified. The Governor of Massachusetts recommerds the following actions. l
)
The United 3tates Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-eile safety ! zone in the oc waters near Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are adv plant. " to relocate or dock in waters further than five siles from the i i Beach and park areas from Salisbury to Plum Island, including the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, are now closed. Persons at tnese beaches and parks or visiting the national wildlife refuge should leave those areas immediately. Immediate evacuation is recoartended for people in (edit as appropriate) l I (lS ],jsbury/Amesbu,ryl (Meerimac/Newbury/ West Newb gy/Newburypert).
O Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 51 Rev. 0 l l Attachment 20 i Page 2 of 3 l i GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (N0 RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) (Edit text on Reception Centers as appropriate) [For Amesbury, the Reception Center is located at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Andover. For Salisbury, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River Street in 8everly.] {For Newbury and Newburyport, the Reception Center is located at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River" Street in 8everly. For West Newbury O and Merrimac, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Andover.] Services offered at the Reception Centers and recommended for all evacuees includes monitoring for contamination; decontamination if necessary; infor-mation and message centers; and referral to congregate care centers. l Persons in the communities directed to evacuate are advised to take the most l convenient roads scuth to main routes -- Route 1, Route 1A, Interstates 95 or 495 -- and travel south in the direction of the Reception Centers. Traffic guides will assist you. All schools wi the communities directed to eveCutte are being evacuated to the designated tion Centers for the community in which they are tocated. Parents should drive to school to meet their children since schools are now being evacuated W children are being taken safely by bus directly to their Reception Centers. School children will then be sent to the _, in ___ where they may be picked up. If ynu have been advised t'o evacuate but do not have your own transportation ond cannot get a ride from a neighbor or someone else, buses will trav21 along main emergency routes to pick you up and take you to a Reception Center. Wait for an announcemer.t s.tating what time buses will begin traveling these emergency routes in your town For taore information on the bus and evacuation routes look up G you. emergency. the information brochures about Seabrook Station which wers mailed ts _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_-_ = _ -- -- -_ _ _ - - - - _ - - - - - - - -
9/ Amendm:nt 4 IP 2.13 Page 52 Rev. 0 Attachment 2 i Fage 3 of 3 1 TTNERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION: SFAetWal CLOSURE OF SEACHES AND WILOLIFE REFUGE) (N0 RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) If you have a bedridden, handicapped or other person in your home who needs special evacuation help and who has not made previous arrangements wi.th New Hampshire Yankee, please call the Now Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Emergency Operations Center at ( - -
). If you have already registereO there is no need to call now; help will soon be on its way.
All persons in the area to be' evacuated are urged to be good neighbors and help one another by sharing rides and helping others with problems.
- If you"know of any neighbors or co-workers with language or hearing problems,
$1 esse check on them to be sure they have been informed of the emergency and understand what they should do.
A Before you leave your home or workplace, make sure you have put out all fires and closed fireplace dampers. Lock all doors when you leave. Take blankets and pillows with you for your own use and any medicines which you regularly take. Pack enough clothing for several days. If you are at work outside the evac-untion area, but live inside it, you may return home to accomplish these cheres and collect family members or necessary belongings. Please do not use the phone except in case of personal emergency. If you are at home, take with you the annual emergency information asiled to you which includet evacuation routes and procedures. If these are unaw 31sble4 check the y telephone book for aceitional inform 4tior.. To repeats W ebrook Station has declared a General Emergency condition. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information is available. Keep tuned to this ESS station for the latest official information. If you are in any of,the 143w Nampg ieg eestern Rockingham County co m nities, ; you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news stovt your ' community. 9 O
Sl9j' Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 53 m Rev. O Attachment.21 Page 1 of 4 GENERAL EMRGENCY pomana8 (EVACUATION: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AM WILDLIFE REFUGE) (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) Date Message Released Time Message Released . Released by:
- NHY Offsite Response Director A GENERAL EMERGENCY was declared at (time) today at Seabrook Nuclear
, Power Station., A GENERAL EMERGENCY means that events.are in progress that could result in some significant release of radioactive materials with releases expected to go beyond levels set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency outside the Seabrook Station site boundary. ,
A release of radioactive material into the air occurred at (time). The New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization is responding to the i problem. Massachusetts government officials have been notified. , l , The Governor of Massachusetts recommends the following actions. The United States Coast Guard has been requested to enforce a five-mile safety zone in the ocean waters neer Seabrook Station. All offshore boaters near the plant are advised to relocate or dock in waters further than five miles from the plant. .- l Beech and areas from $alisbury to Plum Isisad, including the Parker River National Wi Refuge, are noe cloud. Persus at these beaches and parks ( or visiting the national nildlife rtfuge should leave thos.e areas issedf ately. l Immediate evacustion is recommended for people in (edit as appr@ riate) ($slisbuev/Amesourv] 1 l (Merris_ac/Newbury/ West NewDury/Newburvoort]. 1 1 1
\
Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 5 Rev. 0 Attachment 21 Page 2 of 4 GEMERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) (Edit text on Reception Centers as appropriate) * (For Amesbury, the Reception Center is located at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Andover. For Salisbury, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River Street in Beverly.] [For Newbury and Newburyport, the Reception Center is located at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 44 River Street in Beverly. For West Newbury, and Merrimac, the Reception Center is at the Massachusetts Electric Facility at 1101 Turnpiko Street in North Andover.] NOTE: THE FOLLOWING IS TO BE READ ONLY IF ADVISED BY THE NEW MAMFSHIRE YANrEE OFFSITE RESPONSE DIRECTOR THAT THIS INCIDENT MAY OR WILL PRODUCE A CCHTAMINATING ACCIDENT: There is a good possibility for this emergency to produce a contaminating accident. It is strongly recommended that as a precaution, persons leaving the towns told to evacuate go to their designated reception r,Mters for monitoring.
~--
Services offesquE at the Reception Centers and recommended for all evacuees includes aozitet>ing for contamination; decontaaf netiert if secosuary; infor- . estion and opssage centers; and referral to congregate care renters. l ! Persons in the cresunities directed to evecuate are advised to take the most l I convenient roads south to main routes ~ R a te 1, Route 1As Interstates SS or f 495 -- and travel south in the direction rf the Receptfon Cantorz. Traffic j puides vill assist you. 3 i ____ _ _ o
U 9/' Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 55
/' Rev. 0 Attachment 21 Page 3 of 4 I
GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILOLIFE REFUGE) l (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) All schools within the communities directed to evacuate are being evacuated to the designated Reception Centers for the community in which they are located. , l Parents should not drive to school to' meet their children since schools are now being evacuated and children are being taken safely by bus directly to their Reception Centers. in School children will then be sent to the where they may be picked up. If you have been advised to evacuate but do not have your own transportation and cannot get a ride from a neighbor or someone else, buses will trave 1'along main emergency routes to pick you up and take you to a Reception Cantor. Wait for an g announcement ( in your town. stating what time buses will begin traveling these emergency routes For more information on the bus and evacuation routes, look up the emergency information brochures about Seabrook Station which were mailed to you. If you have a cedridden, handicapped or other person in your home who needs special evacuation help and who has nc! made previous arrangements with New Hangshire Yankee, please call the New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Emerge.m:y Operations Center at [ - -
). If you have already registered, there is no need to call nows help will soon ce An its way.
All persons in the area to be evacuated are urged to be good neighbors and help one another by sharing rides and helping others with problems. If you know h ' neighbors or co-workers with language or hearing problems. please check SIthem to be sure they have been informed of the emergency and understand what they should do. i Before you leave your home or workplace, make sure you have put out all fires and closed fireplace dampers. Lock all doors when you leave. Take blankets and pillows with you for your own use and any medicines which you regularly take. Pack enough clothing for several days. If you are at work outside the evac-untion crea, but live inside it, you may return home to accomplish these chores and collect family members or necessary belongings.
/
UlOf 1 Amendment 4 ! IP 2.13 Page l Rev. O Attachment 21 Page 4 of a l GENERAL EMERGENCY MESSAGE (EVACUATION: SEASONAL CLOSURE OF BEACHES AND WILDLIFE REFUGE) l (RELEASE OF RADI0 ACTIVE MATERIAL) (continued) t Please do not use the phone except in case of personal emergency. If you are at home, take with you the annual emergency information mailed to you, which includes evacuation routes and procedures. If these are unavailable, j check the local telephone book for additional information. To repeat: Seabrook Station has declared a General Emergency condition. This message will be repeated every fifteen minutes or until new information is available. Keep tuned to this EBS station for the latest official information. If you are in any of the ,*iew Hampshire eastern Rockingham County communities. l 4 you should tune to a local radio station in New Hampshire for news about your community. l j l
. . l 4
i ei _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - ^ _ <
l Amendment 4 i IP 2.13 Page 57 Rev. O Attachment 22 Page 1 of 1 DOWNGRADING DF EMERGENCY MESSAGE Date Message Released Time Message Released , Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director At (time) the emergency classific& tion of was downgraded to the emergency classification of . Tne Governor of Massachusetts and public health officials recommend the l following actions: O (ENTER APPROPRIATE PUBLIC ACTION / RELATE PRIOR ACTIONS / RELATE TO ACTIONS THEY CAN NOW TAKE AND CURRENT RISK LEVELS IF ANY.),,
'p- ,
Please stay tuned to this EBS station for further information. O
$$ f l) i Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 58 Rev. O Attachment 23 i Page 1 of 1 'l l
TERMINATION OF EMERGENCY MESSAGE l Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director )
' 1 At (time), the Governor of Massachusetts and public health officials I determined that an emergency condition no longer exists at Seabrook Station, {
j 1 (ENTER APPROPRIATE GENERAL INFORMATION: Which communities may resume j normal activities; which communities, if any, may not resume normal ' activities and why not; which, if any, emergency actiers should be . continued; current risk levels, if any.) e l (Repeat announcement one time.) l 1 This concludes operations under the iocal Emergency Broadcast System. All broadcar,t stations may now resume normal broadcast operations.
.. J n i T- - l 4
1 1 O ,
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ __ l
Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 59 Rev. O t, Attachment 24 s Page 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE 1 BUS ROUTE TIMES Date Hessage Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director Attention, all residents and visitors without transportation in the (community / communities) of : Buses will begin traveli,ng emergency routes at: * - Salisbury (time) Amesbury O\ Merrimac Newbury West Newbury Newburyport Consult the emergency information mailed to you for street names and locations of your community's bus routes. l Again, buses will begin traveling emergency routes in the community / communities of . ats Sali ~ (time) Norri Newbury West Newbury Newburyport D I
b $ $) Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 60 Rev. O I Attachment 25 Page 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE 2 PARENTS WITH SCHOOL CHILDREN IN EV/CUATING AREAS Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director NOTE This announcement s' hall be broadcast when instructions to do so are given by the Public Information Adivsor. The following ressage contains additional instructions to parents with school children in evacuation areas around Seabrook Station. j Parents with children attending school within (edit as appropriate) (Salisbury, f Amesbury,1 [Merrimac Newbury. West Newbury, Newburvoort] are advised that their children are currently being safely evacuated by bus directly to a reception center outside the affected area. Children will then be sent to a designated host facility where they may be picked up.
~
Parents who Parents g iri the evacuation zone may go directly to the host f acility. Center for evacuation zone are urged to first report to the Reception community. The designated host facility for all school children evacuated from Massachusetts schools is the in . This message applies to all public, private and parochial schools and preschool I facilities within the affected area. To avoid confusion, parents are urged not to attempt to pick up their children at schools within the affected area. Rather, parents are asked to pick up their children at the i in . (Repeat this announcement one time) L___----_-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W( QI Amendment 4 IP 2.13 Page 61 O Rev. O Attachment 26 ' Page 1 of 2 SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE 3 1 PRECAUTIONARY ACTIONS FOR FARMERS, : FARM WORKERS, F000 PROCESSORS AND F000 DISTRIBUTORS I Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director {1 i (Select Actions As Appropriate) The following message is directed to farmers and food distributors in the com-nunities port). of (Salisburp, Amesbury)', (Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury, Newbury- { f,, j \ ) Oue to the emergency condition which has been declared at Seabrook Station, { State authorities have recommended that precautionary actions be taken by far-mers and food processors in some areas surrounding the plant. These actions are called preventive protective actions and are based on policy adopted long before Seabrook Station was operational. They do not mean a release of radiation big occurred or will occur. ; I According to State officials, farmers and dairy operators in the (community / communities) of (Salisbury, Amesbury) (Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury, Newburyport] should: o Move -prixtucing livestock and other grazing animals inside a barn or o ' 1ter.
.. ?
o Provi W b animals with stored feed and water and reduce sources of out-side air into their buildings. o Move outside feed supplies indoors or cover them, if possible. o Store back-up supplies of water inside buildings and cover outdoor wells, l rainbarrels, tanks or other sources of collected water.
D7[ 9/ l l l i I
)
Amendment'4 IP 2.13 Page 62 Rev.' 0 Attachment 26 ) Page 2 of 2 SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE 3 PRECAUTIONARY ACTIONS FOR FARMERS, FARM WORKERS, F000 PROCESSORS AND FOOD DISTRIBUTORS ) (continued) Food marketers and processors in the (community / communities) of (Salisbury, l Amesbury) [Merrimac, Newbury, West Newbury, Newburyport) should: ' o Stay tuned to this station to stay aware of recommended actions regarding food items. 1 o Call for more information.
?-
- j ll 1
l 4 i l O
~
i ' Amendment a IP 2.13 Page 63
,/ Rev. 0
( Attachment 27 s Pnge 1 of 2 SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE 4 EMERGENCY ACTIONS FOR FARMERS, FARM WORKERS, F000 PROCESSORS AND F000 DISTRIBUTORS Date Message Released Time Message Released Released by: NHY Offsite Response Director The following emergency actions for farmers and food processors in the north-eastern communities of Massachusetts are recommended by State authorities: l (Enter Names of Communities and Select Actions As Appropriate) l Farm Products - \ Authorities are monitoring milk, water, and food to determine if they a're safe to rearket. Do not destroy any food products unless you are told to do so by State officials. Detailed instructions will be given to you by them. Milk. Milk from animals and dairies should not be marketed. Food processors in those towns should hold milk for a period of time to allow for possible radioac-tive materials to decay. Milk can be frozen, concentrated, made into cheese, or dehydrated to allow this to occur. Milk in stores and homes is okay to drink. Meat. Livestquis exposed to external contamination say be used for food if they are adeque and monitored by authorities before slaughtering. Meat animals wi al contamination cannot be slaughtered until you are told by State out that it is safe to do so. If the animals' skins are con-taminated, tfG radioactive materials can be washed off with soap and water. In handling animals, you should wear protective clothing, such as that used in pesticide appliestions, to prevent contaminating yourself. Grain. Producers are asked to hold harvested grains until told that they are safe to market. If some additional action is necessary,'it may include milling and polishing. State officials will advise you about what is recessary.
. __________ = 2
N } 91 i l i Amendment 4 i IP 2.13 Page 6 Rev. O Attachment 27 Page 2 of 2 SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE 4 EMERGENCY ACTIONS FOR FARMERS, FARM WORKERS, F000 PROCESSORS AND F000 DISTRIBUTORS (continued) Fruits and veoetables. With green vegetables, skins or outer leaves should be removed and the remainder washed thoroughly. Potatoes, melons, root crops, peas, and beans require normal cleaning. Fruits that do not have to be picked immediately should be saved and picked after any radiation has decayed. Canning, freezing, or other storage of fruits or vegetables will also allow decay of some radioactive particles and sake them safe to eat. You will be told when it is safe to harvest and market your fruits and vegetables. Personal Safety State authorities are monitoring the area. They will tell you when it is safe to work your farm again or resume your food marketing operations. If you have been told you may cultivate your land, you should:
- 1) Wash hands thoroughly before eating.
- 2) Wear protective clothing (such as that worn during pesticide applications) when working outdoors. Remove outer clothing before entering your home.
- 3) Wear a dust filter over your nose and mouth if you are plowing or culti-vating dry land. You might also need to wear a filter if you are har-vesting corn.
Water Well water can be used for your family and animals. Pond or stream water (circle which is appropriate) can/cannot be used for your family and animals. Normal human drinking water outlets (circle which is appropriate) are/are not suitable for use. Insurance . I 4 If you suffered proveh economic loss due to a nuclear accident, you would be compensated. Seabrook Station carries insurance. This insurance covers per-I sonai injury and damage to property, including animals and crops. i _ _ _ - . 1
f y CARTER'- CROSS 27547'
- 1L ; JUDGE SMITH: Is-Dr. Carter available fo.i cross-A 2' examination now?
3 MS.'TALBOT: Dr. Carter is-now available'for' 4 cross-examination. 5 (Document proffered to all parties. )- 6 MS. TALBOT: -Before we'begin with cross-
'7 examination,LYour Honor, could I just ask how many people 8 need copies of-the attachments aside from the reporter, just 9' to conserve paper so I don't have to make a million copies?'
10 JUDGE ~ SMITH: I'll tell you what you can do-is,,if 11 we're done with Dr. Carter today we'll just give mine to the 12 reporter because I'll use the transcript. 13 MS. TALBOT: Okay.
'14 And Kelly has three, Your Honor. \
15 JUDGE SMITH: You may proceed. 16 CROSS-EXAMINATION 17 BY MR.-LEWALD: 18 Q Dr. Carter, my name is George Lewald and I am one 19 of the attorneys representing the'Appli.: ant. 20 Might I inquire whether you have at the table with 21 you the references to your testimony cited on page 47 22 A (Carter) Yes, sir, I do. L 23 Q Thank you. 24 A (Carter) Are you asking me whether or not I have 25 the documents? f Heritage Reporting (202) 628-4888 Corporation l
-m_
- __ .__ ._ .__ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ __2___.__
l 1 1 CARTER - CROSS 27548 1 Q I was wondering if you had the documents with you 2 at the table? I 3 A (Carter) I've got Perry's Book here. 4 Do you have the Sorensen? You said you were going 5 to bring it over. 6 Yes, sir. 7 Q Doctor, you say in the first page of your 8 testimony that you are Vice President for the Human Factors 9 Corporate Response Group in Washington, about 50 percent of 10 your time and about 30 percent of the time you are a 11 Visiting Fellow at the' Cooperative Institute for Research in 12 the Atmosphere at Colorado State University at Fort Collins. 13 Could I ask you, what is that organization that
; 14 you have the acronym "CIRA?"
15 A (Carter) CIRA: it's a Cooperative Institute l l 16 between Colorado State University and the National Oceanic f I iI 17 and Atmospheric Administration. 18 There are a number of those. There's one also at ; 19 the University of Colorado in Boulder. There's another one 20 at the University of Oklahoma in Norman. And there are l 21 probably others around the country as well. 22 It's a convenient -- I guess the way to put it: 23 it's a convenient mechanism for NOAA to give money, research l i 24 money to universities without having to go through a formal 25 bid process. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 4 i L _ _ _-_ _ - _ -
'ij :.
CARTER - CROSS 275491
~
jai ; -1 It's also a mechanism to trade bodies, people. If d 2 NOAA'did not want'to hire a sociologist they.could put me 3 there and hire;my services, which is essentially what 4 they'veidone. 5 Q' Who could put your there? s (5 AL (Carter) NOAA could. l-7- It's stated so that Colorado: State, if NOAA wants 8 me, has to accept me in that institute. 9- Q' And you're there in some. capacity? l 10 A (Carter) I am with CIRA so long as I have a { , . \'
-11 contract'with NOAA. At any point in which NOAA doesn't want.
12 to contract for my services in that manner, then I'm-no
, 13 longer with CIRA.
, .14 Q So the contract with NOAA is yours and not CIRA's?
t t
' 15 A (Carter) It is -- the contract is with CIRA for 16 my services. Yes. And the contract would'be with CIRA for, 17 for example, Dr. Harold Cochran. He is at Colorado State 18 and they have contracted for his services and contracted for
' 19. other people's services.
20 Q So it's actually your connection with CIRA that 21 results in the work you're doing for NOAA7 22 A (Carter) It's a convenient way for NOAA to get 23 me. 24 They could -- if they got me in a competitive bid 25 situation or tried to go some other route, it would be more Heritage Reporting Corporation
-(s (202) 628-4080
CARTER - CROSS 27550 1 bureaucratically difficult for them to do it. ; 2 O Are you alone in this regard? 3 A (Carter) Am I alone? 4 No , sir, there's a number of people on CIRA who 5 have contracts who are not regular faculty members of 6 Colorado State University, I guess that's the way to put it. 7 Q Does Mr. Baker or Dr. Baker also have a contract 8 with CIRA and with NOAA? 9 A (Carter) Dr. J. Baker? 10 Q Yes. 11 A (Carter) No. 12 O He does not? 13 A (Carter) No. 14 Q Does he work with you in a consulting firm of some 15 sense? 16 A (Carter) He's President of Hazards Management 17 Group; yes, sir. 18 Q And that is the first group? 19 A (Carter) No, there's three groups: the first one l 20 is Corporate Response Group; and the third one is Hazards l 21 Management Group. 22 O And that's headquartered or stationed in j 23 Tallahassee? 24 A (Carter) That's where Dr. Baker lives; yes, sir. 25 0 And that's not the National Hurricane Center? l l 9 i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27551 by . 1 A (Carter) No, sir. 3 x_- 2 The National Hurricane Center is a NOAA agency and 3 that's in Coral Gables, Florida. 4 Q Do you have anything to do with thac, officially? 5 A (Carter) Officially, no. I'm not, no. 6 Obviously, in the hu ricane work I have worked 7 closely with the staff there, but I am not a part of the 8 staff, no. l 9 Q Is there no liaison between the hurricane center 10 in Miami and the Hazards Management Group in Tallahassee? 11 A (Carter) No. l 12 Q None whatsoever. l 13 Now, at the top of page 2 of your testimony you i 1 I
,/'^'N. 14 say: "I am an authority in the area of behavioral response \'] 15- to crisis and emergency situations."
16 Did you write that? 17 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 18 Q Are you acknowledged somewhere in professional i 19 publications as an authority in this field? 20 A (Carter) I have done my work in the field for l 21 probably the past 13 years. My work has been cited by 22 others. 23 I guess the way to put it, the only reason that I 24 am at CIRA is because NOAA wanted me for that expertise in 25 those areas and it's on that basis. A f ) Heritage Reporting Corporation
\- / (202) 628-4888 1
l
- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - ~ .
7 ___- i CARTER - CROSS 27552 1 Q Well, are you saying that without you CIRA 2 wouldn't have the contract with NOAA; is that my 3 understanding? 4 A (Carter) Without me or someone with my skills. 5 There are, obviously, other people who have 6 similar sets of skills. 7 Q Now, you say after that first sentence: "Your 8 first work in this area." Does this mean your first 9 employment or your first publication? 10 A (Carter) My first involvement in the natural 11 disasters area of any type. 12 Q And this was work in relation to emergency 13 response to tornadoes, flashfloods, and hurricanes? 14 A (Carter) And earthquakes. 15 Q And what? 16 And earthquakes? 17 A (Carter) And earthquakes. 18 I didn't list earthquakes there. 19 I might add, since there are no earthquake 20 warnings to study in the United States that part of the 21 research was a little different. That's probably why I left 22 it out. 23 Q I'm missed a part: since there are no what? 24 A (Carter) There have been no warnings for 25 earthquakes in the United States. At least back in 1976. Ileritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4886
CARTER - CROSS 27553 1 Q In that period of time? 2 A (Carter) That's right. 3 O So there was no earthquake activity? 4 A (Carter) We studied three earthquake sites. But 5 we studied other aspects of the process with those. 6 Q But these were of some vintage, were they? These 7 earthquakes? 8 A (Carter) The earthquake studies were looking at 9 the dissemination of technical information from the U.S. 10 Geological Survey and FEMA and other agencies down to local 11 planning departments. 12 So it was a slightly different focus than the 13 warning studies. 14 MS. TALBOT: Excuse me, Mr. Lewald. 15 Dr. Carter, could you speak up because you're 16 facing that way and I'm not getting a sound at all. 17 MR. LEWALD: It's kind of awkward, you there and 18 me here. 19 JUDGE COLE: That microphone doesn't amplify. 20 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Okay. 21 JUDGE COLE: It goes to the court reporter's 22 system. 23 BY MR. LEWALD: 24 Q Would it be fair to call these " regional hazards" 25 if you were investigating them? Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
l CARTER - CROSS 27554 l l 1 A (Carter) Clearly, hurricanes are regional up and f 2 down the east coast and the Gulf of Mexico. The tornadoes i 3 are widely scattered over the entire eastern two-thirds of 4 the country and flashfloods can occur anywhere. 5 Q Well, they're regional as compared to point source i 6 hazards, are they not? 7 A (Carter) In that situation, yes. 8 Q What is a point source hazard? 9 A (Carter) A point source hazard would be a 10 chemical plant or a nuclear power plant where the site of 11 the hazard or the source of the hazard is fixed. 12 Q And that would also be the case of a volcano? . 13 A (Carter) Yes, I would assume. ( 14 Q Well, it is? 1 15 A (Carter) Right. 16 Q Now, after you worked with your colleagues in the 17 University of Minnesota you then spent two yeare at the 18 National Oceanographic and Atmosphere Administration; 19 Environment Research Laboratories in Boulder, Colorado. 20 And this is when you first got associated with 21 CIRA? 22 A (Carter) That's right. 23 CIRA was the mechanism for bringing me to the 24 Environment 25 0 --Research Laboratories. l i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9I
CARTER - CROSS 27555 1 A (Carter) Right. N 2 3 4 a
=
1. 6 7 8 9 10 f 11 12 13 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4088
-am _____m._.____.-__--__________-.mm ____._-___-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ m. a _m _. .1H _ d w ._.mL_.a.A__Aa.m :e_
i CARTER - CROSS 27556 1 Q And at that time you said developed the conceptual 2 basis for an automatic warning fan-out system, which is ; 3 currently being integrated into a prototype of the National 4 Weather Service future automation system, which would be 5 implemented in the early ' 90s. 6 Is this what you are currently working on? I 7 A (Carter) No, sir. 8 Q This is done? 9 A (Carter) Yes. 10 My part of that is done. I think it as last 11 summer, when I was in Boulder, I met with the people at the 12 Environmental Research Lab, and for about a half a day going 13 over how they were implementing it, what they were going to 14 do on the computer system with it. 15 But since I left Boulder, I have no involvement in 16 that other than to keep track of it. 17 Q Is this sort of a model of some nature that you 18 developed? 1 19 A (Carter) What it is, one of the findings that 20 came out of the Minnesota study was that fan-out systems 21 generally fail for predictable reasons. 22 And by a fan-out system, I mean where the weather 23 service typically does not call all local officials to let l 24 them know of a warning, but rather, calls some agency, and j 25 then the agency contacts additional agencies. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 Ol
x.
- CARTER - CROSS 27557-
o
~
' .' i . And one.of.the. problems we documented in the 3j%jJ b0 2i ' Minnesota study was the. fact.that at.the emergency agencies..
-3 the' dispatchers tended to be the least' trained, lowest 4 trained, highest-~ turnover rate'. And we documented a number 15 of casesLin which warnings.which'the weather service'gave to 6 a sheriff's office or something like that, itLdepended,;did; 7 not in - f act always get . disseminated to the other agencies.
<8 So what.this system I developed does is.you go in 9 and do'research. You identify the agencies that you want.to 10 warn. You_ identify the communication links among those 11 ' agencies. You then digitize your warning area,.the area 12 that you have warning responsibility for. You graphically 13; lay.out.the warning box, the area that you want to warn. It
- 14. .doesn't.necessarily have to be a box.
k '15 Then it goes through a series of computer routines
- 1G to determine which agencies have responsibility for the 17 areas that-you have chosen to warn.
18 'Once you have got those agencies, you can then 19 look-at their communication linkages to determine how you . 1
-l
.20 can get~to them if you go through a primary warning agency.
21 And it comes out with a series of instructions-22 that the forecaster can give to the dispatcher for the 23 example, I want to issue a warning, a tornado warning. I'll
]
24 read it to you. Could you please fan it out, and it gives 25 the. names of communications channels that they are used to Heritage R.eporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
CARTER - CROSS 27558 1 using. 2 In addition to that, it gives you the -- it looks 3 for isolated organizations, those that in fact cannot be 4 warned that way, so that you know that you are going to have 5 to take some special type of action to reach those. 6 That's basically in a nutshell what it does. 7 Q This is all programmed for computer access so 8 that -- 9 A (Carter) Yes. 10 0 -- with one telephone call you can send a message 11 out? l 12 A (Carter) Yes, it was designed to be operated l l 13 primarily with NAWAS, the National Warning System, which all l 14 weather services have, and which go to primary warning 15 points as designated by FEMA. 16 It was originally designed, this was back in 17 computer dark ages, it was designed on an Apple II, and it's 18 currently now being integrated into a broader forecast 19 program. That's the AWIPS that I mentioned. 20 Q Then say in 1982, you established a relationship 21 of the National Weather Bureau in Silver Springs? 22 A (Carter) National Weather Service. 23 Q National Weather Service. 24 A (Carter) Yes. 25 Q The weather bureau is in Miami. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
Ne l't-CARTER CROSS 27559-L.
... .f1E A -.. (C'a rt e r) ' They changed their name.
- )\ 2 Yes, sir-.
L 3 -Q' And-you say your initial-task there involved the 4 development and implementation.of the hurricane probability
.5 program.
l
~
-6 A (Carter) That's right.
7 In terms of'its use.by' local. officials and the
.8- public.and its. dissemination, I am not a meteorologist. I
~
9 did not do the technical meterological work on it. 10 O What is a hurricane probability: program? 11 A (Carter) The way to put it in perspective,.the 12 National' Hurricane Center issues.every sixLhours a forecast.
-13 for'where the-hurricane is going to go,.where it will:be in
.14 ' the next 12,.24, 36, 48 and 72 hours.
' 15 ' For each one of those time periods, from the time 16 .they issue the forecast, they give a latitude and longitude-17 . position.
.18 As everybody knows, those forecasts have an error 19 component to them. There is two components to the error.
And
~
20 One is a cross-track, where the storm is going to go. 21 the other.one is timing, when it's going to get where it ! 1
'22 goes.
23 And what the meteorologists -- what the hurricane 24 center has done is they keep meticulous records, very good 25 data records on where they forecast a storm to be and where
- /
} Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
m _ I CARTER - CROSS 27560 1 it actually ended up at those time periods. 2 And based upon these forecasts, they are able to 3 get a picture of the forecast error in a probability sense. 4 And the hurricane probability, if you will notice the next 5 time there is a hurricane as its approaching landfall, they 6 will give probabilities along various parts of the coast, 7 and those are derived from that forecast error. 8 Q And the probability aspect that you have done, 9 does that attach a percentage of error to the forecast at 10 this early stage? 11 A (Carter) Yes. 12 Essentially what it is, is based upon the 13 forecast. If I had a forecast that showed the storm going 14 right over New Orleans, New Orleans would have the highest ' 15 probability. But because of forecast error, the probability 16 would be probably just as large as I go east and west. It 17 depends upon how close I am to landfall. 18 Obviously, the closer -- the 12-hour forecast is 19 much more accurate than the 72-hour forecast. But it gives 20 me a good sense for if the storm is forecast to go one 21 location, how far on either side of that is also at risk to 22 getting the full impact of the storm. 23 Q The first forecast is a 72-hour forecast? 24 A (Carter) That's the farthest out they go in time. 25 Q And then they move up half that, to a 36-hour Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4006
^^ UTER - CROSS
- 27561 1 forecast?
2 A (Carter) There is a -- I don't know if it's made 3 landfall or not, but there is a tropical storm, Allison in 4 the Gulf right now. Every six hours for that storm they 5 give a forecast for where it will be in 12, where it will be 6 in 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours. 7 O So that there is a 72 hour -- well, a 72-hour 8 forecast could conceivably give you a first warning of a 9 hurricane, the existence of a hurricane? 10 A (Carter) Yes, that's true. 11 Well, I don't think that's what is relevant. The 12 72-hour forecast would give you, as it approaches tti coast, 13 the first indication of where along the coast.it might hit. 14 Q And what's the probability of error in that 15 forecast at 72 hours? 16 A (Carter) The maximum probability you have at 72 17 hours is about 10 percent, and that would be over a wide l 18 range. The average error at 72 hours is on the neighborhood l l 19 of 500 miles. So there is extreme amount of error in that 20 72-h,our forecast. 21 Q And then the probabilities lessen - get greater, 22 I guess, as the -- 23 A (Carter) As the time -- th at's right. 24 At 48 hours, the probabilities are up around 15 25 percent. At 36 hours, they rise up to the low 20s. At 24 Heritage Reporting Corp 3 ration (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27562 1 hours, they are up 25 - 30, something like that. And 2 finally at about 12 hours, they are above 60. And as the 3 storm is about ready to make landfall, they approach 100 4 percent. 5 Q Now who makes these forecasts? 6 A (Carter) The forecasters at the National 7 Hurricane Center. l 8 Q Now what part does the National Weather Service 9 play in this? 10 A (Carter) The National Hurricane Center is one of 11 the branches, is an organization of the National Weather 12 Service. 13 Q Are you working on the current hurricane that's in 14 the Gulf, you say, Allicia? ( 15 A (Carter) It's Allison. 16 Q Allison. I'm sorry. 17 A (Carter) Am I doing anything? 18 No, no. 19 0 You say from 1983 to 1985, you worked onsite as a 20 liaison between the local weather service offices and local 21 officials during five hurricane threats. 22 Now, first, what does "onsite" mean? 23 A (Carter) I was on location at a weather service 24 office or an EOC while the storm was coming in, during the 25 event itself. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27563 ('~'$ 1 .O Well, at that point would you know where the . \ ) I '# 2 location is? I 3 A (Carter) It's a guessing game. 4 Q Pardon? l 5 It's a guessing game? 6 A (Carter) It's a guessing game. 7 I have been through hits and I've been through 8 misses as one would expect given the forecast error. 9 Q Well, just what was your function here in regard 10 to any one of these hurricanes? 11 What did you do? 12 A (Carter) It varies from. office to office. I can 13 give you -- and the reason it does is because I am there and
/m
( 14 I operate at the direction of the meteorologist in charge.
'O It's his area of responsibility.
15 It's his office. 16 In Wilmington, North Carolina, for both Hurricane 17 Diana in 1984, and Hurricane Gloria in 1985, what I did was I i 18 to work with the forecasters there to prepare their local l' 19 statements. Actually sat down and wrote some, subject to 20 their approval. 21 I also had coordination in -- things change 22 between the two. In 1984, there was no good coordinating 23 mechanism with local officials, and we had to call 24 individual local officials. That was changed between '84 25 and ' 85.
,.O
( ' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l l CARTER - CROSS 27564 1 So when I was there in '85, I dealt primarily with l 2 the state liaison who then dealt directly with the local 3 officials. And what we did was to coordinate the evacuation 4 orders. 5 Q Now you say in some cases you would sit down and 6 write a message? 7 A (Carter) Yes. 8 Q Can you tell me what that would say? 9 A (Carter) It would describe in very general terms. 10 The forecast would go through which areas should evacuate. 11 The weather service does not issue evacuation warnings. So 12 that was what the coordination with the local officials 13 primarily concentrated on: who needed to evacuate, what 14 types of actions other people needed to take, these types of 15 -thing. 16 Q Well, when would this activity begin? 17 Again, 72 hours ahead of a storm? 18 A (Carter) Generally those messages start to be 19 issued when a hurricane watch is issued, which generally is 20 around 36 hours, 36 to 48, somewhere around there. 21 Q And at 36 hours you would be writing a message 22 that would instruct certain people in certain localities to 23 evacuate? 24 A (Carter) Probably not at 36 hours. 25 No, sir. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4000 i
11 i s . $$$w - CARTER -. CROSS 27565 c.; - f g 1 O 'I beg your pardon? j' 2 A- (Carter) Probably not at 36 hours,'no. 3' -ItEdepends upon how long the evacuation is 4 ' expected to.take. There have been,.and it's basically the
~
5 same as with a'naclear power plant accident. Thers have
-6 be'n-transportation e studies, traffic studies done for most 7 areas of the coast through.the conjunction of the Corps of-B Engineers and FEMA, which have time estimates for evacuation 9- ' based upon different hurricane scenarios.
10 And based n eon those times, those time estimates,- 11 is when you start preparing people and start the evacuation 12 orders. 13 0 -These are evacuations that work on entire towns? y ' 14 A (Carter) They are regions. They are larger than 15 towns. They are regions. 16 Q They are regions? 17 A (Carter) .Yes. 18 The National Weat'.ier Service has developed a 19 computer model to simulate the effects of a hurricane making
;20 landfall in terms of inundation by storm search. And it's a 21 'conice.1, I think, polar -- I don't remember what kind of 22 model it is. But it covers, for example, the Mobile Bay, 23 they essentially do them for water bodies. The Mobile Bay 24 covers from beyond Panama City, Florida, over to New 25 Orleans.
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27566 i l 1 Q Would these be I-DYNEV models? 2 A (Carter) No. No, that's a transportation model. 3 Q I thought you were telling me the network for 4 evacuation. 5 A (Carter) The overall study involves, first of 6 all, the hazard analysis: looking at the areas that would 7 be inundated under various scenarios. It goes through with l j 8 an identification -- l 9 Q Excuse me. 10 Would you have a role in this activity? 11 A (Carter) Through the Hazards Management Group, we 12 do th e behavioral analysis. 13 In order to run I-DYNEV or any of the 14 transportation models, you need to specify some behavioral 15 assumptions. 16 And with Hazards Management Group, we have done, 17 and I think I have it, if not here, I have it in my vitae. 18 Q This comes a little later than the period we were 19 talking about earlier, true? 20 A (Carter) That's right. 21 Q 1983 to 1985, at that point you were onsite 22 liaison. 23 A (Carter) That's true. 24 Q And assisting in communications. 25 A (Carter) That was -- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
l' 1 CARTER - CROSS 27567 f ~i 1 Q And writing warning messages.
! ) l
\s / A That was with my contract with the l 2 (Carter) 3 weather service, right. l 4 Q Did any of the local officials write their own i 5 messages? )
6 A (Carter) Yes, sir, of course. 1 The messages that I dealt with were messages to 8 the extent -- in those areas where I dealt with them -- were 9 messages that were put out by the weather service. 10 0 They were put out by the weather service? 11 A (Carter) By the weather service, yes. 12 Q So it was a weather service message? 13 A (Carter) It was a weather service message.
/N 14 Q And you weren't writing them?
's 15 A (Carter) Sir.
16 Q You weren't writing them, or you were writing 17 them? 18 A (Carter) I was writing - yes. 19 Q For the weather service? 20 A (Carter) I participated in the writing of the 21 weather service messages. 22 Yes, sir. 23 0 And did these entail all of the details about 24 evacuation, what t o bring, where to go, or matters of that 25 nature? [~'\ ( Heritage Reporting Corporation
'- (202) 628-4880
CARTER - CROSS 27568 1 A (Carter) There were from a slightly different 2 focus. They were not evacuation orders. The local 3 officials issued evacuation orders. 4 The tfpical weather service office has 5 responsibility for at least four or five, probably six, 6 coastal counties. So these were summary statements 7 assessing the risk in the evacuation orders, if they were 8 issued, for a broad range. 9 If I was going to write an evacuation order for a 10 particular community, that evacuation order would be much 11 more detailed than what the weather service puts out. 12 The weather service puts out a more general type 13 of message for a broader area, and is more involved with 14 some of the meterological aspects of it than what a local 15 official would put out. 16 Q Then with the incorporation, I guess, of the 17 Hazard Management Group, then you, as your testimony says, l 18 that you then began to participate in the development of 19 behavioral assumptions concerning the likely response of the 20 public to a variety of hurricane threat scenarias? 21 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 22 And this is, going back to what I said previously 23 about the evacuation studies that are done around the coast, 24 this is in conjunction with those. 25 Q And does this start the association with Dr.
~
Heritage Reporting Corporation (2021 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27569 Baker? 91 2 A (Carter) Yes. I 3 Business association with him, yes. 4 l 1 5 6 l 7 8 9 h 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l t' l I CARTER - CROSS 27570 1 Q Now, as you say, this is hurricane work? 2 A (Carter) Yes. 3 Q Isn't Dr. Baker referred to by his colleagues as 4 "Mr. Hurricane?" 5 A (Carter) I haven't heard that. 6 Q You haven't! 7 A (Carter) No. 8 Q Does the Kazard Management Group issue warnings to 9 the local populace with respect to hurricanes? 10 A (Carter) Obviously not. 11 Q It does not? 12 A (Carter) No. 13 Q Does it have anything to do with them? g 14 A (Carter) No. 15 The only possible -- in addition to doing the 16 studies on contract or subcontract with the Corps of 17 Engineers doing our part of the study, we have developed a 18 computer program that graphically depicts the forecast air 19 ellipsis around the hurricane forecast. 20 It will plot graphically the hurricane forecast 21 and then put whatever size probability ellipse you want on 22 it. This has been sold to, oh, probably over 100 local 23 governments, state governments. 24 FEMA has it, the weather service has it, and some 25 foreign nations in the Caribbean. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4086 1
CARTER - CROSS 27571 J (~'; 1 It's utilized by some of those during an 'I i
'~# 2 evacuation situation of a horricane threat.
3 But the Hazards Management Group is a consulting 4 firm. And we have no contracts to provide onsite consulting 5 'during a hurricane. And that would be the only way that we 6 would be involved in that type of situation. 7 Q Would it be fair to say that your concentrations 8 that you began in Minnesota in 1970 has been with respect to 9 hurricanes and hurricane activity? 10 A (Carter) Not entirely. 11 I would -- it would be safe -- I think it would be 12 fair to say that my research has been involved in natural 13 hazards. 73 i
) 14 Q In natural hazards? 'q,/
15 A (Carter) In natural hazards. 16 I have taught modules of the evacuation course at 17 Emmittsburg, FEMA training center, which dealt more broadly 18 with technological hazards. So I'm familiar with that 19 literature but I have conducted no studies in technological 20 disasters. 21 Q Well, the course that you taught there did not 22 include -- at least so I understand from the people that 23 attended it -- did not include the drafting of warning 24 messages or EBS messages; is that true? 25 A (Carter) There was -- so far as I know in terms ex Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 626-4888 l
CARTER - CROSS 27572 l l L 1 of -- as I remember, in the course itself they did not have l 2 to draft messages, right. 3 Q Are you still involved in that program? l 4 A (Carter) No, I'm not. 5 0 And your involvement was 1985 and ' 86 or was it 6 longer? 7 A (Carter) I think -- I don't remember exactly. At 8 most I think I probably was involved for three course, 1 l 9 possibly four, but in that range. But it was in that time 1 10 period. 11 Q Did you alternate in teaching these courses with 12 Dr. Baker? 13 A (Carter) Yes. 14 Alternate is not the word. We both at one point 15 or another taught it, yes. 16 O At one point or another? 17 A (Carter) Right. 18 Q Now, your testimony represents that it addresses 19 certain contentions that have been filed in this proceeding. 20 Are you familiar with those contentions, 21 generally? 22 A (Carter) Yes. 23 I've had copies of them; I read them. 24 0 You've been given copies of them? 25 A (Carter) Yes. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l CARTER - CROSS 27573
,y 1 O And were you given copies of the contentions and i \~. / 2 asked to draw up some testimony with respect to this; is 3 that the way it went?
4 A (Carter) I was brought in after the contentions 5 had been written up. Had been, I guess, filed with the 6 Board. And these contentions dealt with warning and 7 information, and I was hired as a person who would write 8 direct testimony in that area. 9 Q And was that a direct line from somebody from the 10 Attorney General's office called you and asked if you would 11 be interested? 12 A (Carter) No. We were contacted by a company in 13 California, Impact Assessments. 14 Were they sort of an expert job-shopper?
/'~'} Q \' '/ A 15 (Carter) I'm not sure.
16 I'm not sure how Massachusetts Attorney General 17 got in touch with them. We were contacted by -- the 10 Corporate Response Group was contacted by them. 19 Q Do you have a working relationship with this 20 public response group or the California group, the Impact 21 Assessments? 22 A (Carter) The only project that we have worked 23 with them on is this one. 24 Q This is your first occasion? 25 A (Carter) Yes. 7
\w~x)
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4800 l I
CARTER - CROSS 27574 1 Q Co you get on a list or something? 2 A (Carter) To be honest, I was not -- when the 3 first contact was made between Corporate Response Group, 4 whom I'm with, and Impact Assessments, I was not involved in 5 that first contact and I'm not sure what its history was or 6 how it began. 7 Q If I could turn to your testimony which refers to 8 the literature on the social science literature and findings 9 which deal with the nature of public response to emergency 10 warnings. 11 After calling attention to the fact that there you 12 say: "Rather than repeat those findings you will take as a 13 starting point pertinent portions of Dennis Mileti's ; 14 prefiled testimony in the New Hampshire portion of these 15 proceedings." 16 How did you find out that Dr. Mileti testified in 17 New Hampshire? 18 A (Carter) I was given a copy of his -- at least 19 part of his deposition. I'm not sure that it was all of it. I 20 There was more to it than what I'm referring to. He gets 21 into the -- it started about where he got into the altruism i 22 issue. But I was given that by Massachusetts, by MAG. 23 MS. TALBOT: Just for the record, Mr. Lewald. 24 Did you mean deposition or testimony, Dr. Carter? 25 I just wanted to make it clear for the record. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27575 1 MR. LEWALD: He can do that after. 9 2 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Okay. 3 Whatever you have put in here as the official 4 citation of it, which is direct testimony I guess; yes. 5 BY MR. LEWALD: 6 0 You were just given excerpts of it, in any event, 7 is that what I understand? 8 A (Carter) Only parts of it were directly relevant 9 to my testimony. 10 0 I was asking what you were given? 11 A (Carter) To be honest, I don't know if I was 12 given everything or not. It's back at the office, I did not 13 bring it with me. 14 O But you say for the purposes of your testimony 15 here you accept Dr. Mileti's basic summary and 16 interpretation of the research findings? 17 A (Carter) That's true. 18 Q And then you say in Dr. Mileti's words: "Most 19 members of the public in emergencies behave in ways 20 relatively consistent with their situational perceptions of 21 risk and what to do about it." And then you cite a 22 particular page. 23 Then you go on to say: "This perception of 24 personal risk is determined by a wide variety of factors." 25 la that your statement or is that Dr. Mileti's? Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i d I CARTER - CROSS 27576 1 JUDGE SMITH: What page are we on? 2 MR. LEMALD: We're on page 6. 3 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Page 6, top of page 6. 4 That's my statement. Probably somewhere in Dr. 5 Mileti's testimony he made reference to somethina similar. 6 But that's my statement. That's not, at least, a direct 7 quote from Dr. Mileti. 8 BY MR. LEWALD: 9 Q But the perception of personal risk is not -- 1 10 mean, to work as an antecedent back to what Dr. Mileti was 11 referring to. 12 You say: "This perception of personal risk," is 13 that Dr. Mileti's or yours? 14 A (Carter) Social sciences. 15 Q It's social science? 16 A (Carter) That's right. 17 Q In the broad field? 18 A (Carter) A number of people have -- we use it in 19 our hurricane studies. It's used in part of the social 20 science literature. 21 Q You go on to say that: "Most of these factors," 22 on page 6, " vary widely over a population and thus cannot be 23 controlled by officials in the issuance of emergency 24 warning." 25 Is there a source that you're relying on for that Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4800 I i 1
l I CARTER - CROSS 27577 I i (^x 1 statement? l \
's -)- 2 A (Carter) Specifically,.no. )
3 Sociological characteristics vary over a 4 population. Age varies over the population. Sex varies 5 over the population. To some extent we know that those 6 types of factors have some influence on how the person 7 responds, and it's on the basis of that, that I make that 8 statement. 9 Q You go on to say: "However, one element which can 10 be controlled," and which is the focus of your testimony, 11 "is the emergency warning information which was issued to 12 the public." 13 Is that your belief? [N
\ ]
14 A (Carter) Yes. 15 Q And then you go on to say: "As Dr. Mileti stated 16 in his earlier testimony, a good emergency warning message 17 is one which can overcome the effects of an individual's 18 characteristic on his own perception of personal risk." 19 Do you see that in your testimony? 20 Is Dr. Mileti's reference to the message or to the 21 information of the message? 22 A (Carter) If I go back and try to remember Dr. 23 Mileti's testimony it's proba'bly to the message. But part 24 of how he defines the message is the information that's 25 contained in the message. 1 f"'N j (N Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27578 1 In terms of, which I'm sure you're going to get to 2 the criteria I used, there are two sets of criteria. Two 3 different dimensions. One is, what information is contained 4 in the message? And then the other are what we commonly 5 call " message attributes." 6 0 Why don't we move to the criteria? 7 A (Carter) What page would you like me to move to? 8 Q It's on the next page. 9 This you refer to as a checklist that Dr. Mileti 10 set forth in his testimony? l 11 A (Carter) That's his term " checklist." 12 O His term? 13 A (Carter) Right. 14 It's in the quotations. 15 Q Now, you reject this checklist, if you will, of 16 Dr. Mileti because you say it's far too briefly summarized 17 to enable the reader to effectively utilize it? 18 A (Carter) That charge is in your rebuttal 19 testimony. 20 Could you read to me where I rejected that 21 checklist? 22 I say: "However, I believe hir discussion of this 23 checklist is far too briefly summarized to allow the 24 reader." 25 If you go back over his original checklist, every , l 1 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4866 1 1
a o
, j 1 1
s U, ~ CARTER.- CROSS 27579 I f~^
/t cl~- point'he's got'in it is, in fact, in the final checklistg j i
i 2 that I.present. What I do-is expand the discussion'of some 3- 'of the. points he makes and.I expand it a little bit, but I .
- 1 4 .have'not rejected his checklist.
S .Q- So'you end up by adopting it?! l
'6 .A. (Carter) In modified form.
.7 Q In modified form?
'8 :A (Carter) In'my modified' form; yes, sir.-
9 -Q You adopt it with the addition of some seven 10 points in reference to the level of communication? 11 A (Carter) Actually, some of those items in my 12 seven points or'in.other: parts of his, so it's not just that. 13 one level of information is expanded. One of his points is fT 14 expanded.into seven. .Some of the ones are contained in the
). 15- -others, 'also.
16 Q But you'say a more useful or detailed discussion 17 of the fact is found in a -- well, let me strike that and 18 start over again. 19 You'say a more helpful checklist, if you will,His 20 one that's summarized in a paper that Dr. Mileti and his 21 ' colleagues have presented elsewhere. 22 By " paper," you're not attempting to disparage the 23 work that Dr. Mileti and his colleagues have done, have you? l 24 A (Carter) I was surprised when -- I don't know 25 that I -- okay. Let's go back to an issue that you didn't Heritage Reporting Cceporation (202) 628-4888
)
l 1
- - - - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ i
CARTER - CROSS 27580 1 ask me and that is whether or not -- 2 O Why don't we stay with my question. 3 A (Carter) No , I'm not trying to -- it's this work 4 here, no. 5 Q That's a definitive work, is it not? 6 A (Cart'er) It's a -- 7 Q Of the literature in the field on the subject? 8 A (Carter) I don't know that I would call it 9 definitive work. It is very useful for me when I want to 10 review a particular aspect. I'm not sure what you would call 11 definitive. 12 I'm not discouraging that document by any means. 13 It's very specific. It's focused on the assessment of 14 issues that are raised in terms of evacuation. And in such 15 I don't think it's a work which thoroughly reviews all of l 16 the literature in a theoretical sense on evacuation, but it 17 certainly has most of that in it but from a different 18 perspective. 19 Q Well, it's a canvas of all the literature in the 1 l 20 field on that subject, is it not, that was then published at 21 the time the document was published? 22 A (Carter) I would assume most of it, if not all. 23 Q Do you know of anything that isn't? 24 A (Carter) I haven't sat down and checked it for l 25 that. l l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4886 i l l \
CARTER - CROSS 27581 j i 1 MS. TALBOT: Speak up just e. little bit, Doctor. I l 2 3 4 ! l 5 i 6 7 8 1 9 10 11 12 13 14 l 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corpore. tion (202) 626-4666
CARTER - CROSS 27502 1 MR. LEWALD: Your Honor, I don't know whether you 2 want to take the noon recess at -- 3 JUDGE SMITH: Do you want one? 4 MR. LENALD: Well, I was going to suggest that 5 that if it were possible, I think it would be a good time, 6 at least from my point of view, to break. 7 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 8 Return at 1:10. 9 (Whereupon, at 12:14 p.m., the hearing was 10 recessed, to resume at 1:10 p.m., this same day, Tuesday, 11 June 27, 1989.) 12 13 14 ! 15 ! 4 1 16 :1 17 18 ) 19 ) 20 21 22 1 23 l 24 25 Heritage Reporting Co.yporation (202) 628-4888 I l i
I / I I I CARTEF.- CROSS 27583 ! l 1
. /N . 1 AETERHQQN & E S g 1 Q H. l l l
)
'd' 2 (1:10 a.m.)
1 3 JUDGE SMITH: Mr. Lewald. 4 MR. TRAFICONTE: Your Honor, before we resume the 5 cross, we would just like to have a brief minute, perhaps 6 off the record, about schedule for today. 7 (Discussion off the record. ) 8 MR. TRAFICONTE: I want to make sure. We do have 9 some calls into our experts. 10 Do we have an. agreement, Mr. Lewald, that Mr. 11 Trout will be made available. I don't know how much longer 12 you have. But you will make him available and that we can 13 pursue.that? 14 MR. LEWALD: It's my understanding that he's ; f (/ 15 coming here for that purpose. l s 16 MR. TRAFICONTE: For that purpose. 17 MR. LEWALD: This afternoon. 18 MR. TRAFICONTE: All right. 19 MR. TURK: But we would like to read Renn first, 20 Your Honor. 21 MR. LEWALD: I don't know about Renn. We just 22 got -- 23 MR. TRAFICONTE: The Staff is represented by two 24 attorneys. Perhaps one of the two individuals could read 25 the Renn piece in the interim, so that you would be prepared p- s (' Heritace Reportina Corporation (202) 628-403r I
CARTER - CROSS 27584 1 to argue if you have any objections. I doubt you would. 2 MR. TURK: Why can't you put him off until 3 tomorrow? 4 MR. TRAFICONTE: We can't put him off until 5 tomorrow because we just want to schedule his appearance. 6 We can put his coming in off until tomorrow or Thursday or 7 Friday, but we just -- 8 MR. TURK: Put off the argument until tomorrow. 9 You've got these three other pieces. j 10 You've got an Applicant Panel. You've got two i 11 returning commuter Panels. 12 Do you need to argue Renn today, or can you give 13 us overnight to read it? 14 MR. TRAFICONTE: I was actually under the clearly 15 mistaken impression that we could get done before 5:30 on 16 Friday afternoon. But to do that, we would actually have to 17 plot things out and plan in advance. 18 If you want to defer things, we may have some down 19 time while we're waiting for an expert to come in. That's 20 basically the problem. 21 MR. TURK: Your Honor, I'll ask you for relief. 22 Can we put off the Renn argument until tomorrow? 23 JUDGE SMITH: No, let's get it done. Put it last 24 of the whole group, and let's get it done. 25 I'm not saying that you can't object to particular Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27585
/ 1 parts of the testimony when Dr. Renn appears, but I think 2 it's time to argue whether he appears or whether he does not
'3 appear. And you can look at the general thrust of his 4 testimony for that purpose. That's a scheduling 5 consideration.
.s 6 Whereupon, 7 T. MICHAEL CARTER 8 having been previously duly sworn, was recalled.as a witness 9 herein and was examined and testified further as follows: 10 CROSS-EXAMINATION (Continued) 11 BY MR. LEWALD: 12 Q Dr. Carter, when we broke for luncheon recess, I 13 was about to refer to your reference to what you term as a
-[ 14 paper that Dr. Mileti and his colleagues have presented.
\s 15 And in that paper, there are a so-called check list, again 16 of the criteria for emergency warning messages which it's my 17 understanding that you find more sufficient than Dr.
18 Mileti's exposition of the matter in his testimony in New 1 19 Hampshire. 20 A (Carter) We could make a point-by-point 21 comparison of the check list Dr. Mileti has. presented in the 22 New Hampshire versus this check list. They are almost 23 identical. 24 What I prefer in this was the discussion i l 25 accompanying the check list. I don't see that overall there { Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
)
CARTER - CROSS 27586 1 are substantive differences between the two. But it's the 2 discussion. l 3 In Dr. Mileti's prefiled testimony in the New 4 Hampshire, his discussion of the check list constituted 5 about a paragraph. And that's what I said was -- 6 Q A paragraph? 7 A (Carter) He presents it in a paragraph, yes, sir. 1 8 Q That's your memory? ! 9 A (Carter) That's my memory. { l 10 He goes on then in the evaluation, the next ) 11 section of it. After he presents it in the evaluation, he 12 expands on some of it. But the presentation itself. 13 But there might be a few minor differences between 14 the check list in the Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti, and what he 15 presented in his testimony. There might be minor 16 differences, but substantively I think they are essentially 17 similar. 18 Q You are aware, are you not, that the work done by 19 Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti, entitled " Evacuation on Assessment 20 of Planning and Research", doesn't make that representation 21 that they have, in setting forth the 10 items, have gone ( 22 into any great depth or detail in identifying these items? 23 Don't they say that anywhere? 24 A (Carter) They present it as a, and I quote it l l 25 here, " factors which have been documented as being important ] I Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888 l l
CARTER - CROSS 27587 1 to the issuance of a good warning". 2 Clearly, there may be other factors, and I present 3 some of those in my own work, but I think it's a good 4 representation of Dr. Mileti's original check list that he 5 presented in his testimony. 6 Q Now I'm not suggesting that it is a good 7 representation. I'm just inquiring of whether or not the 8 authors of this 10 point check list don't state as a preface 9 to the list that the study can't go into great depth on the 10 subject of warning systems, and we disclaim any real 11 discussion with respect to each of these items in their work 12 on pages 110, 111 and 112. 13 A (Carter) I don't understand your point. 14 Q I understand that you are presenting this check 15 list as a more extensive exposition of the criteria that 16 should be in a hazard warning announcement than appears in 17 Dr. Mileti's testimony given in New Hampshire. 16 And my only point is that if that is your 19 position, it is not a position that's shared by the authors 20 of the article. And I was asking you if you would agree 21 with that conclusion. 22 A (Carter) As you state it, no. 23 If you want to ask me whether or not the authors 24 Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti would say that this is a full and 25 extensive discussion of these.10 factors, then I would agree Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l l CARTER - CROSS 27588 1 1 with that statement that it's not. l 2 The authors didn't address the question you put, ! 3 whether or not this was a more extensive discussion than 4 what was contained in Dr. Mileti's New Hampshire testimony. 5 Q Now what follows? 6 You have then the style or the format of your 7 testimony. You have presented these 10 factors in block 8 quotes, in a block quote setup. 9 Are you intending to quote from these articles? 10 A (Carter) No, sir. 11 What I did is to take my understanding of what was 12 meant by what Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti meant or how they j 13 defined, how they described these 10 factors, put that into 14 my own words. 15 And where, for example, on No. 7 on page 9, where 16 there was a point I would make that I did not think was 17 covered by their description, I made that clear in saying, 18 although not covered in the Sorensen, et al., I went on and 19 added something of my own. 20 In your rebuttal testimony, you claim that I add 21 things that they don't say. 22 Q Which rebuttal testimony aro you referring to? 23 You've lost me there, Doctor. 24 A (Carter) The rebuttal testimony that was I 25 presented against my testimony. Heritage Reporting Corporation , (202) 628-4888 4
i y CARTER - CROSS 27589 (/ 1 Q Something that was prefiled here that was.given to , lJ i 2- you? 3 A (Carter) Yes. j l
~
4 And what I did was to take my reading of, based 5 upon.my knowledge of the social science literature, and what j Ei .they said, and then paraphrased that. 7 And where I thought I was deviating from their 8 meaning, I made that' explicit. ) 1 9 Q And how did you do that?
- 10. A. (Carter) Well, for example, on page 7. I mean,.
11 I'm sorry, page 9, No. 7 of my testimony on protective 12 action guidance. 13 Where you make distinctions among groups having to
.[ 14 take different actions, my reading of their material did not ' \~
15 include that. And I think that that's -- based upon my 16- experience, that's an important factor. So I included it as 17 something distinctly different than.their meaning. 18 Q Okay. 19 So you have taken each of the 10 factors and you 20 have interpreted them. 21 A (Carter) That's true. 22 O And then what appears here in your testimony is 23 your interpretation of them. And then where you think that 24 these factors should be embellished on or added to, you do 25 that. f' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888. 1
CARTER - CROSS 27590 1 A (Carter) Yes. 2 Q And then following that, you go through the 3 exercise of adding seven more to No. 6 of that number, of 4 the Sorensen number? 5 A (Carter) As I mentioned earlier, some of the -- 6 Q Well, did you do that or not? 7 A (Carter) Yes. 8 Okay, I'll let you -- 9 0 And then on top of that we have four attributes of 10 criteria? 11 So we have 10, seven and then 4, is that -- 12 A (Carter) The four attributes are what I consider 13 to be the most importcnt attributes. 14 We come up with 11 total that I'm using compared 15 to the 10 that are in the Sorensen. 16 Q Are you substituting your 11 plus four for the 10 17 in Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti? 18 A (Carter) Yes, air. 19 My final evaluation, what I used to evaluate the 20 SPMC messages and the exercise messages are my seven on 21 information, plus the four message attributes. 22 Q Now just take one if I can, the first factor in 23 the Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti work. 24 It says, first, as I read it, "First, is the 25 source of the information." Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9l<
l CARTER'- CROSS. 27591 [N 1 Now you read this.to mean' source'of the message; 2 is'that correct? l 31 A (Carter) Wnen we speak of source, we're speaking ;
'l 4 of who puts out the message. And the information -- the 5 message contains information.
6 So it's-who is doing the talking.
-1 7 Q Well, who is responsible for the information that 8 is delivered in the message?
9 A (Carter) I don't see that -- I'm not following 10 you on what distinction you are trying to make. 11' JUDGE SMITH: The voice in the message compared to 12 the person.who creates the ideas that are expressed. 13 THE WITNESS: (Carter) That's a distinction. But-14 if I'm a member of the public, I'm not sure that -- 15 JUDGE SMITH: Disregard what I said. 16 BY MR. LEWALD: 17 Q Unless you were advised as to the source of the 18 information? 19 A (Carter) Sir? l 20 Q Unless you were advised as to the source of the 21 information? 22 If you'were a member of the public, would it 23 matter to you whether you were advised as to the source of 24 the information or the source of who delivered the message? 25 A (Carter) If the message was from the governor of l' Heritage Reporting Corporation j (202) 628-4888 i I i u_L_:-_ _=_ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - - l
CARTER - CROSS 27592 1 New-Hampshire and in it he cited an incident where he got 2 the information from that incident from another source. I 3 mean that -- I think that's what you are talking about. 4 Are we incorrect? 5 I mean is that what you are getting at? 6 I don't understand your question. 7 Q Why don't you just answer my question. 8 If you can't, if you don't understand them -- 9 JUDGE SMITH: There is confusion. There is 10 confusion. I 11 Are you talking about the actual literal voice of 12 the governor delivering the message, or the message coming 13 from the governor? 14 THE WITNESS: (Carter) In the source, the way we 15 typically are using the term, it's the governor issued it. 16 It doesn't have to be the governor himself. It's the 17 governor's office or a state or something like that. 18 BY MR. LEWALD: 19 0 Well, you are interpreting this rather than 20 spelling out what Sorensen, vogt & Mileti interpreted that, 21 is that right? 22 A (Carter) It's my interpretation of what we as 23 social scientists mean by the source of the message or the 24 information in the message. 25 Q So they are synonymous, message with information, Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
m- _ _ _ CARTER - CROSS 27593 l ,7
.1 as you as a social scientist would treat the matter?
p 2- A= - (Carter) No, sir. I 3 It's not.an anonymous message. L 4 Q Synonymous. 5 A (Carter) Ch, synonymous. 6 Yes, unless there were some call to try to make 7 the distinction that you are trying to make. 8 Q And if we could go to No, 2, the " consistency of l 9 the message"'which appears on page 8 of your testimony. 10 And you interpret " consistency of the message" to 11 mean. consistent with a number of people who might deliver 12 the same message, or a sitnilar message? 13 A (Carter) There is two aspects I see to
/ \ 34 consi_tency. .k -
15 One is the message, the information in the message 16 itself, internally consistent. 17 Q Is internally censistent? 18 A (Carter) Is internally consistent. 19 The second, the second aspect of consistency is to 20 what extent does the message give me information that is < l 21 consistent with other information I receive. 22 Q From the same source? 23 A (Carter) From other mensagss. 24 Yes. I would say from ocner messages. Some of 25 which could come from the same source. Some of which could c
-('- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27594
- 1 come from other sources.
l
? Q Now if we could move over to No. 6 where you talk 3 about the " level of detailed information". And what appears 4 of No. 6 on page 8 is your paraphrasing of what appears in 5 the Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti testimony.
6 A (Carter) It is my paraphrasing of what I 7 understand social scientists mean when they talk about the 8 level of dstalled information. 9 Q And what appears on the fc11owing page, on page 9, 10 is your addition? 11 A (Carter) I would say it happens to be another 12 paragraph, but not necessarily -- both paragraphs represent 13 my interpretation. 14 Q An observation that you have added. 15 A (Carter) Right 16 17 18 l 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27595 11 Q And the same thing is~true of number 7? L ',/ l 2 A' (Carter)' In number 7 that second paragraph is my 3 ' reading of Sorensen, et al.'s discussion of protective 4 action guidance. It did not include the point that I added
- 5 about different people having to take different actions.
6 Q If we could go on to 10 talking about 7 dissemination channels of the message. -And then you have an 8 addition that's a sentence in that indented paragraph: "In ! 9 addition personal communication of the warning message, for 10 example, by uniformed officials has been found to be more 11 effective than media message or simply sounding a siren." 12 What are you relating to in that? 13 A (Carter) Door-to-door. !
/ \ 14 Q Pardon? ,,s 15 A (Carter) Door-to-door. Having officials go 16 door-to-door and warn people.
17 Q Is this something you had found in hurricane 118 warnings for evacuation? 19 A (Carter) Hurricane warnings? 20 The first study that we documented in the 21 Minnesota study was in flashflood. 22 Q Flashflood? 23 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 24 Q And have you others? ; 25 A (Carter) We've also documented it in my own
. f' Beritage Reporting Corporation
(' (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27596 1 personal research in hurricanes, also. It's elsewhere in 2 the literature. 3 Q Now, you go on to refer to a work which you call 4 the " Perry Model," do you not? I l 5 A (Carter) Yes. 6 Q In the bottom of page ll? 7 A (Carter) Yes. 8 Q On page 13 you mention three factors which Perry 9 identifies, you say: "Which facilitates the taking of 10 protective action." And you list these as the 11 identification of an appropriate and effective protective f l 12 action. 13 And then the two that follow the existence of an 14 individual or family emergency plan to be followed by a 15 social context in which the families together are otherwise 16 accounted for at the time of the emergency. 17 Do you see those? 18 A (Carter) Yes, sir. k 19 Q Now, didn't the Perry study that you referenced 20 find that it had no data on which it could rely in that i 22 study and make findings with respect to individual or family l i l 22 evacuation? l 23 A (Carter) Within a social context I think was 24 where he said that his data was a little weak. 25 O Well, it wasn't weak; it was all one way, wasn't i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 u______----- 1
CARTER - CROSS 27597 1 it? 2 A (Carter) The literature shows, and I think Perry 3 rightly included, that in some circumstances family context 4 is an important factor -- I'm sorry, is a factor. There are 5 other types of situations in which it may be less important. 6 I utilized Perry to supplement what was written in 7 the Sorensen, et al. piece. If you are trying to get me to 8 say, family context is always important and has to be 9 considered or that people do not evacuate unless they are in 10 a family context all together, I won't say because that's 11 not true. 12 If it is something that you need to take into 13 consideration when you' re writing emergency war ning 14 messages, then I would say it belongs in here. 15 Q You would agree that points two and three -- 16 A (Carter) Number two, the existence -- 17 0 You quote as to be identified by Perry are not 18 identified is pertinent to the study of which he undertook 19 in that article? 20 A (Carter) Not as pertinent as some of the other 21 points he makes. It is included in the model. 22 O Well, he is looking to other people for this 23 information? 24 A (Carter) I'm using his model. I'm not 25 necessarily using the four particular studies that he Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
s l i ( CARTER - CROSS 27598 l 1 conducted. 2 O You're using what you conceive to be his model? 3 A (Carter) How I interpret the chart on page 4 whatever it is in chapter 3. 5 Q Do you have the Perry work before you? 6 A (Cart'er) Yes, sir. 7 Q on page 29, " Assess logistics of response." 8 The one prior to that is the high personal risk-9 where the individual who is responding to the warning 10 assesses whether or not he is a personal risk. 11 Then the next box is labeled, " Assess logistics of 12 response." There's a bullet, "Is protection possible." 13 There's a second bullet, "Is plan available." A third 14 bullet, "Is family together." 15 - MR. LEWALD: Just a moment. 16 (Pause to locate document. ) 17 BY MR. LEWALD: 18 Q Could I ask you to turn to page 43. 19 A (Carter) Yes. 20 Q The second paragraph on that page reads: " Table 21 311 sh;ws family context by warning response for each 22 community." 23 And then it goes on to say: "This analysis 24 indicates that most families were together or their members 25 were accounted for at the time of the warning. Hence, Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27599 j
^x 1 99.2; 95.5; 91.2; and 98.7 percent of the families were
) accounted for in Sumner Valley, Filmore and --
p N_ / 2 3 respectfully, given the very small number of families whose 4 members were not together at the time of warning it is 5 difficult to draw any conclusions about evacuation." 6 A (Carter) In those four studies. 7 JUDGE COLE: That's in the Perry reference? 8 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Yes, sir, that's page 43 9 of the Perry reference. 10 BY MR. LEWALD: 11 Q And your testimony does not relate to what Perry 12 is writing about? 13 A (Carter) Counsel there are going -- in those
/N 14 situations in which during the time of evacuation the
( )
' 15 families are not together. Social context, family in 16 context is a consideration that families take into account 17 in making an evacuation decision.
18 If the families are together when the evacuation 19 is called for, then obviously that point becomes moot. j 20 Q On this point, on page 14 of your testimony you , 21 say that regarding the social context aspect: "It is 22 routine in hurricane warning" -- 23 A (Carter) Excuse me, that's covered in our errata. 24 In that portion with respoct to family plans, the first 25 phrase of that paragraph and the one below it on page 15 (p_ ) Heritage Reporting Corporation
\- (202) 628-4888
l CARTER - CROSS 27600 1 were switched. l 2 0 Were changed? 3 A ; Carter) Were changed. 4 So the paragraph at the bottom of 14 going on to 5 15 deals with family plans. And the middle paragraph on 15 6 deals with social context. 7 0 So what did appear on page 14 of your testimony is 8 not true regarding the social context? 9 .A (Carter) Yes, sir, that's right. 10 That discussion is regarding immily plans. 11 Q Now, you go on to say: "A hurricane unlike some of 12 the other hazards, for example, tornado, earthquake, 13 provides fairly long lead-times." And I think we discussed 14 earlier, i 15 A (Carter) That's right. 16 Q And you say that: "During the early watch phase 17 within about 36-hours before landfall you regularly issue 18 messages urging the public to begin making plans in case 19 evacuation becomes necessary at a later time." 20 Who is the "we" there that you're referring to? 21 A (Carter) The "we" would be the response 22 community, the weather service along with local officials. 23 Q The response community? 24 A (Carter) Right. 25 Q Now, this differs considerably from that of a Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l l _____________w
f.i i
~ CARTER - CROSS 27601 f
5 11 point source hazard such as a nuclear plant incident, does A 2 it'not?.
3 You don't.have 36-hours in advance-when you l 4 encounter a nuclear incident?
'S .A .(Carter) It's my understanding that with Three Hi 6 . Mile Island you had quite a time before you might have had ,
7 core meltdown'or from the time the accident began until -- 8 Q From the time the accident began, how much lead-9 time did you'have prior to the accident? 10 A (Carter) To.be honest, I don't know. 11 I don't think you would necessarily need -- I 12 don't think the 36-hours or whatever is the important thing 13 here. It's the looking -- 14 Q Well, they're different, aren't they? 15 MS. TALBOT: Excuse me, Mr. Lewald, could the
'16 witness please finish the answer.
17 MR. LEWALD: If he's responding to my question, 18 Ms. Talbot, I have no problem. 19 MS. TALBOT: Well, I think he would like to 20 finish. You interrupted him in -- 21 MR.-LEWALD: If he's expanding on his own I do 22 have a problem. 23 MS. TALBOT: Can you finish your answer, Dr. 24 Carter. 25 THE WITNESS: (Carter) I don't remember. i j ( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - l
CARTER - CROSS 27602 1 JUDGE McCOLLOM: What was the question? 2 BY MR. LEWALD: 3 Q There is a difference, is there not, in the lead-4 time between a nuclear plant hazard and a hurricane hazard? 5 MS. TALBOT: Do you want the beginning of your 6 response played back, Dr. Carter? 7 THE WITNESS: (Carter) No. 8 I would say to respond to that: that's something 9 that would depend upon the nature of the scenario of the 10 accident and there are a number of different scenarios, 11 So if you're going to ask me: is there a 12 difference in the time frame between a Bophal and a 13 hurricane? Obviously. But it depends upon the nature of 14 the accident. 15 BY MR. LEWALD: 16 0 You can visualize a nuclear accident which is not 17 -- in which is classified -- well, let's take an example. 18 Let's have a nuclear accident taking place and an 19 alert declared. And let's compare that to the known 20 presence of a hurricane somewhere in the Caribbean. 21 And the hazard that you would be concerned with 22 would be an irradiation as a result of the nuclear plant 23 incident; and the hurricane hazard which would be wind, 24 water, surge damage. l 25 So couldn't we say that insofar as what is known, j Heritage Reporting Corporation ! (202) 628-4888 E _ - - - - -
CARTER - CROSS 27603 1 it is already happening in a hurricane; and the question as 2 far as the nuclear plant, is $- 're was it going to happen? 3 A (Carter) No. 4 In the nuclear plant it would be, if it would 5 happen. And in the hurricane it would be, as an individual 6 -- as a local official or in the weather service at a given q
/ location there may, in fact, be a hurricane out there and I 8 don't know if it's going to hit me and I need to respond to 9 it.
10 And both have uncertainty. I agree that one 11 uncertainty is: will radiation hazard develop, and I don't 12 know that. But that, in terms of my decision-making and the 13 way I respond, I don't think right now I see any difference 14 in, will a hurricane hit me or some place else down the 15 coast in terms of making decisions about what I need to do 16 sometime in the future. 17 0 Isn't that the second point: what is not known in 18 the case for hurricane is, where it's going to happen? 19 And in the case of a nuclear power plant is, if it 20 will happen? I 21 A (Carter) I agree with that. 22 Q The uncertainty then insofar as protective action 23 is concerned in regard to a hurricane is, who engages in an 24 evacuation; is it not? 25 A (Carter) Yes, I'll go with that ( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27604 1 Q And the uncertainty in a nuclear power plant is, 2 what protective action is being engaged in? i 3 A (Carter) Yes. 4 Q What experience have you had in dealing with 5 emergency planning for nuclear power facilities? 6 A (Carter) Direct experience of emergency planning? 7 Q Yes? ! 8 A (Carter) None. 9 Q And you have had a good deal of experience and 10 training and study with respect to hurricanes? 11 A (Carter) I would -- 12 Q And natural disasters? 13 A (Carter) Weather-related disasters. 14 Q Weather-related disasters. 15 And I note in your testimony as you go through, 16 you do fall back on your experience with weather disasters 17 and hurricane hazards t..m time-to-time as sort of touching 18 base as to what was done a.4d what you observed was done in 19 those instances? 20 A (Carter) That's true. 21 Q Would it be fair to say that you're relating some 22 of the protective action that were taken in hurricanes to 23 nuclear protection or to guard against nuclear hazards? 24 A (Carter) As a general statement, no, I don't 25 believe. i
)
l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
[m .
;q 1
s
, ;I/
uARTER - CROSS 27605 -i As a general statement, no? l4 f .1. Q 1 r2' A (Carter) No. ..On page -- ) l l- 3; Q On. specific instances, yes? 4- A (Carter) Beginning'on page 16 where I lay out the 5 evacuation criteria I will utilize, I made a conscious- , 6 attempt.'on each'one of them where appropriate to relate l
- 7. those back to a nuclear-accident.
1. 1' 6' 9 10 11 12
.13 14
.(
.15 '
16 17 18 19 2 0.- 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
[: CARTER - CROSS 27606 ' 1 1 A (Carter) (Continued) I want to guarantee you 2 that there are no weather hazards in there, but in defining l 3 them and in thinking about them, I tried to focus in on the 4 nuclear hazard and how they might be applied. 5 Q Now the items, though, the criteria thct you begin q 6 with on page 16, this, as you say in the preceding l 7 paragraph, is that you are expounding on No. 6 of Dr. 8 Mileti's check list. l 9 And by Dr. Mileti's check list, I assume you are 10 referring to the Sorensen, Vogt & Mileti work? ! 11 A (Carter) That's true. 12 That may have been a bit net part of the 13 testimony. I may have been focusing a little bit too much 14 on that No. 6. No. 7 and No. 9 from the Sorensen, et al., 15 check list also related to my seven. 16 Q To your seven points? 17 A (Cart er) To my seven points. I 18 Q So you -- l l 19 A (Carter) Number 7 is protective actions and No. 9 j l 20 is specific location. And both of those are included in my l 21 seven. j 22 Q Well, in dealing with specific locations with 4 I 23 respect to a nuclear power plant, we are dealing with a 24 point source hazard, are we not? 25 A (Carter) Yes. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 ] 1 I
'1
'l
;t .
CARTER - CROSS 27607 C /*" l 'O Whereas, in a hurricane, we' re dealing with a I I t Ad 2. regional'haz'ard. 1 3 A (Carter) That's true. p 4 Q And in light of that, wouldn't the protective I i 5' action or the warning criteria be somewhat different? j 1 6' A (Carter)- In what way?
~
'I 7 Q Insofar as the location of the hazard.
8 A (Carter) What we mean in a warning message by 9 specifying the location is that the warning message needs to-10 be clear enough so that a citizen can determine, based upon 11 that message, whether or not he's'in the area of risk or 12 not. That's generically all we mean. 13 And I would do it differently for a flash flood
#~ Do it differently for a
/ 14 than I would for a hurricane.
( 15- chemical plant and a nuclear power plant than I would for a 16 hurricane. 17 But in terms of the type of information you need 18 to give,-it's the same. 19 Q All right. 20 In your seven items, what particular hazard do 21 'they relate to? 22 A (Carter) In one form or another, I would say any 23 warning message for any hazard needs to address these seven 24 items. 25 O This would be a check list in which any hazard i l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l CARTER - CROSS 27608 1 whatsoever would have to site in some fashion, or the 2 warning message would have to site in some fashion these 3 seven items? 4 A (Carter) Address those seven items, yes, sir. 5 I think that's the same as the 10 factors that 6 Sorensen, Mileti reviewed from the literature. They weren't 7 hazard-specific, for one hazard and not for another. 8 They would have different applications in 9 different hazards. 10 Q Well, if we take four, for instance. Four says, 11 "The message must clearly assess how severe the radiation is 12 or is forecast to be. The mere statement that a release has 13 occurred gives the public no information by which to judge 14 the risk." 15 This has no relation to natural disasters, does ' 16 it? 17 A (Carter) Yes, it does, in terms of the severity. 18 The factor that I'm looking for in No. 4 is the 19 severity of the incident. And in the previous testimony 20 here some place, and probably up when I'm dealing with 21 Sorensen and Mileti, I talk about the difference between a 22 severe hurricane versus a non -- a Hurricane Gilbert versus < 23 something else. 24 What I have tried to do in the discussion page, 25 beginning on page 15 is to relate -- I'm sorry -- page 16, Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I 1 l l
l i CARTER - CROSS 27609' 1 is to. relate my seven things directly to the focus of the 7~} l H bs / 2 remainder of the testimony, and that is the nuclear' power
- 3. accident. l l I J
4 And I just said that there may be some references 5 to other hazards'in here, but I definitely made the attempt 6 to focus these for the nuclear power accident. These are -- 7 Q You have lost me-now..
.8 .You are' referring to what page?
9 A (Carter) Page 16. 10 Q Page 16, that begins the seven points. 11 A (Carter) That's right. 12 Q That started out under 6 of the Sorensen, Vogt & 13 Mileti list.
' [~'\ 14 A (Carter) That's right.
15 These are factors which need to be considered, or 16 items that need to be considered when you are evaluating or 11 7 preparing an emergency warning. 18 And in this attempt,. I have tried to interpret 19 each one of those within the framework of a nuclear power 20 accident. 21 Q So this is just related to a nuclear power i i 22 accident? i 23 A (Carter) The formulation of what it is I would 24 evaluate each one of these on, or what I'm looking for is 25 only the examples. The focus of it is nuclear power plants. i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
i 1 1 CARTER - CROSS 27610 f 1 I could and have done the.same thing for , 2 hurricanes. I could do it for other hazards as well. 3 Q Now on page 18, we're back to general message f f 4 characteristics, is that true? i l J 5 A (Carter) That's true. l 6 O And these are the ones that Mileti started with in 7 his testimony in New Hampshire, and that you are now 8 repeating here? 9 A (Carter) Some of them were contained in Mileti's 10 New Hampshire. Some of them also obviously were contained 11 in the Sorensen, et al., list, yes. 12 These are, I think, message characteristics, 13 message attributes as opposed to looking at specific pieces ! i
, 14 of information.
15 Q Now in your four items you say, "The emergency 16 message should, to the extent possible, reflect the 17 collaboration of a number of sources." 18 And this is the same point that we talked about 19 earlier. 20 A (Carter) That's true. 21 Q As to the source either of the message or the l 22 source of the information, you see no difference? 23 A (Carter) For right now, we have been through that 24 before, so I accept that. Whatever I said back then, I 25 stay with it. ] l l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
CARTER - CROSS 27611
~~ 3 1 Q Now the second one is the, "The messages should be i 'l' N/ 2 internally consistent and consistent with the message' issued 3 by other agencies or organizations." j l
4 And this is what we talked about earlier. It's a 5 dual consistency. J 6 A .( Carter) That's right. 7 Q And now you say that, " Consistency with other 8 messages means that the protective action recommendation 9 should be consistent across jurisdictions." 10 And on what do you rely for that statement? 11 A (Carter) I probably, to be clearer, should have 12 put " adjacent jurisdictions". I 13 O Sorry? ! [T 14 A (Carter) To be clearer in that, I probably should t
\
'~/ 15 have added " adjacent jurisdictions".
16 One of the problems I saw in the exercise, and 17 I'll relate it in case you want to get into that later, into 18 hurricanes, is the artificial dividing line of a county as l 19 to who needs to evacuate and who doesn't. 20 And one of the things we have to be very sensitive 21 to in hurricanes is not have those sudden breaks. If I walk 22 two feet across a line, I'm suddenly at risk. And if I back 23 up two feet, I'm not at risk. 24 So it's that notion that I was getting to here in 25 terms of consistency. im
/ \
i,,' j lleritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27612 . l 1 Q You are saying in terms of hurricanes, the l l 2 emergency message should not be along the lines of political j l 3 subdivisions. i 4 Is that what you are saying? 5 A (Carter) No, sir. No , sir. 6 In fact, since the evacuation notices are given by 7 elected officials of subdivisions, by definition they have 8 to be that way. 9 What generally happens in a hurricane is that 10 while one will recommend -- as you get away from the threat, 11 the evacuation recommendations become weaker and more 12 voluntary. But there is no sharp division. 13 What I was building up to here in the exercise is 14 the fact that New Hampshire in the alert phase closed their 15 beaches and the beaches in Massachusetts remained open. And 16 that you have got people at adjacent beaches, some of whom 17 are told to leave and right down the road they are not told 18 to leave. 19 I'm not saying, and I state it in the next 20 sentence starting at page 18, going to the start of 19, "In 21 the situation where such recommendations differ for 22 legitimate reasons, these reasons must be explained or else 23 you are causing confusion in the mind of the public, why me 24 instead of them, or why not me and them." 25 Q You mean the confusion is you may have people Heritage Reporting Corporation , (202) 628-4888
CARTER CROSS 27613
;f"'O 1 leaving the. beaches in-Massachusetts when the message isn't
[T . ! k ' 2. . directed to.them? L 3 A' .(Carter) That's true. 4: That would be the application of-that particular' 5 situation. 6 -Q So you are suggesting here that'what the governor. 7 or his surrogate in Massachusetts ought to do is to make an' 8 announcement and say that, I understand that the' beaches in 9 New Hampshire are being closed, but all you Massachusetts 10 people lying on the beaches and enjoying the sun, stay put. 11- Is.this something you are suggesting that would 12 obviate the. confusion? 13' A (Carter) No, sir. [~ 14 What I'm suggesting is that, in this case New V} 15 Hampshire.ORO explain why New Hampshire beaches are being 16 closed down and they are not closing down Massachusetts 17 beaches. 18 I think the explanation, if I read the plan 19 correctly, is very straight forward. The New Hampshire 20 beaches are within the two miles, I think, of the plant, and i 21 the Massachusetts beaches are not. l 22 And so a simple statement would be, because of the
, l l
23 proximity of the New Ha"pshire beaches to Seabrook, we've 24 taken the precautionary action right now of closing these 25 beaches. If conditions continue to develop or something, we Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l l
CARTER - CROSS 27614 f 1 may follow this up later in Massachusetts beaches. 2 But there needs to be some statements. 3 Q There needs to be against what? 4 What turns on there being no such statement? f ' l 5 Is it any less a protective action? 6 A (Carter) For the people in New Hampshire, no. 7 For the people in Massachusetts, people who are 8 seemingly at equal risk, are not being told what to do. ; 9 Q Seemingly in whose view? 10 A (Carter) Seemingly in the public's view. l 11 Q Well, it's obviously in your view. 12 A (Carter) That's true. 13 Seemingly in my view also, I guess. 14 Q Well, it's only in your view as far as you know. 15 You have taken no poll or made no inquiry of -- 16 A (Carter) Of the people in -- 17 Q People in Massachusetts. 18 A (Carter) People who visit Massachusetts beaches. 19 Yes, sir, you are right. 20 21 22 23 24 , 1 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27615 l 1 Q Now, I think it's the last of your points, you say 2 that the messages should be repeated frequently and 3 frequently updated. And that they -- I guess that's the 4 third point -- and that they should be issued through a 5 number of channels. 6 Then you add to that on page 19: "In other words, 7 the messages which are disseminated through EBS broadcast 8 should be given to all other channels." 9 Now, this is something that is reflective of your 10 hurricane experience, is it not? 11 A (Carter) Not pr.rtially, but also tornados and 12 flashfloods where the EBS system is also used. 13 O Then you add: "Similarly, messages disseminated to 14 the media center should be disseminates through EBS." 15 Are you suggesting that everything going to the 16 media center is to go out over the EBS network? 17 A (Carter) I talk about this later, specifically, 18 and I think I do a more thorough job there. 19 Can we go to that testimony now? 20 Q No. 21 Answer my question. 22 MS. TALBOT: Excuse me. 23 THE WITNESS: (Carter) If you're asking me if 24 every piece of information disseminated at the media center 25 should go on EBS, the answer is, no. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27616 f 1 BY MR. LEWALD: l i-2 Q No. 3 MS. TALBOT: Excuse me. 4 JUDGE SMITH: When your counsel interposes, you 5 should stop your answer so she can make an objection. 6 MS. TALBOT: Could you hear me when I just spoke 7 up? 8 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Oh, I'm sorry, excuse me. 9 MS. TALBOT: Next time if you want to refer to 10 your testimony to answer the question, you are certainly 11 able to do that unless the Judge says otherwise. 22 THE WITNESS: (Carter) I didn't realize -- I'm 13 sorry, sir. 14 MS. TALBOT: So don't let anyone tell you 15 otherwise. 16 BY MR. LEWALD: 17 Q Do you want to go back and start where counsel 18 interrupted where we apparently ran over? 19 Do you wish to add to your answer? 20 A (Carter) No, I'll let it stand. If my answer 21 satisfied you, i I 22 Q From your testimony and what you've testified to I 23 here, I take it, you are of the view that protective action . I 24 information ought to be disseminated to people who are not j i 25 at risk from the particular hazard that's involved? f 1 i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 1
- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]
o CARTER - CROSS 27617
.f'"S . 1- A (Carter) No, sir, that's not what I'm saying.
g
'^ What I'm saying is that, in any - .let me define 2
3 .an area at risk. The coastal counties for hurricanes,. 4 basically counties or parts of counties for flashflood, the 5 EPZ.for:a nuclear power plant. 6 And once I have defined in my warning message, I
.7 say who this message is directed toward. And if my 8 protective actions that I recommend do not apply to all 9 members of that group; then what I'm saying is that you 10 ought to distinguish it.
11 Let's take it back to the hurricane: one of the 12 problems we have in a hurricane is people who are 13 objectively'not at risk evacuating. And based upon our
'['NjT 14 studies we found that they didn't realize that they weren't 15' being totally evacuated because the evacuation orders were L
16 not specific. 1 17 Q What study was that? 18 A (Carter) We found that in Mobile, in Hurricane 19 Frederick in 1979. Dr. Baker also found it in some studies l 20 he did in 1985 with Hurricane Elena both in the Tampa Bay 21 area and in Panama City. It was also found in a study he did 22 in Hurricane Ellen in 1980 on Galveston. 23 So it's a pattern of not providing specific 24 information if you're going to make distinctions among the 25 population. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l i
I ? l CARTER - CROSS 27618 1 Q And this is to head--off voluntary evacuation? 2 A (Carter) Right. Yes. 3 Q Now, the people who were told to evacuate but
-4 didn't -- excuse me -- strike that. Were any people who did 5 not have to evacuate from elevations because of their 6 elevations told to evacuate because they were in the middle 7 of low-lying regions?
8 A (Carter) In those specific incidents, I don't 9 recollect. 10 0 If you had someone who lived on a hill in a low-11 lying area, would you specifically direct attention to the 12 people on the hill differently than those in a low-lying 13 area? 14 A (Carter) I evacuate in a hurricane for storm 15 surge and for water. If there were areas that would be 16 surrounded by storm surge that are still on high ground, I 17 would call for the evacuation of those areas. Those areas 18 would be includeo in the evacuation order. 19 0 In your experience in dealing with hurricanes and 20 hurricane warning, have you found or has it been found that 21 the people in areas prone to hurricanes are responsive to 22 protective action recommendations and advice to follow what 23 was suggested in the recommendation? 24 A (Carter) Generally, yes. 25 Q Has there been any difficulty in conveying to Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4038 1 _ _ - - - _ _ - _ - J
E', n. ' If
.e- t
-CARTER - CROSS 27619
, j' 'l these people.that they are.at risk'in a protective action, i w 2 - A .(Carter) In so,ne situations, . yes. In1some g 3L situations, yes. And that.was due to the way the evacuation
'4 ' orders were worded.
5: .0 Do'you feel it's necessary to bring home'to these 6 people via some' protective. action recommendation or 7- announcement of warning that theyfare at' risk? 8 A (Carter) That's the purpose of an emergency-9 warning message, it is to give people th( information so-10 that.they can. properly assess their risk. 11 0 And would it be' fair to say that depending on what 12 . hazard you're dealing with you'would have to increase the 13 intensity of the warning? 14 A- (Carter) I'm not sure I understand what you mean
, '15- by "the' intensity of the warning."
16 0 Well, have you suggested in any of the messages 17 that you may have been writing.for local officials in the
~
IB- ' Gulf area that there ought to be stressed to the people who 19 are at risk, the physiological harm that might be. fallen:if 20 they were subject to or became the sictims of-high water or 21 surge? - 22 A (Carter) I noticed that'in your rebuttal 23 testimony. Again, the physiology of drowning is, I think, 24 well understood by most individuals. 25 0 And so because of that there would be no need to Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
l l I CARTER - CROSS 27620 l 1 convey to them those facts? 2 A (Carter) It is an old trick of emergency 3 management officials when they do go door-to-door in the 4 high hazard areas for a hurricane and somebody claims that 5 they don't want to leave. He is asking for names of next of 6 kin and that type of thing, which I think is what you're 7 getting at. 8 Q Now, insofar as your experience or study, is there 9 any hazard that has come to your attention that people do 10 not regard or people do not have any perception of as a 11 risk? 12 A (Carter) In its most extreme forms I think I 13 would agree with you. In a case of a flashflood or a 14 riverine flood we have many floods in this country every 15 year where basements get flooded and first floors get 1 i 16 flooded. But the flood is not necessarily a threat to the 17 integrity of the house. And if people prefer to stay in I 18 their house to protect their property, a local official is 19 not going to force them out. 20 There are other floods which are much more severe l I 21 which have the potential to wipe the house away and kill the l 22 people; and I think that's the distinction in terms of l 23 severity of the risk that I would want to make. 24 Q Now, on page 23 you tell us of all the materials i 25 involved in this proceeding, at least I think you do, which I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 Oll 1 l
.p
.)
c -
. CARTER - CROSS 27621
(~ 1 you have:revie*4et in the course of preparing your testimony? N/ ~2 A (Carter) No, sir. 3 That on page 23, the materials used in, so far,.is 4 only on the exercise. 5 Ql It's solely on the exercice? 6 A (Carter) Yes, sir, solely on the exercise. 7 Solely within this portion of the testimony on the 0 adequacy of the messages in the exercise. I need to make 9 that more specific. 10 Q ,Have you been retained to testify elsewhere with
.11 respect to the adequacy and quality of the FEMA graded 12 exercise?
13 A (Carter) No, sir, I have not. 14 O This is your first --
.[~
k 15 -A (Carter) First testimony,.yes.
- 16 Q And have you read the -- I gather you have not
- 17. read the FEMA evaluation of the exercise, from what I see on l
i 18 page 23? 19 A (Carter) The exercise report produced by FEMA and 20 dated September 1, 1988. 21 Q And FEMA issued a report on that? 22 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 23 O And have you read the details of tha evaluation of 24 that report? 25- MS. TALBOT: Objection. It's not clear what Mr. r% Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27622 1 Lewald is talking about. 2 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Yes, I'm not sure what 3 you' re referring to. I've read this. 4 BY MR. LEWALD: 5 Q All right. 6 Thats Exhibit 23, is it? 7 MR. TRAFICONTE: 23f. 8 THE WITNESS: (Carter) I don't see that on here. 9 MR. LEWALD: Okay. 10 THE WITNESS: (Carter) It's dated -- it's 11 September 1, 1988. I've read the portions of that that 12 relate to my testimony. 13 BY MR. LEWALD: 14 Q All right. 15 Going beyond the exercise, what other materials 16 have you read? 17 A (Carter) I've read portions of the Seabrook plan 18 for Massachusetts communities. 19 Q Portions of it, could you be more specific? j 20 A (Carter) Yes, sir, I could. 21 The introduction of section 1, on the 22 i:,* roduction; section 2, the organization; section 3 the 23 concept of operations. 24 I've scanned a later portion on facilities, but I 25 didn't study it. In terms of the Implementing Procedures I (202) 628-4888
1 i i j CARTER - CROSS 27623 , (~<v 1 read 1.1 to New Hampshire Yankee offsite response director s)
- x- 2 and assistant; '2.12 on'public information, media relations 3 and rumor control; 2.13 on public alert and notification.
4 And I have scanned, 1 guess is the word, some of 5 the other Implementing Procedures that deal with government 6 liaison, but not as extensively as I have these. 7 0 And with regard to the exercise you say you'have 8 read certain portions of the depositions of Richard Donovan, 9 and Richard Donovan is a FEMA person, is he not? 10 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 11 Q And have you read his testimony? 12 A (Carter) Only part of it. 13 I state on page 28, pages 44 through 68.
't
/) 14 Q Now, on page 28 you say, "You totally agree with 15 Mr. Donovan's characterization," of this probably you refer 16 to, and, "with his quick "fix" approach." And the "fix" is 17 in quotes.
18 Are you implying that this is a word used by 19 Donovan? 20 A (Carter) In the context of which I'm using it 21 there, probably what I should have done was to use " quick l 22 fix" itself, both words in quotation marks. 23 I guess I would do -- no, I guess I did'it the 24 correct way. In his characterization: what I disagree with 25 is his characterization of how to correct that situation. 3 Heritage Reportirag Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27624 1 In any other hazard that I have worked with, if we 2 put out an inaccurate message the first priority is to put 3 out a corrected message. The weather service has COR in one 4 of its fields because, obviously, incorrect messages go out. 5 And as soon as you issue an incorrect message and 6 you discover it or somebody brings it to your attention, you 7 put out the same version of it with "COR" on it and explain 8 what it is you have corrected. And that to me is the -- in 9 terms of how you would approach a situation like that, 10 that's the only acceptable solution. 11 Q Wasn't Mr. Donovan simply replying here as how he 12 construed the message as being unclear rather than 13 deficient, and that he wasn't asking for a "fix" at all or 14 suggesting a "fix" at all, but he was simply relating as to 15 how he regarded the particular message? 16 A (Carter) I haven't looked at Mr. Donovan's 17 testimony since I prepared this testimony. 18 I agree that he didn't see it was the problem that 19 I would say it was. 20 Q He wasn't suggesting a fix of any kind, was he? 21 A (Carter) He was saying that, I suppose -- and 22 again, I'm trying to recall from memory. 23 He did not acknowledge it was as great a problem 24 as I think it is; and therefore, I see where you're coming 25 from. That was probably -- the question would be is: if he Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i l 1
.a- .
5h_ 7,
'f CARTER - CROSS- 27625' 1 : perceived.'a serious problem would he recommend the same -'-
.Oi 2-would.he take the same position that-he'.s taking on;this-3 issue'?
' 4 '- And I guess we.would both agree that he probably 5 would'not.
6 7 8 9, 10 i 11 12-13-14 4 15.
- 16 17
. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888-
CARTER - CROSS 27625 1 MR. LEWALD: This isn't what you say here, tiaough, 2 is it? 3 MS. TALBOT: Excuse me. 4 Would it be proper for me to give the witness a 5 copy of the document being discussed to refresh his memory? 6 MR. LEWALD: We have redirect, Your Honor. I'm 7 sure that if there is anything that isn't coming out or 8 coming out erroneously, that it can be addressed. 9 MS. TALBOT: Don't you think it's better to just . 10 avoid error in general by giving him the document up front. 11 Then I don't have to correct anything. 12 MR. LEWALD: The witness is talking about some 40 13 pages or 30 pages, and I don't know what you are going to 14 give him, two or three? 15 JUDGE SMITH: He's not examining him on particular 16 words and sentences there, but upon the entire impression. 17 And I don't think they are in disagreement yet. , 1 18 MS. TALBOT: Okay. 19 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, I think he's examining him l 20 on 24 pages of Mr. Donovan's deposition. And then the 21 witness has indicated that he hasn't reviewed those pages in 22 some time. And Mr. Lewald is pressing on what it is that 23 Dr. Carter understand Mr. Donovan said. 24 JUDGE SMITH: He hasn't expressed any difficulty 25 until now. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
CARTER - CROSS 27627 [' 'T 1 MR. LEWALD: I'm not sure that there is a question
'~
2 pending. 3 JUDGE SMITH: There is no objecting. Nothing. 4 MR. LEWALD: I think it's been answered. 5 JUDGE SMITH: There is no pending question? 6 MR. LEWALD: Unless I -- 7 JUDGE SMITH: No. 8 MR. TRAFIC0dfE: Well, if there is, then why don't 9 I withdraw it so that the record -- i 10 MR. TRAFICONTE: There is a pending question. 11 MR. LEWALD: There is a pending question? 12 MR. TURK: I heard him answer. 13 There was an answer and then Ms. Talbot said -- [N. 3) 14 JUDGE SMITH: The reporter doesn't believe there's 15 a pending question. If she believes there is no pending 16 question, there is no pending question. 17 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, you are withdrawing it if 18 there is. 19 MR. LEWALD: We have a ruling from the reporter. 20 (Laughter) 21 JUDGE McCOLLOM: That settles it. 22 JUDGE SMITH: He withdrew that question, and it 23 was not pending anyway. 24 MR. TURK: If it was pending. t 25 JUDGE SMITH: Go ahead to your next question. i r\
> \
(,) Heritage Reporting Corporation j (202) 628-4888 j l 1 1
CARTER - CROSS 27628 1 BY MR. LEWALD: 2 O Now, Dr. Carter, you are aware, of course, that 3 the SPMC differentiates between EBS messages and news 4 releases. 5 A (Carter) Yes, I am aware. I 6 Q And you've termed this to be a fallacy as I 7 understand your testimony on page 23. 8 A (Carter) Let me go back. 9 Yes. Yes, sir, I did. 10 Q And you pick up on the same point, if I understand 11 it correctly, on page 33 where you say, "From my viewpoint, 12 emergency information is emergency information, whether it's 13 labeled a news release or an EBS message." 14 A (Carter) Yes. 15 Q And this is your position, and this is the 16 underpinning for your views in reviewing the messages that 17 were forthcoming in the exe.:cise. 18 A (Carter) Yes. 19 Q Irrespective of whether they were over the EBS 20 system or they were direct news releases. 21 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 22 That is based on my reading of the plan that news 23 releases are only distributed at the media center, and not 24 otherwise disseminated. 25 If I have a uniform and timely dissemination 1 l ? Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 , l l I ___-__-a
J i CARTER - CROSS 27629. 1 system in the area that I.need to give a warning to, then I
'\w/ '()-
i
' 2- can highlight certain of those messages on.the EBS system 3 because the EBS system has that alarm, that tone alarm that ;
4 gives it some special thing. 5 But basically the EBS system is simply a 6 dissemination mechanism. And, for example, let me give 7 you -- at times in the hurricane field we activate EBS. At 8 other times we don't. The reason for that is that all 9 warning meso >ges in hurricanes are disseminated by AP and 10 -UPI which assures essentially -- there may be a few of the 11- computerized radio stations that are growing nowadays that 12 don't describe to AP but UPI, but essentially everybody that 13 has any type of news function does, and they will get those f 14 messages.
\'
15 So I can highlight some that I want to that are 16- especially important on EBS. So it's on that basis that I 17 make that statement. 18 Q Isn't your quarrel, with respect to the SPMC, with 19 NUREG-0654 rather than with the SPMC as to have both the EBS 20 service and a news release program? 21 A (Carter) I read portions of NUREG way back 22 yonder. I didn't use them in putting together this 23 testimony. 24 So I would have to say I don't know what NUREG 25 says on that. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i i
CARTER - CROSS 27630 l 1 O You don't know whether that's the governing 2 guidance with respect to -- 3 A (Carter) I know it is, but I can't tell you 4 what -- 5 Q -- notification? 6 A (Carter) I can't tell you right now what it says. 7 Q And it may well be that then you would agree that 8 your quarrel may well be with NUREG-0654 rather than the 9 SPMC? 10 A (Carter) It could be, yes. 11 Q Now on page 32 you discuss the procedures outlined 12 by the SPMC, and note that the responsibility for developing 13 and disseminating emergency information to the public is 24 divided within the New Hampshire ORO between the public 15 notification coordinator and the public information advisor. 16 Is that true? 17 A (Carter) That's correct. 18 Q Now the responsibility for developing the 19 information is with the PMC and the PIA. 20 But wouldn't you agree that the responsibility for 21 disseminating it as developed lies with the ORO director? 22 A (Carter) It's my understanding that the director 23 approves -- has to finally approve a message before its 24 disseminated. 25 If that's what you mean, yes, sir. l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l i _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ 4
' CARTER - CROSS 27631
$r~' 1 Q If he doesn't like what's there, he. suggests some
-" :2 changes,1does he not?
-31 A (Carter) I assume so.
4 Q~ Now isn't'what's done here just simply a division 5 of that labor, that EBS messages will be developed by the_ , 6 :PNC and news messages by the PIA? 7 Isn't~that simply a division of labor? - y 8 A (Carter) It's a unitary function. It's dealt 9 with in two different sections of the implementing 10 procedures. They are treated if -- if you call one a chief 11 of something and then the other one his assistance, and you 12 are going to give primary responsibility of one to the 13 other,. or.something like that conceptually. 14 :But they are dealt with different implementing 15 parts of the plan. The plan treats them as two different 16 functions, and I see them as a unitary function, two aspects 17 of a unitary function. 18 Q The development is two different functions, but do. 19 they not funnel together into one responsible person? 20 A (Carter) In the sense that the same person has to 21 approve them, yes. i. 22 Q And insofar as an organization is concerned, this 23 would be just one step in the hierarchy, wouldn't it? 24 A (Carter) I don't understand that. 25 Q Well, isn't the PIA and the PNC directly under the
) Beritage Reporting Corporation l-(202) 628-4888
]
CARTER - CROSS 27di32 1 ORO director? 2 A (Carter) It's my recollection. 3 Q So wouldn't you agree that's just a single step in 4 the corporate hierarchy of an organization hierarchy? 5 A (Carter) No, sir, I think I'm going to stand with 6 what I said before. That it's a unitary function that has 7 been divided into what I consider to be an arbitrary 8 distinction of two functions by the -- 9 Q You refer to it as a decentralization, don't you? 10 A (Carter) Decentralization in that more than one, 11 more than one functions are doing it, are performing what I 12 consider to be the same function. 13 Q So where as here, "a division of labor", you 14 consider that to be decentralization? 15 A (Carter) I see the way you are -- for right now, 16 yes. 17 Q Is it your view, Dr. Carter, that locating the 18 media center in a building which was not under the same roof 19 as the EOC or the EOF is a prudent planning activity, or is 20 not? 21 A (Carter) I think, in terms of planning 22 activities, to be prudent you want to separate the media 23 from your operational work space. I think that's clear. 24 We have seen some of the instances in Miami. 25 And Dade County during David, for example, is a good IIeritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i I _ . _ _ _ . _ . .__
CARTER - CROSS 27633 1- illustration of what'can happen if you allow the media into
' f'~'
2 your operational work area. 3 Yes,.they need to be separated'out of that area. 4' I don't know that I would routinely go so far as
-5. to.say physically remove them in another building, because what that does is makes a distinction between those who are
~
6 7 making'the decisions -- in that type of situation, those who 8 are making the decisions have to formulate's message to send 9 to those who are disseminating information to the media. 10 If they.were in the same building, in different 11 parts of the building, those who are making the decision 12 could come in and brief the media. 13 So from that perspective, and most EOCs that I'm.
'14. aware of, both local-and-state governments, do not have the L 15 media off in another location for-that rcsson.
16 0 It's just a matter of either walking or riding 17 from one point to another, 18 A (Carter) Conceivably that could be the case. 19 MR. LEWALD: Excuse me. 20 (Counsel confer.) 21 MR. LEWALD: I think I just overlooked one 22 question. I just have one. 23 BY MR. LEWALD: 24 0 I noted that in the very beginning of your 25 activities you said you were vice president, human factors, ( Heritage Reporting Corporation j (202) 628-4888 l
I CARTER - CROSS 27634 I 1 of the Corporate Response Group of Washington. 2 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 3 Q And what does that group do? 4 A (Carter) It's a crisis management consulting ! 5 firm. 6 Q A consulting firm? 7 A (Carter) Crisis management consulting firm. 8 Yes, sir. 9 Q And do you know Dr. Harris? 10 A (Carter) Yes, sir. 11 He's with Corporate Response Group. 12 Q And Mr. Sikich? 13 A (Car *er) No. 14 I know Mr. Sikich. He's not with Corporate 15 Response Group. He's Laventhol and Horwath or something, in i 16 Chicago. 17 MR. LEWALD: I have no further questions. 18 JUDGE SMITH: Do you have questions? ' 19 MR. BACHMANN: I just have a couple of questions 20 based on Mr. Lewald's cross-examination. It will just take 21 a couple of minutes. 22 CROSS-EXAMINATION 23 BY MR. BACHMANN: 24 Q Dr. Carter, during your cross-examination by Mr. 25 Lewald, there was discussion about the seven bits of Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l I _ _ _ _ __ __D
. CARTER - CROSS. 27635 ?f"N1 1 information that you believed were necessary to be in EBS 2 messages.
- 3 A (Carter) In warning -- I would say warning 4 messages, more generally.
5 Q I didn't hear what you said. 6 A' (Carter) I wouldn't limit it to EBS messages. I 7 would say1 warning messages. .The seven pieces of.information 8 .that needed to be in warning messages. 9 Q But certainly in the EBS messages, is that your -- l 10 A (Carter) Yes, right. ] 11 Q Now you also testified that you had never 12 participated in planning.for nuclear emergencies. 13 Is that correct?
., 14 .A' (Carter) That's correct.
15 Q Do you have any technical background or expertise 16 on the area of fission products produced in a nuclear 17 reactor? 18 A (Carter) No, sir. 19 Q .So you would, in that case since these are what is 20 produced or released in an accident, you would have no 21 technical. training or expertise as to what could emanate 22 from reactor in the case of an accident? 23 A (Carter) If you had a list of what could, I 24 probably couldn't identify them. 25 No, sir. (~ i' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
~
( CARTER - CROSS 27636 1 Q And, therefore, you have no knowledge of their i 2 physical properties or chemical properties or anything like i 3 that? l 4 A (Carter) That's true. 5 Q Do you have any technical training or expertise on 6 the health effects of radioactive substances? 7 A (Carter) No , sir. 8 Q So really, when you gave in your -- when you 9 discussed your seven points as far as informing the public 10 of the type of release and the effects of the release, you 11 weren't speaking from any background, or knowledge, or 12 expertise about what type of release they could be. You 13 were just nort of shooting in the dark on that one then. 14 Is that correct? 15 A (Carter) I'm not sure I would characterize it as 16 " shooting in the dark". 17 One of the pieces of information that I believe is 18 important to give to the public is information that will 19 allow the public to develop an appropriate perception of how 20 much I'm at risk from this incident. Something that gives 21 me the proper sense that this is something I really have to 22 leave for. This is something that is not all that serious. 23 And it's that information about that range of severity that 24 I was referring to. 25 Q But based on your background and training, you Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27637
./5- .1 couldn't write a message and quantify it?
\% -<) '2 ' A (Carter) Based uren that, no, sir, I couldn't.
.3 MR. BACF..dN: 7. hve no further .. questions.
4 EXAMINATION BY JUDGE COLE
- 5. JUDGE COLE: Dr. Carter,'on page 15 of your 6 testimony you talk about an evacuation scenario wherein the 7 children are at the school and they ar evacuated by' school 8 bus or will be evacuated by school bus, and the problem of 9 the parents not being with the children. That being, in 10 your words, a problematic situation.
11 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Is this the description of 12 Hurricane Eva? 13 JUDGE COLE: Well, I guess it's the same scenario rN 14 where the parents refused to leave until they collected f
\
15 their children? 16 THE WITNESS: (Carter) Right. 17 Yes. 18 JUDGE COLE: I want to make sure, is your point 19 there one of educating the parents as to what the plan is, - 20 or od you have a different solution to that problem? l 21 THE WITNESS: (Carter) That would be very nice. 22 I always get myself in trouble whenever I make presentations 23 to local officials, because I tend to downplay the utility I 24 of pre-emergency information simply because most people 25 don't have it. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 ) 1 I
27638 1 And in contrast, I play up the fact that when , 2 there is an incident, you've got everybody's attention, and 3 give them that information. 4 So those people who are great advocates of pre-5 emergency information tend to think that I'm saying don't do 6 it. I don't say that. But I'm saying it would be very nice 7 if you could educate the parents as to what the plan is. 8 Failing that the parents are going to listen to you about 9 and learn what the plan is, during the incident give very 10 explicit information as to what's going to happen. 11 That's what I'm advocating in this situation. 12 JUDGE COLE: All right, sir. 13 One other point. You mentioned a problem of where 14 warnings are sent out via political subdivisions and people 15 across the county line might get differing recommendations 16 for protective actions. I could appreciate the fact that 17 that might be a problem. 18 How do you handle this with hurricanes? 19 THE WITNESS: (Carter) I think I just alluded -- j i 20 generally what happens is, first of all, it's coordination. 21 There are always going to be pockets of local officials who 22 want to overreach or underreact. So it's a matter of 23 coordination between the weather service. At times, in some 24 states, the states get involved. In other states, they 25 don't. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27639 1 Basically, it is a matter of the, and I guess I 9 2 will go back to the counsel's term "the intensity of the 3 warning" of the evacuation order gradually falls of as you 4 get away from the focus of the immediate threat. 5 Those communities on the end generally issue what 6 we call voluntary evacuation orders. If you don't feel 7 comfortable staying here, then feel free to leave, and we' ll 8 set up a few shelters in case you want to go to a shelter or 9 something like that. 10 But they don't go door to door. They don't issue 11 firm, strong evacuation orders. 12 13 lb 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27640 1 THE WITNESS: (Carter) That's the kind of 2 mechanism by which -- that's what happens in hurricanes.- 3 JUDGE COLE: That wouldn't be practical with the 4 kind of scenario we're talking about here, would it? 5 THE WITNESS: (Carter) I think the distinction 6 that -- my only point in bringing this up in terms of the 7 exercise, and I think it's zero to two miles and then beyond 8 two miles; I think that's the distinction that is being 9 made, is that while you're making that distinction -- while 10 that distinction is being made the messages never say that's 11 the distinction that is being made. 12 The messages are saying, we're going to close 13 these beaches and not those beaches. We're going to ; 14 evacuate or shelter these two towns but not these other 15 towns. And we have been talking about all six towns at the 16 same time. 17 If you're making a distinction based upon within 18 two miles, say you're making a distinction based upon there 19 within two miles. 20 JUDGE COLE: That goes back to your point about 21 completeness of the information? 22 THE WITNESS: (Carter) That's right. 23 JUDGE COLE: All right. 24 Thank you. 25 MR. TRAFICONTE: Could we have a minute, Your l Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888
h 27641 I Honor,
/] 1 i \- 2 (Counsel confers.)
~
3 -JUDGE SMITH: Would you like to take.a break now? 4 MR. TRAFICONTE: No, we're almost resolved. 5 MS. TALBOT: Your Honor, I think I have no further 6 redirect. No redirect at all, as a matter of fact.
- 7. JUDGE SMITH: Do you have any questions based upon 8 anything?.
9 MR. LEWALD: Nothing based on Dr. Cole and the 10 Staff. 11 JUDGE SMITH: Dr. Carter, you're excused and thank 12 you for coming. 13 '(The witness was excused. )
/D '14 JUDGE SMITH: A 10 minute break.
N 15 (Whereupon, at 10 minute recess was taken.) 16 MR. TRAFICONTE: Your Honor, we pick up the four 17 pieces of testimony. I would like this on the record. 18 At the end of the break the Staff distributed a 19 June 26 letter to Your Honors from Edwin Reis attached to 20 which is the confirmatory action letter dated June 23 having 21 to do with last week's events at the reactor during low-22 power testing. 23 I just want to make a couple of points about this. 24 First, for the record, although the confirmatory action 25 lists the Seabrook hearing service list as well as the ( Heritage Reporting Corporation
-('
(202) 628-4888
27642 1 Commonwealth of Massachusetts, I have not and as far as I j 2 know no one in my office has to date received a copy of this 3 confirmatory action letter. Obviously, we're in receipt of 4 it today. 5 We are intending to put together a contention if, 6 and when, we believe there is sufficient basis and I 7 specificity. We don't have a lot of information about what 8 transpired. I know that Mr. Dignan made a statement on the 9 record yesterday. Obviously, we've read what has been 10 appearing in the press, but otherwise we don't have a lot of 11 information. 12 The NRC through its Public Information Office in 13 Washington has indicated that there may well be a public 14 meeting that would comment the conclusion of the Applicants' 15 report, the submittal of the report to the NRC, meetings 16 with the Staff and then a public meeting. 17 I just ask Staff counsel whether he could confirm 18 or disconfirm that and he is not aware of any scheduled 19 public meeting one way or the other. 20 I bring this up primarily because if, and when, we i j 21 do file something everyone in the room knows that there will 22 be an issue about a late filed contention, and the first 23 standard, of course, which is timely, a good cause for late 24 filing. And one of the issues will be, when did they file 25 after the events occurred and when could they have known, et l Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888 t -- _ _-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ i
27643 J fg - 1- cetera, et cetera. ] x/ 2. And to the extent that I can effect'that. 3 calculation now I want to indicate that we are intending to 4 participate, to the extent possible, at any such public 5 meeting in the form of asking questions and seeking out 6- information as well as reviewing whatever report Applicants 7 put together and submit to the NRC as described in.the 8 confirmatory action letter. Assuming said report is made 9 available to us.
- 10. So we are in a, right now, holding pattern. We 11 believe we need more information. We are hoping that we 12 will get it in the very short term. And it's at that point 13 that we would' sit down and put pen to paper.
[} 14 Obviously, this is all very self-serving,.no one We may 15 can pat me on the back and say, okay, you're fined. 16 be held later to have let the time go that we should have 17 acted. l 18 And the other point I want to make is, we would 19 see this as an illustration, quite honestly, of the kinds of 20 issues and events presented by low power testing that are 21 litigable pursuant'to our motion which is still under 22 consideration. 23 So don't misunderstand anything that I have 24 indicated. I don't know how the Board is going to rule as 25 to that prong of our motion. But it is our conception of l /~s Heritage Reporting Corp 3 ration l - [- l (202) 628-4888
i 27644 1 the status of the case that something like this.would oe 2 precisely what low power testing could disclose that would i 3 be litigable in which case we don't believe we would have to 4 move to reopen the record. Nor do we believe, but we 5 believe this with a lot less certitude now that such a 6 contention would be subject to the late filed contention 7 standard. 8 But in any event, the Board hasn't ruled on the 9 motion. So we are just protecting ourselves, and obviously, 10 assuming that if the Board rules against the motion in that 11 particular, that we would have to reopen the record -- move 12 to reopen the record as well as meet a late filed contention 13 standard. 14 So ich those self-serving remarks -- 15 MR. TURK: May I respond briefly, Your Honor? 16 JUDGE SMITH: All you're doing is using this 17 transcript service. 18 MR. TURK: Well, since Mr. Traficonte has gone on 19 record. 20 JUDGE SMITH: You're welcome to do it, yes. 21 MR. TURK: Let me indicate, first of all, that 22 this letter may be partly in error, that is the Edwin Reis 23 letter, to the extent that it indicates that the natural 24 circulation test was the last test in the low power program. 25 I'm attempting to verify now whether, in fact, the Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I l l _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i
27645
'~' 1 test.was part of low-power testing. It's my impression.that
\ 2 it.was not and that, in fact, it was a natural circulation 3 test where things,are tested current eddy-cooling. That is
- 4. the extent to which netural convection occurs within the.
5 . water system. It may, in fact, not.have been part of low-6 power testing, but' simply a test which could be undertaken 7 at any time; and I'm trying to verify that now. 8 JUDGE SMITH: You could do that test with 9 nonnuclear heat. 10 MR. TURK: It do it at nonpower, Your Honor, as 11 long as there's enough heat in the system. 12 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 13 MR. TRAFICONTE: Mr. Turk, it was done in this
.g
( 14 instance, however, with nuclear; was it not? That isn't in 15 dispute. 16 MR. TURK: I don't know-the answer to that 17 question, Mr. Traficonte. 18 MR. TRAFICONTE: Oh. 19 MR. TURK: Let me also continue to note -- 20 MR. TRAFICONTE: I just wonder why there was a 21 scram. 22 MR. TURK: Despite the repeated interruptions, let 23 me note that Mr. Brock of the Mass AG's office was in 24 contact with Mr. Reis last week, Mr. Reis at this office. 25 They certainly have all the information that was available Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - _-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - __ - _ _ _ + _ _ _ - - _ _ -
27646 1 rit this point publicly. 2 MR. TRAFICONTE: That's not true. 3 MR. TURK: One more interruption I note, Your 4 Honor. 5 MR. TRAFICONTE: I thought you were done. 6 MR. TURK: With respect to the issue of whether 7 there will be a public meeting, I just don't know. And I 8 don't know what the Public Information Office of the NRC has 9 informed Mass AG about and I really can't count whether 10 there will be a meeting or not or when, if any, meeting 11 should occur. 12 Also, let's note that Mr. Shannon has taken the 13 opportunity to go all out in the press over the weekend. So 14 they certainly have some information. How much more there 15 is, I don't know. At what point they're obligated to form a 16 contention, I couldn't say yet. But it's certainly not a 17 vacuum at this point. 18 MR. TRAFICONTE: It's not a vacuum. 19 JUDGE SMITH: What sequence do we wish to argue 20 the four motions on the testimony? 21 MR. FIERCE: Your Honor, since you indicated you 22 wanted to hold the Ortwin Renn piece for last, I think the 23 three pieces that I'm concerned with kind of go together and 24 would suggest if Ms. Doughty is ready that you take up the 25 Burrows matter first. l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l l L _ _-_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
27647
} 1 JUDGE SMITH: Dr. Burrows?
N- 2 Mr. Trout,.ws'11 take up, if you don't mind, Dr. 3 Burrows. L 4 MR., TROUT: That would be fine, Your Honor. 5 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, Applicants would move that 6 the entire piece of testimony be excluded. The testimony 7 divides itself into two portions. 8 Applicants would argue that the entire testimony, 9 both the first -- let me just characterize the portions. 10 The_first portion running from page 2 through the top of 11 page 4, ending at the end of answer 6 is generally a 12 criticism of the FEMA MS-1 guidLnce and just says that it's 13 not good enough. It doesn't really explain why, but just
, 14 says it's not good enough.
5 15 The second portion of the testimony beginning -
'16 JUDGE SMITH: Well, it does say some of why.
17 It says, you can get it even if it does not have 18 its own nuclear medicine service; is there reason. 19 But go ahead. Is that your point? 20 MR. TROUT: No, Your Honor, that wasn't my point. 21 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 22 MR. TROUT: The second portion of the testimony at 23 pages 4 through 6 addresses the reception center 24 decontamination and post-decontamination process; and is 25 centered on the argument that a portable pulse height ( Beritage Reporting (202) 628-4888 Corporation
i 27648 1 analyzer with a sensitive sodium iodide detector should be 2 installed at each receptica and decontamination center for 3 spectral analysis of evacuees. 4 Taking the two portions of the testimony, I think 5 both portions are objectionable because they are not 6 rebuttal to testimony filed by Applicants, rather they are 7 part of the Interveners' direct case which should have been 8 filed in February and in April respectively on the two 9 parts. 10 The first part goes to, I would imagine, JI 11 Contention 48. No, I'm sorry. 12 MS. DOUGHTY: 46. 13 MR. TROUT: Is it 467 14 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. 15 MR. TROUT: Thank you, Jane. 16 It goes to JI Contention 46. And the second part, 17 if it goes to any contention at all, would go to JI 18 Contention 56. 19 So the first part would have been due in February; 20 the second part would have been due in April. 21 There is nothing in this testimony that couldn't 22 have been in the original testimony filed in February and in 23 April respectively. 24 Now, taking the second part, the contention about 25 post-decontamination analysis with this particular piece of Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ i
27649
,-As 1L equipment. Aside.from being extremely late, Applicants l s_) 2. . would argae that it's not even within the' scope of the j 3 contentions. That there is nothing in JI-56. .There's 4 nothing in the contention or in the discovery responses that .1 1
5 ever. suggested that we were supposed to have this elaborate 6 analysis p2ccess and this. machinery or type of machinery 7 installed at reception centers. 8 And the first time we ever heard of it, Your ; i 9- Honor, was this Monday, this last week of the hearings, when ! 10 the piece of testimony showed up. 11 And so Applicants wouldLargue that for that i 12 additional ground the second half should be struch. But 1
.i 13' really the entire testimony because it's late. Because it's l / 14 not really rebuttal. But really part of the Interveners' l '- 15 direct case. .That they just have chosen for their own 16 purposes to wait until the last week of hearings to file, it j i
17 should be excluded as untimely. 18 OUDGE SMITH: Haven't we already made rulings in 19 this case about post-decontamination care of radiologically 20 exposed individuals? 21 MS. DOUGHTY: Your Honor, can I have a chance to 22 respond to Mr. Trout's argument? 23 JUDGE SMITH: Well, if anybody has the answer to 24 the question it would advise me considerably. l 25 FR. TROUT: The issue came up, Your Honor, during
/%
i Heritage Reporting Corporatir4
\~- (202) 628-4888 i
r _____._____, 27650 1 Mr. Fierce's cross-examination of Applicants' Panel 17. And 2 as you may recall Applicants raised the objection at that 3 time that that whole subject was, in fact, beyond the scope 4 of the contentions. 5 Mr. Fierce suggested that it was within the scope 6 of the contentions. We looked at the contentions together, 7 the partiee and the Board, and the Board ruled that it was 8 outside the scope. ) 9 MS, DOUGHTY: Your Honor, I was not here at that l 10 time and I didn't have the opportunity to make argument 11 prior to the Board's ruling, so I would just like the { 12 opportunity to respond to Mr. Trout. 13 I would like to argue the second part of the 14 testimony, I believe as he has divided it up, it's pretty 15 much as we have conceptualized it, too. So I would like to 16 begin with question 7 at page 4 and moving on from there. 17 We filed -- initially SAPL filed contentions on I 18 the SPMC in April of 1988. And we filed it based on the f 1 19 language as it exists in the SPMC. l l 20 Now, at section 3.8 under " medical and public I 21 health support" the plans states: " Emergency care for 22 contaminated individuals includes the general public as well 23 as emergency workers and covers those members of the general 24 public who are suspected to have been overexposed or who 25 cannot be decontaminated at designated reception centers. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 , 1
I. : i 27651 7N 1 The list designating primary and backup hospitals ( !
'x / 2 is available at the New Hampshire Yankee offsite response 3 EOC and at reception centers operated by the New Hampshire 4 Yankee offsite response organization."
5 Now, this language under the " medical and public 6 health support" indicates that people who cannot be f 7 decontaminated at the designated reception centers are sent 8 to the MS-1 hospitals. I 9 So SAPL dealt with the issue of this portion of 10 the population that have internal contamination initially in 11 SAPL Contention 5. We thought that captured this issue, and 12 our concern at that point was that the hospitals were not 13 adequately prepared to deal with those members of the public (}
~
14 who are, according to the planned procedures as there 15 presently stated, referred on to MS-1 hospitals. 16 Now in the course of cross-examining Mr. 17 Callendrello on April -- it was either April 27th or 28th, 18 SAPL doesn't get the daily copy. And that ultimately -- 19 that SAPL Contention 5 ultimately got folded into JI-46 20 which was the hospital contention. And we thought that 21 dealt with that portion of the public who were internally 22 contaminated. 23 Because under the provisions of the plan those 24 people were all to go to the hospitals. 25 Now in cross-examining Mr. Callendrello, and we ( . Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l 27652 l 1 didn't get the chance to cross-examine Mr. Callendrello, he f 1 5 1 2 was part of Applicants' Panel No. 6, on this issue until it 3 was either the 27th of 28th of April, I believe, which is 4 after the second filing of direct testimony. 5 And in the course of that examination -- and I'm 6 afraid it's one'of those two dates, but I just have a few 7 pages here, it's a transcript 21,557. I asked Mr. 8 Callendrello the following: "The plan provides for sending 9 people on to MS-1 hospitals for further processing if they 10 can't be decontaminated at this reception center; is that 11 correct?" 12 And he responded: "Yes. With the exception of 13 some individuals who may have internal contamination they 14 may be entered into the radiological screening program in 15 accordance with IP-2.9." 16 Now, referring to IP-2.9 at section 5.2.16 there's 17 a section that says: "When individuals have contamination 18 which cannot be removed after three decontamination attempts 19 or are suspected of having internal contamination, e.g., 20 individuals with contamination around the nose and mouth: 21 (a) you notify the radiological health advisor; and, (b) you 22 obtain the individual's name, social security number, 23 address, and telephone number, and provide the information 24 to the rad health advisor for entrance into the radiological 25 screening program." Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
l 27653 fN 1 So there are two steps: there is to notify the I
\\' ] l 2 radiological health advisor and enter them into the 3 screening program. And then you refer to the radiological 4 health advisors procedure it indicates at section 5.1.5 5 which we noted in our response to interrogatories in 6 response to JI-46 that -- it says: " Follow-up on any 7 emergency workers having received 5 rads or greater whole 8 body exposure or those suspected of having internal 9 contamination or members of the general public who cannot be 10 contaminated below acceptable limite." i 11 JUDGE COLE: Decontaminated you mean.
12 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. Sorry. 13 Very definitely, "Decontam1nated below a6ceptable (' i 14 limits using Attachment 2, radiological screening program v 15 tracking sheet. Obtain the necessary information needed to 16 fill out Attachment 2 to the monitoring decontamination 17 leader who reports the exposure of contamination incident to 18 you. If necessary request the Yankee Atomic Mobile Body Van 19 Services or arrange for a bioassay to be performed at a 20 hospital as stated in Appendix M." 21 So we, I think, reasonably believed that people , 22 were going to be sent, especially because of the language at 23 section 3.8, it says: " People who cannot be 24 decontaminated," it's under this hospital services section, 25 we thought they were all going to the MS-1 hospitals. f ('-~ Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L _ _----__-_
J 27654 ) l 1 And the first indication we had that that wasn't 2 the case was with Mr. Callendrello's testimony. I 3 I I 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
- e4 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 e-_--_-------___-_ -
ETL E E 27655 VN. ' 1' MS. DOUGHTY: (Continued) And now because of i N/ 2 that, this raises a whole bunch of concerns at.the reception 3 center for us that we didn't have before, which is who at 4 the reception' center determines whether or not these people 5 need in cner medical care. 6 If everybody was automatically, who was internally 7 contaminated and couldn't be decontaminated below acceptable 8 limits and immediately went on to a hospital, you would know 9 that they would see some medical person, and that some 10 medical person would make the evaluative judgment as to what 11 should be done about that internal contamination. 12 But since we have no learned that that's not going 13 to be.the case anymore -- 14 JUDGE SMITH: Well, wait a minute.
'\- 15 Did you previously think this was going to be the 16 case?
17 MS. DOUGHTY: That everybody who was not 18 contaminated below acceptable limits would be referred to an 19 MS-1 hospital for further evaluation. 20 JUDGE SMITH: Everybody who could not be 21 decontaminated to a certain point -- 22 MS. DOUGHTY: Right, which is defined in the plan. 23 JUDGE SMITH: -- would be referred to the 24 hospital. 25 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. Heritage Reporting Corporation
\-- (202) 628-4888
27656 1 JUDGE SMITH: And now you learned through cross-l 2 examination of Mr. Callendrello that what would be the case? 3 MS. DOUGHTY: That some people -- j j 4 JUDGE SMITH: Would be put in a tracking program. ! 5 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. 6 And I cross-examined further to say what criteria 7 are used for determining who gets sent on to the hospital 8 and who just goes in the tracking program. 9 And in response to that, he just said there are 10 general criteria for the monitoring and decontamination 11 leader. That's IP-2.9, Section 5.2.16, which I read to you, 12 which indeed is very general, which says, when individuals 13 have contamination which cannot be removed after three 14 decontamination attempts, you know, it's what I said before. 15 You notify the rad health advisor, and he testified they get 16 entered into the screening program. 17 So we don't feel it satisfactorily addresses that 18 question of who makes that decision. 19 JUDGE SMITH: What's the point where the whole 20 process breaks down? 21 Where does the process break down? At what point? 22 They've tried three times. 23 MS. DOUGHTY: It's remonitoring. 24 JUDGE SMITH: They still can't do it. They refer 25 it over to the -- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 l 27657 ' 1'
;/~} . 1 MS. DOUGHTY: Rad-health technical advisor.
N-< 2 JUDGE SMITH: -- rad health technician, and he ) 3 breaks down. His skill is inadequate? 4 At what point, if they don't go to a MS hospital, 5 they,go into the tracking program, where does the. process
'6 fail?
!- 7 MS.. DOUGHTY: It's right at that point, who makes 8' the decision and what criteria are used. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Well, how'does it fail? 10 How does it fail? 11 MS. DOUGHTY: It's that there are.no criteria,,no 12 reasonable criteria for determining who goes. They have no 13 means of evaluating who should -- and that person is not i
/~' 14 even there. He's available via telephone from the EOC.
15 So there is no scientific basis or any medical 16 health basis on which they make the choice as to who goes to 17 the. hospital and who stays and just gets entered into a
-18 program.
19 And so because of this testimony, we are 20 submitting this rebuttal testimony from Dr. Burrows which 21 says that if people aren't automatically going to the 22 hospital, as I told him that that was the testimony of the 23 Applicants, then he believes that then you need medical 24 personnel there. 25 And this answer to Question 9, you know, we didn't f ( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 n ]
l I L i l 27658 ! 1 have to offer that and tell them how to fix the plan, but he i 2 did have a practical suggestion as to what could be done at 3 the reception center is to deal with that problem. 4 And I guess these portable pulse height analyzers 5 are not that difficult to obtain. And as the name 6 indicates, it's a portable. 7 So if you had the properly trained personnel 8 thero, you can make a more informed judgment as to whether 9 people should be sent on for other medical treatment or 10 whether they could just be safely entered into a tracking. 11 JUDGE SMITH: You could not learn from the plan 12 itself that there were no criteria for making the 13 distinction? 14 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, the plan itself says that 15 everybody goes to the hospital. So that I thought -- 16 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, you said that. 17 MS. DOUGHTY: It says, again it's the second 18 paragraph under Section -- 19 JUDGE SMITH: You're going to have to go around a 20 couple of times on this until we finally get it. 21 JUDGE McCOLLOM: What happens to them in the 22 tracking program? 23 MS. DOUGHTY: I don't really know. They get -- < i 24 there is no further explication of that in the plan. 25 And if everybody was going to be entered into the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
+
1 27659 7'~ 3 1 tracking program and go to the hospital, no problem. But i i
's. / 2 from Mr. Callendrello's testimony, we gather that some 3 people are just put into the tracking program before there
- 4 is a medical evaluation that that's appropriate.
5 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. l 6 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I have two problems with 7 the arguments. 8 JUDGE McCOLLOM: You are going to have to speak 9 up. I 10 MR. TROUT: I' m sorry, Your Honor. ) 11 I have two problems with the argument that Ms. 12 Doughty has just made. 13 The first problem is that I believe she is [' 14 mischaracterizing the witness' testimony. Because I believe
\'~/ 15 if you read Question and Answer 7 and the questions and 16 answers that follow, you see that the witness is not saying, l 17 is not talking about this distinction between people who go 18 into the tracking program and people who go to the MS-1 19 hospitals.
20 The witness is saying that everyone who is l 21 potentially contaminated and everyone on whom surface 22 contamination is found, whether it's successfully removed or 23 not, should also have this internal check done with the 24 piece cf equipment that -- I keep -- portable pulse height 25 analyzer with a sensitive sodium iodide detector. (O) Ns Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l 1 I
L 27660 1 So that's the first problem I have, that the 2 distinction that she's trying to draw in order to turn this t 3 into rebuttal testimony is not a valid distinction on the 4 face of the testimony itself. 5 The second problem that I have is, as Ms. Doughty 6 h,as herself pointed out, the procedure for putting people in 7 the tracking program, if there have been three 8 decontamination and it's failed, is right in the 9 implementing procedures. It's been in there since 1988. 10 There has been no change in the plan, let alone a lat e 11 change of the plan. 12 All Mr. Callendrello did on cross-examination was 13 answer a question and refer the person who is questioning 14 him, I presume it was Ms. Doughty, refer her to the existing 15 procedures. 16 And so, again, 1 just think this is testimony that 17 could have and should have been filed originally. 18 JUDGE SMITH: Well, let's break it up into -- 19 MR. TROUT: Assuming that it goes to the 20 contention. 21 JUDGE SMITH: Let's break it up into smaller 22 thought bites.
~
23 MR. TROUT: Okay. 24 JUDGE SMITH: You disagree with Ms. Doughty that 25 it was not until Mr. Callendrello was cross-examined that Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888 i l
)
j _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l
- r. . - -
[ ' r s. 1 27661-
'N she learned.that' some people would go to a tracking program?. I a) / ' 1_
?LL :2L MR. TROUT: I: disagree'that,- -
]
"3; JUDGE SMITH: She'could have learned that.
4 MR. TROUT: That's~right..
]
5 . JUDGE SMITH: ..You disagree with that? 6 MR. TROUT: She;could-have-learned. 7 Then.I, definitely disagree with-that. 8- JUDGE SMITH: Okay,.let's nail that down. 9 What do you think about that? 10 'MS. DOUGHTY: Well, I agree that we knew people 11' could go in the tracking program, but we didn't realize the 12 hospital -- this portion of the plan says they go to the o S 13 hospital. l-14 The IP here says they enter the tracking program. 15 We didn't.think.that'the plan was inconsistent. 16 We thought that both --- 17 JUDGE SMITH: They go to the hospital first. Then 18- the tracking program.
'19 MS. DOUGHTY: I didn't -- no, I thought.that their 20 .name and address was probably'taken at-the trailer for the L 21 tracking. program but also to.go to the hospital.
22 JUDGE SMITH: You don't realize that they.went to 23 the tracking program instead of the hospital. You didn't 24 realize that. 25 MS. DOUGHTY: Right.
't -
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
l
]
27662 1 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. l 2 MS. DOUGHTY: I read the language as not being i k 3 mutually exclusive. I viewed it as being -- 4 JUDGE SMITH: Let's nail that down. 5 Now 1au got that. 6 MS. DOOGHTY: Right. 7 JUDGE SMITH: I said it makes sense. 8 MS. DOUGHTY: It's sort of like in the law. If 0 you have to different sections of the law, you read them 10 both as having effect. ! 11 I read this as having effect. I read that as 12 having effect. I assumed they were both in effect. 13 JUDGE SMITH: There is certain logic to that. 14 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. 15 JUDGE SMITH: You drecide to just keep the 16 statistics on some and treat some. 17 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes, and it didn't say either/or. 18 It didn't say only the externally contaminated go on. 19 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. Hold it there. 20 Now what do you say about that, Mr. Trout? 21 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I'm focusing on the plan l l 22 cited by Ms. Doughty, which is 3.8.1, and I'm focusing on 23 the implementing procedure which is IP-2.9, Procedure 24 5.2.16, and, frankly, I'm trying to see if it's possible to 25 read the two together and arrive at the conclusion that you j Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
- n 1
27663
. p's 1 do both. !
\m / 2 Because certainly if you read 5.2.16, there~is no 3- ambiguity. When individuals have contamination which cannot 1
-J
'4 be removed after three decontamination attempts, or are 5' suspected of having internal contamination, you do two
-6 things, and it says only two things.
7 Notify the radiological health advisor, and obtain 8 the person's name, social security, et cetera, in order to 9 enroll them in'the screening program.
'10 It doesn't say anything_there about sending them 11 to the MS-1 hospitals.
12 Now I want to just -- before I rely on that, I 13 want to read through the rest of this just to make sure that 14 they can't be read as complementary.
"" JUDGE SMITH: Well,-the fact is I remember when 15 16 that tracking statement came up. I wondered why it did 17 include post-treatment or post-hospital diagnosis or not.
18 MR. TROUT: Your Honor. 19 JUDGE SMITH: I think Mr. Callendrello is trying 20 to help you. 21 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I'm looking at 3.8.1, and 22' it tells you in 3.8.1 exactly who it is who goes to the 23 hospital. 24 It says, " Injured individuals who may be 25 contaminated or overexposed will be transported to the O' Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27664 1 designated MS-1 hospitals." 2 JUDGE SMITH: That would include everybody then 3 that would be qualified for the tracking program, right? 4 MR. TROUT: No, Your Honor, I don't believe that's 5 the case at all. 6 A person who is injured -- 7 JUDGE SMITH: Well, I thought we decided now that 8 those who are radiologically exposed -- is there still a 9 dispute, if you have internal contamination, are you 10 radiologically exposed? 11 MR. TROUT: Oh, no. No , that's not -- no, I'm not 12 trying to resurrect that problem, Your Honor. 13 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 14 Haven't we been functioning under the idea all 15 along that if you have internal contamination, you are 16 radiologically injured in that you follow in that subset of 17 contaminated injured who are also radiologically exposed? 18 (Counsel confer. ) 19 MR. TURK: I wasn't here during that cross-20 examination. l 21 At the risk of confusing things, my understanding j 22 of a contaminated injured individual is that those terms are I l 23 not synonymous. An injury must exist, and there must be i l 24 contamination, j 25 JUDGE SMITH: With traumatic injury and Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888 l
1
-)
27665 f'
.L 1: . contamination.
.A 2- -MR. TURK: Physical. injury.
3- ' JUDGE SMITH: .Yes, I-took that as an article of-
- 4. faith, too, until Ms. Doughty.came-up'with a-Commission
.5- - guidance to the contrary.
6' Boy, we'have to go back and unravel all-of this?- 7 We now have been operating'.under the premise, 8 based upon.the most recent Commission guidance, which backed 9 away from San Onofree, and said the contaminated injured 10 people means not only traumatically injured people with. 11 radiological contamination,.but it means radiologically 12 exposed people. 13 And I have just sort of equated internally 14 contaminated' people who can't be. uncontaminated with 15' ' radiologically exposed. Thereby, then, syllogistically 16 getting them into contaminated injured. 17 Can you pull out your magic regulation again? 18 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, actually I have the -- 19 JUDGE SMITH: We have it downstaits. 20 MS. DOUGHTY: -- the GM MS-1. That's one part of 21 the FEMA guidance we are not disputing. It has the three 22 categories of what it says as used in 10 CFR 50.47 (b) (12) in 23 Planning Standard L of NUREG-0654, FEMA REP. 1, Revision 1. 24 "The term ' contaminated injured' means: (1) 25 Contaminated and otherwise physically injured; (2) I Heritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888 ' _ - - - \
27666 1 contaminated and exposed to dangerous levels of radiation; 2 or (3) exposed to dangerous levels of radiation." 3 So I believe these people fall within the second 4 category. 5 MR. TURK: Maybe the key there -- 6 JUDGE SMITH: Perhaps. They are candidates for l 7 it, in any event. 8 MS, DOUGHTY: Certainly. 9 MR. TURK: Maybe the key is the word " dangerous". 10 In other words, not all levels of radiological 11 contamination are such that it raises a fear of a danger to 12 the person. 13 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, the expert -- 14 MR. TURK: That's not Commission guidance. That's i 15 a FEMA document. t 16 MR. TROUT: Well, Your Honor -- 17 JUDGE SMITH: A Commission -- 18 MS. DOUGHTY: This is a FEMA, and it was a -- 19 JUDGE SMITH: -- policy statement. 20 Was it a policy statement? 21 Yes, it was -- 22 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I think we are getting 23 into a definitional problem that we don't need to pursue, 24 because the passage I just cited -- I mean we're debating 25 what does contaminated injured mean, and I think we went to ! Heritage Reporting Corporation i (202) 628-4888 j
27667 1 that in some detail earlier, and we agreed it means three 2 things.
\'
3 But the paragraph of 3.8.1, which talks about 4 who's going tc go to the MS-1 hospitals, does say 5 contaminated injured individuals. It doesn't use the 6 regulatory language. It does use the regulatory language in 7 the preceding paragraph. 8 MS. DOUGHTY: It does in the second paragraph that 9 I'm talking about? 10 MR. TROUT: It says in the second paragraph. It 11 says contaminated injured individuals. 12 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. 13 MR. TROUT: In the third paragraph, which says who 14 goes to the MS-1 hospitals, and this is the point I was 15 trying to make earlier, it says injured individuals, not 16 contaminated injured individuals, injured individuals. 17 JUDGE SMITH: Radiologically injured. 18 MR. TFOUT: No, it just says injured, Your Honor. 19 Injured individuals -- 20 JUDGE SMITH: What do you need a MS-1 hospital for l 21 an injured person for? 22 MR. TROUT: Injured individuals who may be i 23 contaminated or overexposed. 24 MR. TURK: That's by definition what the 25 contaminated injured definition includes. She just read the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
- - _ ~ 27668 1 definition including that same category. 2 MR. TROUT: It includes it. 3 MR. TURK: Yes. 4 You just heard her read exactly that definition 5 for injured who have been exposed is another way of stating 6 the contaminated injured. 7 MR. TROUT: It's one subset. 8 MR. TURK: Yes, it's a subset. 9 MR. TROUT: It's a subset. 10 MR. TURK: So the plan says that subset goes to 11 the MS-1 hospital. 12 MR. TROUT: Right. 13 MR. TURK: That's right. 14 MR. TROUT: Right. , 15 MR. TURK: And that's what she understood. 16 MR. TROUT: That's the point. 17 MS. DOUGHTY: Who may be contaminated. 18 MR. TROUT: All right, the point -- l 19 MS. DOUGHTY: We're talking -- 20 MR. TROUT: The point that I was trying to make 21 all along is that the distinction, see, I understand Ms. 22 Doughty's argument to be regardless of what the testimony 23 says, that the rebuttal aspect of this is that they did not 24 learn, SAPL did not learn until Mt. Callendrello's cross-25 examination, is that there is a sorting process that takes l Heritage Reporting Corporation 1 (202) 628-4888 ; t I L : l ! \ , l I ! l L _ _-
27669 f-~g 'l- place at the reception center.- And.some people are sent-on s- 2- to the MS-1 hospitals and some people are just enrolled in 3' the. screening programing. 4 Now I'think - please jump in now if-I have got 5 that wrong, because the rest of my argument is going to be 6 premised on that's the distinction that you are drawing. 7 JUDGE SMITH: I think that's right. It's fair. 8 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. I thought -- 9 MR. TROUT: Okay. 10 MS. DOUGHTY: -- that both things were going to I 11 -happen. For someone who had gone through three
- 12. decontamination attempts and was still showing in the survey 13 instrumentation as being contaminated.
14 MR. TROUT: All right. 15 JUDGE SMITH: She is agreeing with.you very 16 warily. [ 17 (Laughter) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 0 5 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
27670 q 1 MR. TRAFICONTE: It's the source of the message. 2 (Laughter) 3 MR. TROUT: I can't imagine why. 4 The argument is that the distinction isn't in the 5 plans. It's not in the procedures. It's something that Mr. 6 Callendrello revealed for the first time on cross-7 examination. 8 And I respectfully suggest that an examination of 9 plans and procedures just will not bear that out. That if 10 you compare IP-2.9, 5.2.16 with that third paragraph in the 11 plan, 3.8.1, you see that there is a subset of contaminated 12 injured who are being sent on to the MS-1 hospital. 13 And that's further borne out by IP-1.2, the 14 radiological health advisor, emergency response actions at 15 2.7 which reads as follows: "One of his responsibility, his i 16 or her responsibilities to ensuring that members of the 17 general public who cannot be decontaminated below acceptable , i 18 limits or have external contamination of greater than 10 19 times the frisking alarm point and are decontaminated are ! l 20 offered entry into the radiological screening program and j 1 21 that they receive follow-up treatment." 22 Now, there again, you have a winnowing process in 23 that the radiological health advisor is asked to make a 24 decision as to what, if any, follow-up treatment is I 25 required. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27671 f-N 1 JUDGE SMITH: Does he decide who goes.to the 4^ N/-
) 2 hospital and who needs only --
3 ' MR . TROUT: I believe that that's correct. 4 JUDGE SMITH: -- following, tracking and. 5 treatment. l , 6 MR. TROUT: I believe that'that is correct, Your 7 Honor, but let me consult. 8 (Counsel confers.) 9 MS.. DOUGHTY: Mr. Trout, I just point out to you 10 that that 2.7 talks.about external contamination and we're 11 dealing with internal contamination with this group of 12 people I'm talking about. 13 MR. TROUT: " Members of the general public who
/~' 14 cannot be decontaminated below acceptable limits or."
15 MS. DOUGHTY: Oh, I see. 16 MR. TROUT: Yes. 17 JUDGE SMITH: I think that all relates to 18 radiologically exposed people. 19 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. 20 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, it has been explained to 21 me that what the RHA does is determines who might 22 immediately need to go to a hospital. And if someone is 23 enrolled in the radiological screening program and needs 24 some sort of medical treatment later on, further down the 25 road in the long term process, that decision is not made by I
/h (j Eeritage Reporting Corporation l
]
(202) 628-4888 l l _______1_______ . _ _ _ . __ J
27672 1 the RHA on the spot. But again, the winnowing process is 2 there. 3 JUDGE SMITH: There comes a point where there is 4 uncertainty as to whether they go to the hospital. But to 5 be conservative you keep track of them in case they need it. 6 MR. TROUT: Yes, Your Honor. 7 JUDGE SMITH: So you're saying, that's the way it 8 works. 9 MR. TROUT: Yes. 10 JUDGE SMITH: And you're saying that the plan has 11 all along made it clear. 12 MR. TROUT: Yes, none of this has changed. 13 JUDGE SMITH: But I still have not yet tracked 14 through the language where the fork comes and some go 15 tracked and some go to the hospital. 16 MR. TROUT: It's the RHA. 17 JUDGE SMITH: Just take us right to the language. 18 (Counsel reviews document.) 19 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, it has been pointed out to 20 me that the distinction that I was attempting to draw, the 21 language in 3.8-1 is also borne out in Implementing 22 Procedure 2.9. 23 If you look at Implementing Procedure 2.9 at 24 5.2.15, that's on page 6 of IP-2.9, you will see that there 25 is: "If individuals arrive at the monitoring trailer with Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
.r 27673-r~ 'l- injuries that may require medical attention'due to D
2 following," and there's a series of steps. 3 5.2.16 talks about: "When individuals have L 4 contamination which cannot be removed through the following ! 5 which is: notify the RHA and obtain" -- 6- JUDGE SMITH: Wait a minute. j 7 Notify RHA. ! l 8 MR, TROUT: And put them in the screening program. 9 JUDGE SMITH: "Or notify RHA," and under " notify 10 RHA," if they have levels of contamination which cannot be ! 11 removed. If they don't, you let them go. If they do, you 12 go to RHA. He examines the data if they go above a certain 13 level.to the hospital. I
/A 14 MR. TROUT: Yes. '
15 JUDGE SMITH: Below that level screening. 16 MR. TROUT: Yes. 17 JUDGE SMITH: And read the language that says 18 that. How do we~know what the RHA does? 19 JUDGE McCOLLOM: Tell us what you're reading from 20 now, Mr. Trout. 21 MR. TROUT: Okay, Your Honor, I would be happy to. 1 22 We have our contaminated injured class of people 23 which divides into three groups as we've determined in the 24 past. 25 JUDGE SMITH: No one is disputing that this O l D) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27674 1 afternoon now. 2 MR. TROUT: Okay. 3 The injured, the pecple who are injured and 4 contaminated or injured and exposed, they're taken care of 5 by 5.2.15. 6 JUDGE SMITH: Traumatically. 7 MR. TROUT: That's correct. 8 JUDGE SMITH: You've got body injuries. 9 MR. TROUT: All right. 10 JUDGE SMITH: We're not talking about them. 11 MR. TROUT: We're only talking about the people 12 who are only contaminated or who are only exposed. 13 JUDGE SMITH: Who are contaminated and cannot be 14 decontaminated? i 15 MR. TROUT: Right. 16 JUDGE SMITH: Seriously contaminated or exposed. 17 MR. TROUT: Or exposed, right, and cannot be 18 decontaminated. Those are the people that run through 19 IP-2.9, step 5.2.16. 20 JUDGE SMITH: Where do we send these people to the 21 -- I'm sorry, I shouldn't have cut you off. 22 MR. TROUT: The first thing you do is notify the 23 radiological health advisor; that's step A under IP-2.9. 24 We're on page 7 of IP-2.9, it's procedure 5.2.16. Notify 25 the radiological health advisor. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27675 9"- ' 1 JUDGE SMITH: The only thing it says there for him
?f Am 2- is to put him in the' screening program.
3 MR. TROUT: Well go~,.Your' Honor, to IP-1.2 which 4- 'is the radiological health advisor's emergency response 5 action. You go to section 2.7. 6 JUDGE SMITH: Go to IP-1.2? 7 MR. TROUT: Yes, Your Honor. 8 Section 2.7. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Section? 10 MR. TROUT:' 2.7 of IP-1.2. 11 (Pause to review document. ) 12' ' JUDGE SMITH: You still don't have them into a. 13 hospital, j' 14 MR. TROUT: Well, no, Your Honor, that's true. It i
\'+ 15 doesn't say that the follow-up treatment would be MS-1 16 hospital. It doesn't specify what the follow-up treatment 17 would be. It's going to vary from individual-to-individual.
18 JUDGE SMITH: Where does it provide ~at any time 19 that anybody on the judgment of the RHA goes from the 20 decontamination center straight to the MS-1 hospital? ; 21 MR. TROUT: That's in 2.5.15, which is the injured 22 cubset. 23 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 24 So there is no provision then expressly where only 25 the radiologically injured people go straight to the MS-1 l' ) Heritage Reporting Corporation
~~/ (202) 628-4888
l 27676 1 hospital. 2 MR. TROUT: That's correct, Your Honor. 3 JUDGE SMITH: Radiologically exposed. 4 MR. TROUT: Right. 5 That was the point that I was trying to get at 6 earlier. The plan makes the distinction and the procedures 7 make the same distinction between the radiologically exposed 8 -- the group that are just radiologically exposed, the 9 radiologically contaminated and the injured contaminated. 10 The injured contaminated go through 5.2.15, they 11 go to the RHA, and then they go to the MS-1 hospital. And 12 that's also what the plan at 3.8.1 says. l 13 The people who are just contaminated or just 14 exposed go through 5.2.16, they go to the RHA, they're 15 enrolled in the acreening program and the RHA could send 16 them to the MS-1 hospital if that's the follow-up treatment 17 that he feels is required in their individual case, although 18 that's not expressed. 19 JUDGE SMITH: Sooner or later. 20 MR. TROUT: Sooner or later; yes, Your Honor. 21 JUDGE SMITH: Early in the screening program or ( 22 later in the screening program. 22 MR. TROUT: Yes, Your Honor. 24 And that distinction is in the plan, Your Honor. 25 It's not something Mr. Callendrello invented or revealed on Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l l l
p. ?; ll
-27677-
/"'S 1 the witness stand on April'27th or April 28th.
's - 2 JUDGE SMITH: Now all.of.this, we have to go back, 3 relates to timeliness.
4 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. 5 JUDGE SMITH: As compared to adequacy. 6 MS. DOUGHTY: And then-there is also the witness' s 7 statement -- 8 JUDGE SMITH: It -- excuse me. l 9 MS. DOUGHTY: I'm sorry.. 10 JUDGE SMITH: I shouldn't have interrupted you. 11 MS. DOUGHTY: No, I interrupted you, I'm sorry. 12 I just' wanted to also say that the witness also 13 said, if it's. internal contamination there is not much you t 14 are going to be able to do to decontaminate somebody, and ( 15 that may accountxfor the lack of concern about timeliness. 16 But our expert feels quite differently. There are 17 chelation and certain lavage therapies that can greatly 18 reduce internal exposures if implemented rapidly. 19 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 20 If it becomes appropriate let's get to the quality 21' of his testimony. i 22 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 23 JUDGE SMITH: After we decide whether you knew ) l 24 from the plan, the timeliness, which will depend upon ] i 25 whether you knew from the plan. If the plan had been
.f l Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
t I-l 27678 f 1 followed and the Implementing Procedures have been followed, 2 you know that that distinction was made and that there was 3 no further evaluation of the radiologically exposed people 4 at thb decontamination center. 5 And I think that once you get the hang of 6 following through that and you get familiar with it, that 7 seems to be the case. That there is no provision for the 8 immediate commitment to an MS-1 hospital for those who are 9 solely radiologically exposed. 10 MS. DOUGHTY: I read it differently. 11 I read the plan -- 12 JUDGE SMITH: Wait a minute. 13 Go ahead, finish. 14 MS. DOUGHTY: I really did understand the plan to 15 indicate that people who are contaminated injured, that 16 paragraph 2 at 3.8.1, that they would be -- the whole -- I 17 just read that whole discussion as indicating that those 18 people who are contaminated injured, and I assumed it was 19 the definition that appears in the MS-1 guidance and the 20 Commission's regulations that those people would all -- 21 JUDGE McCOLLOM: Where? 22 MS. DOUGHTY: This is the second paragraph of 23 3.8.1, it says: " Emergency" -- 24 JUDGE McCOLLOM: 3.8.1 of what? 25 MS. DOUGHTY: The plan, I'm sorry. j l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27679
- 2. JUDGE SMITH: 'The details --
2' ' JUDGE McCOLLOM: Oh, we've got to go back to the 3 plan. 4 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes, it's page 3.8.1, and just by
- 5. coincidence it's also section 3.8.1 under-" hospital 6 services."
7 Particularly the phrase that caught my attention - 8 is'the one'in the second paragraph on-that page'that. 9 says -- 10 JUDGE SMITH: Wait a minute. 11 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 12 (Board reviewing document.) 13 JUDGE SMITH: 3.8.1 says: " Injured individuals who
. [~3) 14 may be contaminated or overexposed."
\
15 MS. DOUGHTY: In that preceding paragraph is the 16 one that says: " Emergency care for contaminated injured 17 individuals." And I read that phrase to be the same as the 18 ~ phrase as it appears in the guidance documents.- 19 JUDGE SMITH: Right. 20 And then the following paragraph seems to bear you 21 out, at least as far as it goes: " Injured individuals who 22 may be contaminated or overexposed will be transported from 23 the reception center to designated MS-1 hospitals via 24 ambulance, bus or whatever." That's what it says. 25 MR. TURK: Your Honor, that sentence said: I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 620-4888 I i
27680 1 " Injured individuals who may be contaminated or 2 overexposed," those two phrases define the injured 3 individual. 4 MR. TROUT: Your Honor -- 5 JUDGE SMITH: Oh, it's always injured. They all 6 have to be traumatically injured. 7 MR. TROUT: It's the distinction, Your Honor. If 6 there is some ambiguity in the plan at 3.8.1, I respectfully 9 suggest that that ambiguity is clarified by the Implementing 10 Procedures where you have that distinction sharply drawn 11 between the traumatically injured and the rest of the 12 radiologically injured, and that's in Implementing Procedure 13 2.9, the difference between 5.2.15 where we aend them to the 14 RHA and then to the MS-1 hospital. 15 And 5.2.16, these are the nontraumatically 16 injured, radiologically injured people, who we send to the l'7 RHA and enroll in the screening program. 18 And then if you look at the RHA's procedures you 19 see he may prescribe follow-up treatment. 20 JUDGE SMITH: We're dealing here with, when you 21 stop to think about it, four classes subsets of people. 22 Under 5.2.15, anybody who arrives at the 23 monitoring station injured. 24 MR. TROUT: Yes, traumatically injured. 25 JUDGE SMITH: Traumatically injured. Physically Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
t 27681 l
-x 1 injured, number one, regardless of contamination or s.- 2 whattver. He's there, he goes to the hospital.
3 MR. TROUT: Yes. 4 JUDGE SMITH: So we' re dealing with injured; 5 that's 5.2.15, the first clause, although later on they 6 assume he may be contaminated. . 7 Then we're talking about a subset of injured with 8 contamination. A subset of injured with excessive exposure. i 9 And a subset of excessive exposure only. i 10 If you have a person who is so contaminated who l A
. 1 1
11 cannot be brought down to certain levels he falls into the 12 class of exposed individuals. 13 MR. TROUT: Well I don't know that there's a [} 14 distinction drawn between contaminated and exposed.
\,/ 15 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, there is in the MS-1 guidance, 16 Mr. Trout, that's number 2 versus 3.
17 JUDGE SMITH: We're back to that now. 18 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. 19 JUDGE SMITH: You can have a person who has -- I 20 suppose they got to have contamination or you're not going 21 to read anything on them. I guess that's a necessity, isn't 22 it. I mean, they're going to have to be contaminated or 23 else you're not going to have any way to find out that 24 they're exposed. 25 But that's a nuance'to it. I mean, they're really 7s '{ Heritage Reporting Corporation N- (202) 628-4888 l l l _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
27682 ! I 1 talking about highly exposed people without contamination -- ! l 2 I mean, highly exposed people, people who have been known to 3 have been exposed. And people who are no longer 4 contaminated, but people who are so severely exposed and 5 contaminated they cannot be decontaminated. 1 6 7 4 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 l 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 j
27683 f-^s., l' JUDGE SMITH: So I go back to you. You can have
%s 2- four sets and'some subsets of the four sets, but 3 nevertheless, that's what it is.
4 And you are saying that -- 5 MR. TROUT: The distinctions and treatments -- 6- JUDGE SMITH: The only people that go to the MS-1 7 hospital they have got to have physical injuries, traumatic 8 injuries. You can read all those things there. Everything 9- fits into that scheme. 10 MR. TROUT: No, Your Honor. 11 I'm saying the only people who automatically -- 12 JUDGE SMITH: Automatically go. 13 MR. TROUT: -- go to the MS-1 hospitalo are the f 14 people who are traumatically injured. And that's the b 15 distinction that the plan draws. 16 JUDGE McCOLLOM: All of the traumatic injured do 17 go to the hospital? 18 MR.. TROUT: Yes. 19 JUDGE SMITH: Right. 20 MR. TURK: Assuming it's not a minor injury, I 21 presume. 22 MS. DOUGHTY: Your Honor. 23 MR. TROUT: Assuming it's a traumatic -- 24' JUDGE SMITH: Well, enough to be hospitalized 25 MR. TROUT: -- injury that requires
/ ! Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27684 1 hospitalization, yes. 2 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 3 MS. DOUGHTY: Your Honor? 4 JUDGE SMITH: That does seem to be what it says. 5 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. l 6 JUDGE SMITH: And see if you can read us anything 1 7 which does not fit into that logical, that scheme of -- 8 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. 9 There may be some inconsistency between the plan 10 and procedures, because the second paragraph says, 11 " Emergency care -- 12 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I hate to interrupt. 13 But even if there is an inconsistency between the 14 plan and the procedures, that inconsistency existed a year 15 ago, too. 16 JUDGE SMITH: Well, it may be. I don't know. But 17 if the plan -- 18 MS. DOUGHTY: I agree that it's inconsistent. 19 MR. TROUT: And it's not as though that Mr. 20 Callendrello -- again, it's not something that came up on 21 April 27th. 22 JUDGE SMITH: Well, now we've got pretty much 23 agreement on the part of the Board members and most of the 24 people in the room, not all of them, that the scheme calls 25 for only traumatically injured people to go the MS-1 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27685 hospital. 1
. (N 2 MR. TROUT: Automatically.
l 3 JUDGE SMITH: Automatically. 4 MS. DOUGHTY: Your Honor, could I just argue one 5 last point here? 6 Because:it says emergency -- 7 JUDGE SMITH: No, wait a minute. Wait a minute. 8 Just give me a minute. 9 MS. DOUGHTY: Sure. 10 (The Board confers.) 11 JUDGE SMITH: That seems to be the consensus of 12 the Board and the people across the room from you.
'13 MS. DOUGHTY: I guess I'm not -- . O 14 JUDGE SMITH: By virtue of the operation of the 15 plan, before they go to the MS-1 hospital, they have.to have 16 a traumatic injury.
17 Now it's your opportunity to show why that isn't 18 the case and point to things that do'not fit into'that 19 scheme of logic. 20 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 21 Again, I fall back mainly on the second paragraph ) J 22 at 3.8.1, which refers to emergency care, and that couldn't 23 be talking about just being put in a screening program. 24 To me, it implies medical care, because it falls 25 under whole rubric of hospital services. And I read the j j p i t Htsritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
?
27686 1 language as consistent with the Commission's regulations in 2 the FEMA guidance when it goes on and says, " Emergency care 3 for contaminated individuals includes the general public as 4 well as emergency workers, and covers those members of the 5 general public who are suspected to have been overexposed or l l 6 who cannot be decontaminated at designated reception 7 centers." 8 Now those people who cannot be decontaminated, I 9 assumed, because they fell under this rubric of medical 10 hospital services, would get emergency care, which again 11 implied " hospital", to me. 12 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, all that that paragraph 13 says is that the medical services are available for those
,- 14 persons. It doesn't say that they are automatically going 15 to be sent there.
16 And, in fact, the plan, when you look at the 17 implementing procedure, says for one subset of the whole 18 class of contaminated injured, the big umbrella group, one 19 class, the traumatically injured are going to get sent 20 automatically to the MS-1 hospitals. 21 The rest are going to be sent to the RHA, and the 22 RHA decide what kind of follow-up treatment they receive. 23 And that could include -- 24 JUDGE SMITH: Would you address her point about 25 emergency care? Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l l
I l
^
27687
/s 1- MR. TROUT: Excuse me?-
4 3' -2' . JUDGE SMITH: She's made a point that needs you to 3 address it. 4 MR. TROUT: Emergency care. 5 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 6 MR. TROUT: Right.. 7 Emergency care is P.vailable for contaminated-8 injured individuals at the MS-1 hospital 9 If a person who is just contaminated or.just
- 10 injured, and in the judgment of the RHA requires immediate 11- care, then that person is sent to the MS-1 hospital. That's 12 the point that I kept trying to emphasize when you said that 13 the injured are sent to the hospital, or the traumatically
' 14 injured are sent to_the hospital and the contaminated are 15 not.
' 16 JUDGE SMITH: This is a statement of availability.
17 This is a statement of availability. The resource. 18 MR. TROUT: Yes. Exactly. 19 JUDGE SMITH: As compared to procedures. 20 MR. TROUT: That's right. 21 JUDGE SMITH: Resources compared to procedures. 22 MR. TROUT: And you get into the procedures and 23 the procedures then do the dividing, who goes and who 24 -doesn't 25 JUDGE SMITH: I think that's right now. This is
-fN T p) Beritage Reporting Corporation l (202) 628-4888
27688 1 an interesting argument. It just turns back and forth. 2 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. 3 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, Mr. Callendrello has 4 pointed me to yet another implementing procedure. 5 Is this going to make things better, easier or 6 harder if I throw another implementing procedure into the 7 pot. 8 JUDGE SMITH: Well, wait a minute. Before you do 9 that, let's see what Ms. Doughty says about what the Board 10 now believes to be a correct distinction between the 11 resources in the second paragraph and a procedure in the 12 third paragraph beginning, " Injured individuals", et cetera. 13 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, again -- 4 14 JUDGE SMITH: And you are talking about procedures 15 and not resources. 16 MS. DOUGHTY: Pardon? 17 JUDGE SMITH: Your witness is talking about 18 procedures here and not resources as far as -- yes, he's 19 talking about resources to use in a procedure. 20 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. I 21 JUDGE SMITH: He's not talking about the 22 avaiian lity of MS-1 hospitals. 23 MS. DOUGHTY: In terms of these particular l 24 answers, I told him that we had learned through the 25 cross-examination of the Applicants' witnesses that people Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
a, a
>p-27689 fN
'i
~1- .weren't going.to automatically go to'~the hospitals.
2' And'given.that, what should be the -- you know, 3L what do you feel is necessary, and he absolutely feels -- 4 ' JUDGE SMITH: Okay, but here is where the Board is
- 5. now.
6 The last level:of discussion,.we had arrived at a 7 consensus, agreeing with the people on the opposite' side of' 8 the room, that only injured people would go to the hospital 9' as a" consequence of procedures.
.4 10- And'you'say, well, that can't be true because r.ead-11 the word'" emergency = care for contaminated injured people".
12 And then that convinced me at least that'the burden was back 13- over to Mr.' Trout. j'~ ' 14 And he points out that, well, no, you are 15 confusing resources, facilities alluded.to in the second. 16' . paragraph beginning " emergency care" with procedures which 17 begins in the third paragraph, which I had misread myself at 18 the earlier part of this discussion. 19 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 20 I'm afraid I missed that point. Let me think
'21 about that for just a minute.
22 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 23 Now read the second paragraph with the view that 24 it seems to be talking about facilities. And the third l 25 paragraph says " Injured individuals who may be contaminated ( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L
27690 l 1 or overexposed will be transported from reception centers." 2 And as a chorus of people lead by Mr. Turk pointed 3 out, injured modifies both contaminated and overexposed in 4 that' sentence, and we agreed with it. 5 Injured as a modifier, injured individuals are 6 those who may be injured individuals and contaminated, and 7 injured individuals who are overexposed. 8 MS ., DOUGHTY: Okay. 9 JUDGE SMITH: So there is where the procedure 10 differs from the paragraph above. 11 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 12 It could be read that way, or you could read the 13 words " injured individuals" to just be a continuation of the 14 definition of contaminated injured individuals as it flows 15 from above -- 16 JUDGE SMITH: Okay, that's your reading of it. 17 MS. DOUGHTY: -- which is how I read it. 18 JUDGE SMITH: I think we are coming down to where 4 19 we have the decision point now, I think. 20 And so far, the entire scheme of events that we 21 have read is consistent with only traumatically injured 22 people, traumatically injured people go, by virtue of 23 procedures, to the hospital automatically, by procedure. 24 (The Board confers.) 25 MS. DOUGHTY: I guess, Your Honor, I would just Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l l l I
.)
~
l l l 27691 f /'~Ng 1 :have to say that this was - you know how I construed this I \ N_,). 2 language. s 3 JUDGE SMITH: That's just the way it is, yes. 4 M3. DOUGHTY: And I think the length of time that 5 we have all been discussing it can mean that reasonable 6 minds-can have a good amount of variable understanding as to 7 what is described here, particularly since the Applicants' 8 plan doesn't really break out the categories in quito the 9 same way as -- you know, it doesn't explicitly mention these i 10 categories. 11 And as soon as we found out from Mr. Callendrello, 12 you know, we thought it might be an alteration or whatever. 13 As soon we understood, we notified fairly. shortly thereafter that we intended to bring some contrary testimony. v} 14 /' 15 JUDGE SMITH: Well, there is no question that it 16 takes care to read it, and it took, in our case,. help to 17 read it. I mean you are correct on that score. 18 But once it is understood, it is, in our view, 19 very clear. Once the scheme, once the whole scheme falls 20 into place the Board has been consulting while we have been 21 talking, and it is clear to us what the scheme is, and not 22 that we' re saying that you read it carelessly or didn't act 23 promptly or anything else. That's not the point. 24 You have done a lot of work on it, and you have 25 acted within your concept of it well and promptly. (Q Heritage Reporting (202) 628-4888 Corporation
l 27692 1 But, nevertheless, that isn't the standard we can i 2 apply. We have to apply the clear meaning of the plan, and 3 we do believe that the meaning is clear, although difficult. 4 Unfortunately, that's the way of the world i 5 sometimes. 6 MS. DOUGHTY: And I guess I would also ask the 7 Board to take into consideration whether that tnis plan is a 8 goed plan. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Now let's move to that. I don't 10 know if we can get to that. 11 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 12 JUDGE SMITH: But now we have to decide the 13 timeliness issue and, of course, I think that we have c 14 necessarily arrived at the conclusion that you are out of 15 time and we also were not giving you credit for good cause 16 for being out of time, because although in good faith and 17 with intelligent reading, no question about that, you 18 arrived at a conclusion to the contrary, understandably. 19 Nevertheless, the language being clear, when 20 understood, when studied, does not afford us a reason to 21 find good cause for your late understanding. 22 Okay, you understand where we are now? 23 MS, DOUGHTY: Yes. 24 JUDGE SM77H: Now we have to address whether other l 25 reasons prevail for accepting this testimony. Otherwise, it h j Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 ___m__m -
27693 I l
'A: 1 . will be very late and we'can't accept'it.
kN .j- -2 All right? 3 MS. DOUGHTY: I would say'that -- 4 JUDGE. SMITH: It's a good idea.
-5 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, we couldn't find, I don't 6 think, a much more distinguished or knowledgeable witness 1
7 'than Dr. Burrowsxand with greater expertise in these 8 matters. He has over 40 years of experience in 9 radionuclides and the practice of nuclear medicine. 1. 10 And I can tell you that he feels that this is not 11 adequate for the reasons set forth in his testimony. And in 12 the-spirit of trying to offer a suggestion as to_what could
~
13 help' address, at least in part, this problem, he's made a 14 ' concrete suggestion. And I have misplaced my copy of his
#~') >
JQ L 15. ' testimony.
- 16. Excuse me a minute while I search.
17 (Pause . ) 18 MS. DOUGHTY: 'Oh, here-it is. 19 It appears from Mr. Callendrello's testimony that 20 the Applicants are operating under the assumption that there 21 isn't anything much that can be done if there is internal 22 contamination, and that happens not to be the case. 23 Dr. Burrows pointed out.to me the National Council 24 on Radiation Protection -- l 25 JUDGE SMITH: Well, that's not -- we also had
-(Oj Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i 27694 1 testimony that, although nothing can be done on an emergency 2 basis, that the long-term -- except for what antibiotics and 3 blood transfusion or whatever -- 4 MS. DOUGHTY: There actually are. 5 JUDGE SMITH: But it is a long-term problem. 6 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, the first immediate medical -- 7 JUDGE SMITH: I think what you are really saying 8 is somewhere in that long-term stream, and long term can be 9 shorter or longer, the tracking system needs something 10 better. 11 MS. DOUGHTY: No. I 12 I'm actually saying that there are certain 13 therapies that can provide a great deal of help, and Dr. 14 Burrows says it in his testimony at Question No. 9. 15 He said in the last sentence in his answer that, 16 "If chelation or other therapies are advisable given the 17 results of the analysis of the," this refers up to the 18 internal contamination. "They should be instituted within 19 as little as an hour or so." 20 Thare are certain kinds of drugs that can be 21 administered. One of them is diethylene trimine pantocedic 22 acid, DTPA, and it can be administered. If it could be 23 administered within an hour or two, it can help flush 24 certain contaminants out of the system. 25 Furthermore, there are other means such as Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
. i 27695 l 1
J
-,e~'< -1c . pulmonary lavage. j kN 2 MR. TROUT: Is that within an hour of 3 contamination?
MS. DOUGHTY: Pardon? 4 i
'5 MR. TROUT: Within an hour or two hours of 6 contamination?
7- MS. DOUGHTY: Well, that would be -- that's the 8 optimum. To get the best result, you institute.them that 9 quickly. 10 JUDGE SMITH: Well, all of this assumes that the 11 RHA does not have - well, of course, under these 12 circumstances he could not possibly have access to this type 13 of treatment'or diagnostic capability.
/N 14 We' don't know really what the RHA does, do we?
15 (The Board confers.) 16' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 g Heritage Reporting Corporation l
'- (202) 628-4888 f 1
I 1
iI 27696 1 JUDGE SMITH: Mr. Turk, what is our responsibility 2 under these circumstances? 3 MR. TURK: With respect to amending the plan? l 4 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 5 We found it this late and there's no good cause. 6 We see here that there's an issue that perhape requires l 7 further attention. 8 MR. TURK: If Your Honor had decided that you were 9 convinced further attention is required, then you could 10 raise a significant safety issue of your own, a. sui sponte 11 issue. 12 MR. TRAFICONTE: I don't believe it's that 13 stringent a standard to allow rebuttal testimony. This is 14 no necessarily the admission of a new contention. 15 JUDGE SMITH: No , I don't think it's rebuttal I 16 testimony. I think we sort of ruled that out. 17 MR. TRAFICONTE: So you're applying a standard 18 that would approach to reopen the record. I mean, Mr. 19 Turk's comment -- 20 JUDGE McCOLLOM: Or a late filed contention. 21 MR. TRAFICONTE: A late filed contention. 22 JUDGE SMITH: Late filed contention. q 23 MR. TRAFICONTE: All right. I 24 The late filed contention does require a safety j 25 significance is what I heard Mr. Turk just mention. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27697
. )*~v 1 JUDGE SMITH: What_ if it nas safety issues?
w .2 MR. TROUT: This is sui sponte, though.
- 3. MR. TRAFICONTE: Pardon me?
4 JUDGE SMITH: You're excluding the safety 5 significance from consideration of late filed contention. ! 6 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes. 7 MR. TURK: No , my point was that the Board could 8 raise an issue sui sponte without even requiring ] 9 contentions. But to do that they have to make a finding of 10- significant safety. i 11 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes.
~12 NR. TURK: But, Your Honor, what is the issue that.
13 you believe.
/ 14 JUDGE SMITH: The issue that the Board hasn't
- 15. discussed yet and we.want to discuss, because the procedure 16 is that we have become aware through the cross-examination 17 of Mr. Callendrello through Ms. Doughty's proffer of this 18 witness that there is available, according to him, a 19 diagnostic process and treatment which would improve the 20 short-term and long-term care of radiologically exposed
- 21. people.
22 The way it stands right now the RHA by telephone 23 makes certain judgments based upon gross information and 24 this witness says, well, it can be improved. And we found 25 that it's untimely. , /~% ( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27698 1 MR. TURK: I'm going to hazard a guess, Your l l 2 Honor, I guess there's a danger in doing that. l 3 Answer to question 9 ends by stating that: "If l 4 chelation or other therapies are advisable given the results 5 of the analysis, they should be instituted within as little 6 as an hour or so." l 7 If I read that teatimony on its face correctly, 8 then that would indicate that there is no purpose in having 9 this device at hand, because people will have passed through 1 10 the radiatien, who have gone to the parking lots, will have 11 been standing in line, will be monitored, will then come in. 12 I don't see the basis for suspecting that there will be an 13 hour's time to get to the people after their exposure. 14 MS. DOUGHTY: That again, Mr. Turk, is the { 15 optimum. I'm not sure that it becomes a useless procedure ! 16 afterwards. 17 And I just realized that -- 18 MR. TURK: But it's your testimony, 19 MS. DOUGHTY: I'm afraid I didn't ask the witness. 20 I just realized that in answer to some 21 interrogatories from the Applicants said, additionally, the 22 plans do not account for the amount of time it would needed 23 to be expended for remonitoring individuals. 24 And I stated our understanding at that point that j 1 25 evacuees who had not been successfully decontaminated will l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
p, . 1 4 li a 27699
- ,-s; 1- be referred out. And no one'ever told me we were wrong.
/ ). 1
[\m,/ 2 This was in_ answer.to interrogatory number 255. l ( 3' JUDGE McCOLLOM: Referred out? 4 MS. DOUGHTY: Will be referred out. ] 5 MR. TROUT: Wait a. minute.
-j 6- JUDGE SMITH: Now you're reopening the point of 7 -timeliness.
8 MS. DOUGHTY: Sure. 9 JUDGE SMITH: And that's got to come to an end 10 sooner or later. ] 11 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 12 JUDGE SMITH: We gave you a very full opportunity 13 to argue that.. Lrx 14 MS. DOUGHTY: Sure. I won't get into that_again. N 15 But then further down in answer to another 16 interrogatory we said that there is no demonstration in the 17 plan that_the personnel to be employed have the requisite 18 qualification to be performing these functions. 19 Well, I guess I should read, we allege that: "The 20 SPMC fails to provide reasonable assurance that adequate 21 procedures, personnel, equipment, and facilities for 22 radiological monitoring and decontamination of general 23 public evacuees, emergency workers, special facility 24 evacuees have been established." 25 And the Applicants asked us to please state all
- Heritage Reporting Corporation
- 'w (202) 628-4888
_ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - - . - 1
27700 And we stated that, we l 1 the facts underlying this assertion. 2 referred to the facts in the contention and then said: 1 3 "There is no demonstration in the plan that the personnel to j I 4 be employed had the requisite qualifications to be l
)
5 performing these functions or that they have been adequately 1 i 6 trained. The rad advisor is a particularly key position for 7 which adequate background and experience are critical." 8 (Board confers.) , I 9 MR. TROUT: Your Honor. ! i 10 JUDGE SMITH: Just a second. 11 MR. TROUT: I'm sorry. 12 (Board confers. ) 13 JUDGE SMITH: Mr. Trout? 14 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, do I understand that the 15 question before the house now is whether we have so 16 significant a safety issue that the Board would consider 17 taking up the issue sui sponte? 18 JUDGE SMITH: Let me ask, if you don't dissuade us 1 19 to the contrary here's where we would have announced, if you j 1 20 didn't have any further argument, we would have already ! 21 ruled that it is not timely and if it's going to come up I 22 it's going to be the Board's own sui sponte initiative. 23 And as Mr. Turk pointed out that requires that 24 there be a significant safety circumstance. And I think 25 it's even bigger than that. It's more severe than that. I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
t
)
I' e 27701 l:
..C 1 don't know, but it's strong language.
L ..l, . N 2 'And then we've got to go to the Commission.and let i
- 3. them know we're doing it. And the Commission has 4 discouraged that. And we don't think it raises-to that
,5-point because the whole debate assumes that the RHA is not )
- l
-6 equipped to his' job or her job. That it simply'makes a j 7 gross judgment over gross evidence over the telephone and 8 -let's it go at that; we don't know,'the record is silent.
9 Left to our own devices: we would say that the 10 best we.can do with the concerns raised by Ms. Doughty would 11 -be'to ask the Applicants for a commitment that your 12: cognizable health physic officers will view the concepts-13 expressed by Dr. Burrows and see if they have merit, and 14 that's all we can do. [J~'h 15
~
As we' sit here right now we cannot keep this 16 record open with the idea we're going to have an M.D. in 17 every reception center and one of these machines in every 18 reception center and everything else. That's a big deal, as 19 we well understand. 20 And we don't have a record which supports, at this 21 very, very late date, our intervention on what could be a 22 very, very lopsided situation. Lopsided in your favor. 23 We're aware of all the circumstances. 24 At the same time Dr. Burrows has impressive
- 25. credentials. And we would feel personally more comfortable Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i 27702 i f , I 1 if we had a commitment from the Applicants. 2 MR. TROUT: To review the issues raised? I' 3 JUDGE SMITH: To review the issue. 4 With a commitment you will review the issue and 5 assess its merits. 6 MR. TROUT: May I consult with my client, Your 7 Honor? 8 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 9 (Counsel conferring. ) 10 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I have consulted with my 11 client and as I suspected from what has already occurred in 12 this proceeding, as Your Honor knows with respect to the 13 testimony of Dr. Leaning and Mr. Dillman, my client is quite
,c 14 ready to commit to review the suggestions that Dr. Burrows 15 makes. Give them a thorough analysis.
16 And more than that my client is willing to commit, 17 having undertaken that review, to the extent that they find 18 that there are suggestions in Dr. Burrows testimony that do 19 have merit and that are reasonably implementable my client i 20 will commit to implement them. l l 21 JUDGE SMITH: Now, Ms. Doughty, that was at the 22 Board's own initiative. Your appeal rights are perfectly 23 preserved. You just lost on that one. And you don't have 24 to agree to that or anything; that was the Board's own 25 initiative. j l l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27703 1 On that score, however, the Board does want to 2 note for the second time now, you have made which I believe l I 3 is a very sound contribution to the record with your. l 4 diligence. The first time being explained to us what a 5 contaminated injured person was; and now this time you have 6 made a solid contribution to the record. 7 Now we have the other rad part of the motion. 8 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. 9 Your Honor, I guess the rest of the testimony 10 mainly flows from our concern that there hasn't been yet a 11 ruling on the rebuttal presumption and what it takes to 12 undermine a FEMA finding. 13 Coming into the proceeding and when our testimuny 14 was filed on the hospital issue, which is what these other 15 points in the testimony deal with, we had read Commission 16 case law including your decision in the Three Mile Island 17 case and thought that cross-examination was sufficient to 18 defeat a rebuttal presumption. 19 And now there is an open-question as to whether we 20 will need direct evidence to un;aat the credibility that 21 attaches to a FEMA finding. And that's one of our reasons 22 for wanting to have direct evidence admitted into the 23 proceeding. 24 JUDGE SMITH: Are you still talking about Dr. 25 Burrows? O Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27704 1 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes, Dr. Burrows' testimony.
~
2 He does has some direct disagreement with certain j 3 of the provisions of the FEMA GM MS-1 guidance. He 4 disagrees with the statement in the guidance that JCAH 5 accreditation suffices to establish that a hospital is 6 sufficiently prepared to accept and treat contaminated 7 injured individuals. 8 And he points out that that simply means that JCAH 9 accreditation may simply mean that a hospital has an 10 agreement with a hospital that does have a nuclear medicine 11 service department. 12 JUDGE SMITH: But why isn't this a simple rebuttal 13 to the FEMA rebuttal presumptions? 14 How does this differ from -- 15 MS. DOUGHTY: It also comes in as rebuttal to some 16 things that Mr. Sinclair said in his testimony on this issue 17 under Ms. Greer's, I believe, cross-examination. 18 JUDGE SMITH: My problem is -- all other problems 19 aside -- with Dr. Burrows' testimony, if he's right, it's a 20 rebuttal to a rebuttable presumption. 21 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. 22 JUDGE SMITH: And it's not complicated. 23 MS. DOUGHTY: No. 24 It's a very uncomplicated rebuttal of the FEMA 25 guidance. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L_--_-------------
L T H p. 27705; l 1J JUDGE SMITH: -I thought you were-suggesting'-
\% 2 'something like -- ;
i 3 .S. M DOUGHTY: Finding where the nature of the 4- language goes. j
-5 JUDGE' SMITH: I don't see that. I mean,.if 6 ~there's a ruling from'us that you're seeking that goes 7 beyond a'very simple argument, this is rebuttal to a
,8 rebuttal presumption, . I':m missing it. I 9 You saidlyou read the decision of Three' Mile Island and other decisions on it.
11 MS. DOUGHTY: Right.
- 12 -The~ Applicants in their trial brief have come up
-13 with a. legal theory that in order to rebut the FEMA. finding
, 14- we need to adduce direct evidencer we'can't rely on cross-
- 15. examination.
16 MR. TROUT: That's not the Applicants' position, I 17 don't believe. 18- MS. DOUGHTY: It's'not? 19 MR. TURK: You can make your case with cross-20 examination. 21 MS. DOUGHTY: Pardon? 22 MR.. TURK: You can make your cuse with cross-23 examination. ! 24 MS. DOUGHTY: There's on disagreement about that, 25 our concern about having that particular point in there is
. ~
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27706 1 greatly diminished. 2 JUDGE SMITH: If you think that you destroyed 3 FEMA's position on cross-examination -- I think I'm missing ] 4 something in the debate. I I 5 What is your impression as to the rulings we made? I l 1 6 MS. DOUGHTY: My impression is that the Applicants 7 had a trial brief and we've had some discussions about it, 8 but I don't think that there 'nas ever been a final 9 dispositive ruling stating -- 10 JUDGE SMITH: Universal generic ruling always on 11 FEMA rebuttal presumptions; and that's correct there hasn't. 12 And if I'm lucky there never will be, because 13 that's not a good idea to do it. I mean, why decide that if 9 c. 14 you don't have to decide it. 15 You simply are now offering a simple rebuttal. 16 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. 17 JUDGE SMITH: Isn't she? 10 Do you disagree with that? 19 MR. TROUT: Not at all, Your Honor. 20 Tant was my whole point, that this testimony or 21 this portion of the testimony is not rebuttal to Applicants; 22 it's rebuttal to FEMA's original pos3'.on represented in the 23 FEMA report and it should have been filed back in February, 24 on February 21st when the rest of the Interveners' evidence 25 go into that contention. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 - - - - - - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - ~
'^
27707
.A l1' ' JUDGE SMITH: Now it's timeliness.
-i ,
, ~ \~- -
2 You're only. talking about timeliness. We're not I 3 talking:about~ competence. You're-talking-about the
~
, 44 . timeliness of.the. testimony. There's no other infirmity.to
- 5 the testimony except its substantive merits maybe.
6 MR. TROUT: That's right. 7 JUDGE SMITH: But there's no other threshold-8 infirmity to this testimony. 9 MR. TROUT: That's right. 10 'I am not arguing that they cannot challenge the,
- 11. guidance. I'm not making that argument.
12 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 13 14 f
.\'
15
-16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 O Heritage Reporting (202) 628-4888 Corporation
L f 27708 ! l I 1 MS. DOUGHTY: There is also Mr. Sinclair's j l 2 testimony that we are rebutting, too. 3 JUDGE SMITH: Well, wait a minute. l l 4 On this point, I think that you raised an issue 5 that you need not have raised. 6 Mr. Trout, when you were conferring -- Mr. 7 Traficonte states that the Applicants do not raise an 1 8 objection to Dr. Burrows' testimony on anything except 9 timeliness. 10 MR. TRAFICONTE: If I could just help Ms. Doughty 11 briefly. I think she has misstated her argument actually at 12 . the outset. 13 She sees this as a piece of rebuttal to the FEMA 14 finding. 1S It doesn't necessarily follow from that that she 16 was on notice when FEMA filed its report as to the 17 particulars that are appearing in this testimony, however, 18 as to the particular, and the particular I am focusing on is 19 the accreditation issue. 20 Ms. Doughty only learned of that when Mr. 21 Sinclair, Applicants' witness, responded to some inquiry I 22 from Attorney Greer making certain statements about j l 23 accreditation and what it means. And I think Dr. Burrows is j l 24 going to that point. j i 25 So timeliness really starts then. I i Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i l i l 1
p i 27709 1 JUDGE SMITH: Mr. Sinclair's ' testimony.
/-s 2 MR. TRAFICONTE: Mr. Sinclair's testimony.
- 3. When'Ms. Doughty is characterizing the testimony 4 Eas rebuttal to FEMA, she is talking in the most generic.
5 sense. 6 MS. DOUGHTY: That's what I meant. 7 MR. TRAFICONTE: The ultimate issue, the ultimate , 8 thing it runs to-is that its rebutting the FEMA finding of
- 9. adequacy, but not in the sense that it's immediately 10 . triggered in any direct sense to the FEMA report, and 11 thereby could hre e been filed in February.
12 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 13 MR. TRAFICONTE: I think that's what is 14 misleading. 15 JUDGE SMITH: So what do you say, did the cross-16 examination of Mr. Sinclair raise the issue? 17 MR. TROUT: Not for the first time, Your Honor. I 18 think the FEMA report checked -- when FEMA reviewed 19 Applicants plan and procedures, they saw that we had two 20 MS-1 hospitals because we had the JCAH accreditation, and 21 they said fine. You meet the MS-1 guidance. 22 And that was the time when the issue of the 23 sufficiency of the guidance was raised and should have been 24 addressed. 25 I would also note that it's perhaps superfluees f ~g - Heritage Reporting Corporation (' } (202) 628-4888 l l l 1 -mm__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ i
f-I i 27710 1 argument I've just made, that the Interveners have already 2 had one rebuttal to Mr. Sinclair on H3-1 hospitals. They 3 had Dr. Peelle brought in and cross-examined, and now they 4 want another rebuttal two months later. 5 MR. TRAFICONTE: Different Intervenor. 6 MS. DOUGHTY: Different Intervenor. 7 And, in fact, there is, at transcript 23372, Dr. 8 Peelle testified that he thought a board-certified 9 radiologist was qualified to supervise a hospital response 10 to a radiological emergency where Dr. Burrows offers a 11 slightly different opinion. i 12 He said that that's not necessarily so. l 13 MR. TROUT: So you are rebutting Mass AG's 14 witness, f 15 MR. TRAFICONTE: He was hostile, if I remember ! 1 I 16 correctly. 17 MR. TROUT: I can't imagine why. 18 (Laughter) ; 19 MR. TRAFICONTE: It's a term of art. He was a 20 hostile witness. 21 (Laughter) 22 MR. TRAFICONTE: Hostile in that sense. 23 (Laughter) 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: I thought he was hostile in that 25 sense, too. l Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
27711 f-s; . le JUDGE SMITH: 'Were the nuns' hostile, too?.
~
sSv 2- (Laughter) 3 MR. TROUT: . Care ful', . John .
~4 .MR. TRAFICONTE: It's a term of. art.
5 No comment, Your Honor. 6 (Laughter) 7 JUDGE-SMITH: The argument is made that you.couldf 8 have raised the dependency upon the JCAH accreditation at 9 the time-of the FEMA-report, and that would have made your 10 rebuttal to the FEMA report in January. The argument is 11 -made. 12 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 13 And I guess I don't have a ready answer to that 14' because I don't have a specific enough recollection of that O 15 particular part of the FEMA report, nor did I bring my copy 1 16 today. 17 JUDGE SMITH: Let's see what it says. 18 MR. TRAFICONTE: Can I ask, is it the plan report,. 19 Mr. Trout, you are referencing, or the exercise report? 20 MR. TROUT: That's a good question. 21 I think it's the plan report. 22 (The Doard confe."s.) 23 MR. TRAFICONTE: Mr. Trout, we' re looking at the l 24 plan which is Applicants' Exhibit 43 (c) , and we think it's i 25 the Planning Standard L, Medical and Public Health Support. 1 Heritage Reporting Corporation [)
\-- (202) 628-4888 i
c-- _ 27712 j l 1 tiR . TROUT: Right. 2 MR. TRAFICONTE: And the planning standards is, 3 " Arrangements are made for medical services for contaminated j 4 injured individuals." 5 And we were reviewing the various criteria there, 1 6 and the plan references, in the various statements made by 7 FEMA, the review statements. And we haven't located any 8 indication there about using or making any reference to 9 accreditation. 10 MR. TROUT: Try L-3. 11 MR. TRAFICONTE: L-3, "Tho plan contains a list of 12 hospitals with appropriate information"? 13 MR. TROUT: Yes. 14 And then follow the reference to 3.8.1. 15 MS. DOUGHTY: 3.8.1. 16 (Counsel review document. ) 17 MS. DOUGHTY: At 3.8.1, it says, " Evaluation of 18 the capabilities of listed hospitals, certified by the Joint 19 Committee on Accreditation of Hospitals (JCAH), has been 20 conducted to identify the primary and backup locations." 21 I guess this another example of language that 22 could be read two ways. You could just think the JCAH is 1 23 just a parenthetical reference, or you can assume that they 24 are hanging their hat on the evaluation, in part, on that i 1 25 JCAH accreditation. I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 Ol
I
)
a 27713 { 1
S 1 (The Board . confers. ) {
f ) I N s' 2 JUDGE SMITH: Our ruling, Ms. Doughty, is that the 1 3 plan gave sufficient notice, the reference to the JCAH 4 accreditation. 5 So this is late. 6 You can argue the other standards if you wish, 7 meaning the other standards -- it is not apparent on the 8 face of the testimony that the other standards are met. You 9~ can argue them if you wish, but you are late. And so far we ; 10 have no good cause. 11 We are dealing with this part of the testimony, 12 the M-1 accreditation aspect of it as a late-filed issue' l i 13 based upon the language that you just read from the plan and
/N 14 we just read referring to the accreditation of the JCAH.
MS. DOUGHTY: Hell, I feel that it's a serious 15 16 issue --
17 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 18 MS. DOUGHTY: -- if the FEMA planning guidance is 19 not automatically able to be adhered to and have it ensure 20- that the hospital is accredited. 21 JUDGE SMITH: So you are saying there that does -- 22 that would fit into -- it is only you and your witness will, 23 let me get the standards. 24 The record will not be made by the -- your 25 interest will not be represented by anybody else on this f) ('~,) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i 27714 1 issue. 2 MS. DOUGHTY: Right, i l 3 JUDGE SMITH: I just feel this is going to be a ! 4 futile exercise. This is going to be a futile exercise. I 5 don't want to pre-judge it. But when you get this no good 6 cause for late filing, you have a lot of work to do. 7 MS. DOUGHTY: Right, and I'm frantically seanching 8 for the five steps that I have to satisfy here. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Well, here is one. "The entent to i 10 which the petitioner's participation might reasonably be 11 expected to assist in developing a sound record." 12 Your statement there that this is a problem and 13 you've got a well qualifiec expert to come in and say it's a 14 problem, that goes in your favor. 15 (Counsel confer.) 16 MR. TRAFICCNTE: We are consulting, Your Honor, 17 because we are struggling with the difference between
. 18 treating this testimony as itself a late-filed contention 19 and dealing with the fact that it may well now be seen to be 20 late, the testimony is late because the FEMA plan review put ]
21 SAPL on notice that this was how it was reviewing. l 22 JUDGE SMITH: It is a lately-intrpluced issue. j 23 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, we have contention 24 language, in fact, in the Board's admissien order back in i 25 July of last year, that identifies the issue as the same ) Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
x l
'27715 t :/ s 1 'issueithat. the testimony runs .taa. a
( N 2 So what I'am getting to is'that maybe it is 3: appropriate to use a late-filed contention standards. :! 4 JUDGE SMITH: Yes.
- 5 MR. TRAFICONTE: But'in'the absence of any other.
6 But it is the difference between an issue which is ? . 7 in, and'this is within the scope of that contention, and 8 testimony that for reasons that -- 9 JUDGE SMITH: Well, then you've got big troubles, 10 because there certainly was no basis for challenging the , 11- adequacy of the JCAH accreditation, l 12 MR. TRAFICONTE: No, no, no. 13 JUDGE SMITH: Right. '/ 14 So if you are going it in at all,.you don't get it (' in as rebuttal because we found that you could have raised 15 16 the issue earlier on. You could have filed testimony in, 17 January -- 18 MR. TRAFICONTE: SAPL could haveifiled the 19 testimony in the initial filing in February. 20 JUDGE SMITH: Right. 21' MR. TRAFICONTE: As part of her -- 22 JUDGE SMITH: And'they could have consulted with 23 Dr. Burrows. 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes. 25 JUDGE SMITH: And say, how about this JCAH. t
/
( Heritage Reporting Corporation f (202) 628-4888
27716 1 MR. TRAFICONTE: I understand that. 2 JUDGE SMITH: So they are very late on that. 3 MR. TRAFICONTE: I understand.
)
4 JUDGE SMITH: They are late and they don't have j 5 good cause. 6 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 7 JUDGE SMITH: We found that. 8 The only possible way they can get it in as a late 9 filed issue, and it's going to be almost impossible to do. 10 I think that you know that. 11 And the one that you described goes in our favor. ! i 12 But as you know, it's very, very hard once you are found to 13 be late without good cause, it is very, very hard to 14 overcome that requirement, particularly -- I don't want to l 15 foreclose any further argument from you, Mc. Doughty, i 16 MS. DOUGHTY: I would like to try to address these j 17 points if granted the opportunity. ! 18 JUDGE SMITH: I thought you would. i 19 All right, go head. You see, you've got your book 20 open there. Go ahead. 21 MS. DOUG2TY: Right. 22 And I would see our strongest suit as being 23 Subsection III, the development of a sound record. 24 If the FEMA guidance is faulty in this respect, 25 and in certain other portions of Dr. Borrows' testimony, he Heritage Reporting Corporation , (202) 628-4888 1 e-_______--_
27717
~x 1 points aut that the FEMA guidance doesn't present an i ) \. / 2 adequate standard for evaluation. It's very clear from some 3 of the testimony of the Applicants that they relied very 4 heavily on the FEMA guidance in how they went about their 5 planning activities.
6 For example, Mr. Callendrello testified that they 7 didn't do an independent assessment of w... ther they need ,
.1 8 more than two MS-1 hospitals, and simply complied with FEMA 9 guidance.
10 So to the extent that the FEMA guidance is not 11 sound, it would have a pervasive impact on this hospital 12 issue, we believe. 13 And so certainly the soundness, you know, this
/'~~s 14 JCAE is an example where FEMA was just wrong, plain wrong.
! I
'! 15 The accreditation does not necessarily indicate that the 16 hospital is equipped to deal with contaminated injured 17 individuals.
18 And further, the FEMA guidance, in terms of the 19 numbers of hospitals required, there is not site-specific
)
20 evaluation. It's just a requirement that they have applied i 21 across the board. And Dr. Burrows believes that population 1 22 estimates should enter into the evaluation of the 23 capabilities of medical facilities. 24 So I think Subsection III is probably the area 25 where the greatest contribution will be mude, ip)
\~.-
Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27718 1 Subsection II, there isn't any other means, as you 2 pointed out, where anyone else is going to protect our 3 interest at this point. No other party is bringing these 4 issues as -- 5 JUDGE SMITH: You've got a tough one coming down, 6 though. 7 MS DOUGHTY: Pardon? 8 JUDGE SMITH: You've got a tough one down the 9 road. 10 MS. DOUGHTY: Subsection coming down. 11 JUDGE SMITH: So far you are doing fine. 12 MS. DOUGHTY: II, III and IV. 13 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 14 MS, DOUGHTY: The extent to which it will delay 15 the proceeding, I wouldn't think that Dr. Burrows, depending 16 on the length of Applicants' cross, would be on the 17 stand -- l 18 JUDGE SMITH: Oh, he's throwing out the whole 19 scheme. 20 MS. DOUGHTY: Well, that's a matter of whether we l 21 go up or down. ! 22 JUDGE SMITH: He's bringing a very, very important 23 issue, in his view, into the hearing not only late, but very 24 late, within just a few days of the close of the record. 25 Clearly, the last one would be weighed very Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 e . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _
.j
.i 27719 1 1
/ 1 heavily against'you.
kg 2 MS. DOUGHTY: Part'of the very late,.I had the i 3 - flu. I had' planed to fiJe it at least last. week. J 4 JUDGE SMITH: Well, I'm talking about calendar 5 late. You know, it's not good cause late. Calendar late. 6 We're very late. We're within a few days of closing the 7 record, and that last one is not good'cause. 8 That last-one is to what extent would it broaden 9 the issusc, and it sure will, or delay the proceeding, and 10 it.sure would. It would delay the proceeding and broaden, 11 the issues. 12 You can't'make'it. 13 14
' 15 16 17 18 19 20 1
21 l 22 l 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation
% (202) 628-4888
27720 1 JUDGE SMITH: You don't have to argue. { 2 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 3 JUDGE SMITH: So that means that there is no part s 4 of Dr. Burrows' testimony which is being accepted. ) I 5 MR. FLYNN: Your Honor, I think it would increase i 6 the comfort level of the Board if I would volunteer to have 7 FEMA take another look at this issue. 8 You've already persuaded the Applicants to 9 reexamine their plan in light of the issue that has been 10 raised by Dr. Surrows' testimony. l 11 And as I understand the issue that's raised with ! l 12 respect to FEMA's guidance it is whether it is appropriate 13 to assume on the basis of JCAH accreditation that the 14 accredited hospital is itself equipped to treat contaminated f 15 injured individuals. 16 And the assertion is that, that's not enough by 17 itself. 18 I feel very comfortable committing FEMA to taking 19 a look at that issue and making whatever changes might be 20 appropriate in its guidance. 21 MR. TURK: On a generic basis? 22 MR. FLYNN: On a generic basis. 23 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, it doesn't muci. Matter on a 24 generic basis or a site-specific basis. That's a very 25 comforting and encouraging offer. { Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
i J 27721
<-- 1 maat' procedural form'would'it ttke when FEMA 'j
/
I s_ . 2 : reviews it and it. discovers that it has been using 3 accreditation improperly? 4 MR. TURK: A. course in' turning the ship.
}
5 (Laughter) 6 .MR. TRAFICONTE: With the ocean liner. 7- MR. FLYNN: We can't get~this ship turned around
- 8. before the. record closes, however.
9 (Laughter) 10' MR. TRAFICONTE: Mr. Flynn will be joining me in a 11 motion to reopen the record. 12 (Laughter)
.13 MR. TURK: I'm going to go to the Hazelwood School
/~
- 14 of Navigation. '
15 (Laughter) 16- MR. TROUT: I'm glad.all my practice in admiralty
- 17. law is finally getting some use.
18 (Laughter) 19 (Board confers.) l 20 MR. FLYNN: May I suggest that you write a letter 21 to FEMA identifying those points on which you think review 22 of our guidance would be important. 23 JUDGE SMITH: We still have a lot of business to 24 do this afternoon. We have three other items of testimony. l 25 So I think that concludes your arguments. You l 1 I j Heritage Reporting Corporation V (202) 628-4888 l i l
27722 1 might tell Dr. Burrows that our ruling that he cannot ' 2 testify here does not mean, by any means, that his efforts 3 were futile or that he wasted his time. You should express j 4 the Board's appreciation to him. l 5 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. l 6 Thank you, i 7 MS. TALBOT: Your Honor, I might have to leave in 8 a few minutes, and I just wanted to inform the Board so you 9 don't think I'm rude and just get up and go. 10 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 11 We would know that you're not rude.. 12 MR. TRAFICONTE: What time are you intending to l 13 begin tomorrow? 14 JUDGE SMITH: We wanted to go over all these 15 arguments. 16 FE. TRAFICONTE: Yes, so do we. 17 But in terms of the starting time tomorrow. 18 JUDGE SMITH: 8:30. 19 MR. TRAFICONTE: A miserable 8:30 start. 20 JUDGE SMITH: We can be dissuaded from 8:30 just 21 as easily as everybody else. 22 JUDGE McCOLLOM: But we're not dissuaded from 23 Friday at 5:00 p.m. or 11:15 a.m. 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Part of the answer really hinges 25 on what the outcome is on the other pieces of the testimony. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-483*
27723-jy s 1 JUDGE' SMITH: Yes, that's why I thoughtfwe might { ( ) . ( ,/'- 2 have to go' late and resolve those. 3 MR..TRAFICONTE: Yes, I think we should. 4 :Ms..Talbot is the person who would be -- 5 MS. TALBOT: 8 :'3 0. 1 6 JUDGE SMITH: How is she. going.to leave without 7 -knowing'what our' ruling is? 3 MR. TRAFICONTE: Assume 8:30. i l 9 MS. TALBOT: Does the ruling bear on me? , 10 Oh,. no, I'll come in at 8:30 regardless.
.11 JUDGE SMITH: The testimony, Ms. Doughty, you 12 probably wish to have the testimony of Dr. Burrows marked as 13 an exhibit.
.r- 14 MS. DOUGHTY: Yes. I
(\ 15 Thank you for reminding me, Your. Honor. 16 JUDGE SMITH: SAPL Exhibit and offer it. 4 17 MS, DOUGHTY: Yes. 18 I would offer Dr. Belton Burrows -- the 19 surrebuttal testimony of Belton A. Burrows, M.D. on issues q 20 re: MS-1 hospital, reception decontamination centers, and 21 FEMA GM MS-1 guidance into evidence in this proceeding. 22 JUDGE SMITH: And the attachments? 23- MS. DOUGHTY: And his curriculum vitae. 24 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 25 MR. TROUT: Applicants object for the reasons ]i
., Heritage Reporting Corporation
\
(202) 628-4888
I l 27724 { i i stated, j 2 JUDGE SMITH: The testimony and his curriculum is 3 rejected. 4 JUDGE McCOLLOM: Do you have a SAPL number? 5 MS. DOUGHTY: The last SAPL exhibit was offered in i 6 New Hampshire and I don't remember. 7 JUDGE SMITH: You've got several exhibits. 8 MS. DOUGHTY: I'm afraid I don't recall the last 9 one. Is it in the exhibit book? 10 JUDGE SMITH: Well, the things is, you don't have 11 anything in this phase of the hearing; you had eomething in 12 the last phase. 13 MS. DOUGHTY: Right. 34 JUDGE SMITH: I don't know what it is. . 15 But this will be SAPL Exhibit A. 16 MS. DOUGHTY: That's fine. 17 JUDGE SMITH: And there can be no mistake about 18 that. 19 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay, fine. 20 Should the vitae be "B" or will it be A-l? 21 JUDGE SMITH: Well, we'll make the whole thing as 22 "A." 23 MS. DOUGHTY: Okay. 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I l j
- g. -:
y
$J-rx , ' >
"27725
-4
, ppis 1 -(The'- document referred to j l
^?/
~ i ,, 2L was marked 1for' identification
- m . .
3 N3- as SAPL. Exhibit A and was 4 ~ rejected.) 5: , JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 6? Which one are we going to argue now?
' 7.; MR. TROUT: I' understand it's the' Board's desire 4 l
8 to do Renn towards.the end, and so if that's the case I would like totdo High next, if that's ' agreeable.- 10 Your Honor, again, it would'be Applicants' 1 11 . position.that the entire testimony.should be excluded. This 12 testimony divides into four parts. Unfortunately, the
- 1. 3 argument for excluding each of the four parts tends to be a v/*~g 14 'little different.
J
- b-s)J 15 Let me just first break it down into th,e four 16 parts. The first part -- well, after you get through the 17 introductory material -- the first part, beginning on page 4 ,
1 81 at the bottom talks about resident population.^
-19 And on'this part, as you recall, originally Mass l l
20 AG relied on the Luloff methodology and the Luloff I 21 population figures. And now Mass AG has substituted town ] 22 clerk data. 23 The second part which begins on page 5 and carries 24 over to the top of page 6 talks about transient population, 25 beach vehicles. And the issue there is how you divide the I Heritage Reporting Corporation )
's / (202) 628-4888 i I
_-_ - - =
27726 1 31,000 beach vehicles between New Hampshire and 2 Massachusetts. 3 The third part -- and then that ends with the 4 calculations. So you've got two substantive issues and then 5 you have the calculation as a result of those substantive 6 issues. The rest of the numbers being basically the same l 7 numbers that Applicants are using or at least I'm assuming 8 that. That's what the testimony seems to indicate. 9 Then the last two parts begin on page 7 and 10 carryover to page 8. Page 7 -- 11 JUDGE SMITH: How many parts have we covered now? 12 MR. TROUT: Two, Your Honor. i 13 JUDGE SMITH: Two. All right. 14 MR. TROUT: The third part says that: "All right, 15 putting aside the calculation I just did, that calculation ' 16 is too low because beach vehicle occupancy rate is assumed 17 to be 2.4 and it shouldn't be 2.4, it should be 3 or 3.5." 18 You recall we discussed that issue but did not 19 decide it the last time Mr. High's testimony was before us. 20 And finally, the fourth part is the paragraph on 21 page 8 where once again the witness directly challenges the i 22 20 percent guidance. 23 Now, we could do this in any particular order. I 24 think taking the last part first is the easiest because 25 there is just no question that the 20 percent is res Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 G, l - - - - _ _ _ _ _ - -- l
27727 1 h No lJ -judicata;.and I don't know'what that's doing back inLthis U h bM .- 2 ' . testimony again.
'3 JUDGE SMITH: Is'that a place marker?'
4 ldR. FIERCE: It's,fagain, Dr. High's statement.
~
5 that he.doesn't his testimony here to be seen as endorsing 6 the FEMA 20 percent. rule. He-is not directly challenging 7 it. He just says "if." "If" you'were to use the higher 87 percentage evacuee. loads would be higher. And he's.just .y 9 indicating he doesn't endorse it. 10 That's all it's here'for. We're not challenging. 11 the 20 percent assumption here. I just have a witness who 12 didn't want to go on record as being seen as supporting.the 13 20 percent rule. So it's set here really as an aside to the 14 testimony. It perhaps could even have been a footnote. 15 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I would very-respectfully 16 ' disagree with the characterization of the testimony that Mr.. 17 Fierce just gave. If you read page 7 - question 7: "Do you 18 believe these estimates are the best possible estimates of 19 the evacuee loads at these reception centers?" 20 Answer: "No,.they would likely be higher for-two 21 reasons. .First being the vehicle occupancy rate. The 22 second being the challenge to the 20 presumption." 23 Your Honor, I respectfully suggest you cannot read 24 that question and answer as being anything but a direct 25 challenge to the 20 percent FEMA presumption. l Heritage Reporting Corporation (x- (202) 628-4888
l l 27728 1 MR. FIERCE: Well, it certainly is a challenge to 2 the 2.4 persons per car. But if you read the language used 3 -- and I think it was carefully done, Your Honor, in what is 4 on page 8, the paragraph abo"t the FEMA guidance. It just 5 says: "No evidence is given to support this assumption, the 6 percentage of the population that chose to be monitored 7 could be much higher." 8 Dr. High is not going on record saying, it would 9 be much higher. 10 JUDGE SMITH: It's unnecessary. 11 MR. FIERCE: He just has no evidence. 12 JUDGE SMITH: If your argument is correct, it's 13 unnecessary and why are we sitting here. If it's necessary, s 14 you lose; if it's unnecessary, you lose. l 15 (Laughter) 16 MR. FIERCE: Sometimes you do things, Your Honor, 17 because your witness wants to include it in his testimony. 18 JUDGE SMITH: He's not a party. 19 MR. FIERCE: I was not the person who could take 20 this out. 21 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 22 MR. FIERCE: If Your Honor wants to take it out, 23 I've gone on record indicating what Dr. High's position is 24 on this. 25 JUDGE SMITH: You certainly have. , I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 O)ij 1 1 1
I- I 27729 fs.. I lHe is clearly' disagreeing with it. Tell him that o ~/ N- , \s,/: 72 we duly noted his disagreement. 3 .Does that mean then,Lgiven that ruling, on the-i 4: challenge to FEMA occupancy, that would be the second 5, paragraph and answer'to question 7. 6 Where do we stand with the first paragraph?- Does-7 that also indirectly challenge; is that your point? 8 MR. TROUT: No, Your Honor. 9 JUDGE' SMITH: That's vehicle occupancy. 10 MR. TROUT: That's right, and I have a separate 11 argument with regard to that. 12 JUDGE. SMITH: Okay. 13 So the second paragraph then of answer 7 is out. j 's . 14 MR. TROUT: With regard to hhe first paragraph of
-- 15 answer 7 I would make two arguments, Your Honor.
l: 16 The first argument would also apply to section No. 17 2 of the testimony, and I'll come back to it when we get to 18 section No. 2. And that argument is that it's not within 19 the scope of the contention. 20 The vehicle occupancy rate as a flaw in 21 ' Applicants' monitoring rate calculations was never raised in 22 the contentions or in the discovery responses under the 23 contentions. 24 And you recall that Mr. Turk made the argument 25 that this whole issue, the whole population, issue was not f
# Heritage Reporting Corporation k_ (202) 628-4888
I l l 27730 j
)
1 within the scope of the contentions. 2 I made a place marker comment at that time. I 3 said, regardless of whether the whole issue is in this l 4 2.4 versus 3 was never in the contention. 5 And now has come the time when we're faced 6 squarely with deciding whether it's within the scope of the 7 contention. But we may be able to avoid doing that because 8 my second argument, Your Honor, is that 2.4 versus 3.0 is 9 res judicata. Because the Board decided in New Hampshire in 10 the section -- and I believe it's paragraph 5.19 of the 11 partial initial decision, and I need the partial initial 12 decision. 13 JUDGE SMITH: 2.6. 14 MR. TROUT: 2. 6, yes, exactly right. 15 And while the Board did not find that a number 16 less than 2.6 is necessarily wrong, the Board's calculation 17 relying on 2.6 necessarily means that a number higher than 18 2.6 can't be correct. 19 So I think this 3.0 to 3.5 is res judicata. 20 JUDGE SMITH: On that very issue. 21 MR. TROUT: On that exact issue, yes, Your Honor. j l 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27731 1 JUDGE SMITH: It's my memory that we argued it 2 before in this phase, and I remember from the earlier 3 decision that -- 4 MR. FIERCE: Is Mr. Trout pointing to a section of 5 the PID? 6 MR. TROUT: Yes, let me do that. 7 MR. FIERCE: We had this argument earlier, Your B Honor. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 10 MR. FIERCE: We avoided resolving it because -- 11 JUDGE SMITH: This time we're going to drive a 12 stake through it. 13 (Laughter) . 14 MR. FIERCE: I'm not sure I can recreate the 15 argument entirely and I don't think I want to. 16 But as I recall, I do remember saying to you that 17 the dispute over ETEs, which was the heart of our dispute in 18 New Hampshire on this, was over vehicles. The issue of the 19 number of people per car was not a relevant issue. 20 It was a footnote in Dr. Adler's testimony to the 21 extent that it would become an issue for beach sheltering 22 issues. But with respect to the monitoring and 23 decontamination aspect of the case, it was not put in issue. 24 Your Honor found that the New Hampshire numbers, 25 just as presented in their testimony, you okayed that. And Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 27732 1 going back and reviewing that now, or a few weeks ago, as we I 2 did this, you realized that those numbers didn't, for 1 J 3 example, include the 31,000 beach vehicles that you had 4 found in another portion of the testimony. ] 5 It just was not an issue that was faced at all 6 directly in the issue of monitoring and decontamination for s 7 New Hampshire. l l' 8 I just don't think we fought that debate to any 9 resolution. The ETE decision not imply one way or the other ! 10 how this battle came out. l l 11 JUDGE SMITH: I can't find it. What we said we'd 12 take 2.6. 13 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I'm sorry to interrupt 14 you. 1 15 I have found the cite. 16 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 17 MR. TROUT: The first cite is at 5.2.2, and then 18 the actual calculation is done at -- excuse me. And I'm 19 doing numbers the way they are in the plan. 20 It's Paragraph 5.22 of the partial initial 21 decision. It has the occupancy rate. I 22 And then 5.25 has the actual calculation applying 23 that to Applicants reception centers in New Hampshire, or 24 the reception centers in New Hampshire, and concluding that 25 there are sufficient numbers of reception centers. Heritage Reporting Corporation ' (202) 628-4888 l
a 27733 fs 1 ' JUDGE SMITH: And-in addition to that, we alluded f
\ 2 to the ETE --
3 MR. TROUT: Exactly right. 4 JUDGE SMITH: -- findings for the 2. 6 support. .
*~
- 5. MR. 2. Yes.
6 JUDGE' SMITH: JWd the 2.6 was a little bit of a 7 conservatism over 2.4. 8 MR. TROUT: Right. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Now the question you have to 10 address, Mr. Fierce, is did we do that; and if so, is it res 11 judicata, not whether it was a sound thing to.do because 12 that's not before us anymore. 13 MR. FIERCE: I think that's right, and I think, / - 14' again, in reviewing what you did, I found that you had'just \' # 15 adopted the New Hampshire testimony. 16 JUDGE SMITH: 'Yes. ! l 17 MR. FIERCE: There are references to that 18 testimony. 19 JUDGE SMITH: Right. 20 MR. FIERCE: You adopted the testimony presented 21 by the State of New Hampshire into your proposed findings 22 and, in fact, had not even taken TSe time to look at what 23 New Hampshire was doing in light of your decision on the
-24 31,000 beach vehicles. You just made that as a standard, we 25 adopt New Hampshire and find that their approach is i > Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I
i 27734 I l i 1 reasonable. 2 So I don't think there was a focus on the 2.6. 3 The 2.6 issue is again not what we're debating here either. 4 There was another issue, and we can't be confusing the two. 5 We did litigate an isaue as to whether the 6 permanent residents for ETE purposes. Remember how we got 7 to their number of vehicles. We knew what the permanent 8 residents were. Mr. Lieberman multiplied for the permanent 9 residents by 2.6. 10 Dr. Adler believed, based on our survey by Social 11 Data Analyst, that in fact that was an overestimate. That i t 12 for the permanent residents it should have been something 13 like 2.3, as I recall. 14 I believe you have resolved that issue against 15 us. You have found that for permanent residents the number 1 16 of people in the vehicles would be the higher number, 2.6. 17 JUDGE SMITH: Well, that was when we found that 18 with respect to the monitoring? 19 MR. FIERCE: That's with respect to ETEs. 20 JUDGE SMITH: With ETEs. 21 MR. FIERCE: It was in your ETE findings. 22 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 23 MR. FIERCE: And that had to be based on the 24 Applicants numbers which used the 2.6 multiplier for the 25 permanent residents. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i l
i i 27735 i 1
,-~s 1 This is a separate issue which I say you did not
(
). 2 get to. This is the issue of the number of people per car \s /
I 3 coming.off the beaches, off the beaches. 4 It was, as you may recall, a footnote in Dr. 5 Adler's ETE testimony, and we had some discussion about 6 that. 7 JUDGE SMITH: I'm not picking up the point. 8 What did we find in the ETE? 9 We found 2.6, not a smaller number. 10 MR. FIERCE: Is the multiplier to use for the 11 permanent residents. 12 JUDGE SMITH: For whom? 13 MR. FIERCE: I shouldn't use the word
/~'N' 14 " multiplier".
f
15 The devisor, the devisor in order to calculate the 16 number of permanent residence vehicles that would be modeled 17 in an evacuation.
18 JUDGE SMITH: And we had also found that there 19 would be a somewhat smaller number for the transients? 20 MR. FIERCE: Well, there was no -- this is the 21 issue. 22 Mr. Lieberman's calculations, -- of course, we all 23 had our aerial photos. We counted vehicles. 24 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, right. 25 MR. FIERCE: We didn't have to do a calculation of 1 (~m
) Heritage Reporting Corporation i
(.N- / (202) 628-4888 i
27736 1 how many people were in the car. 2 JUDGE SMITH: Well, how did we come up with 2.4, 3 almost 2.4? 4 If we didn't have to find it, how did we come up 5 with the thought that there was almost 2.4 people per car 6 for transients? 7 MR. FIERCE: That was the number used in the -- 8 for transients? 9 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, for transients. 10 MR. FIERCE: Yes. 11 That clearly was a number that was used by the 12 Applicants during the hearings. 13 JUDGE SMITHr All right. 14 MR. FIERCE: We had suggested that the number of 15 people per car for the beach transients was a higher number 16 than 2.4. 17 But that issue never had to be resolved, Your 18 Honor, because as you can see what happened when you got to 19 the monitoring and decontamination section, it used a 2.6 1 l 20 people per car assumption. That's straight out of the New I 21 Hampshire testimony. 22 You could have been in agreement with us that 23 there was a higher number of beach people. ; 1 24 JUDGE SMITH: Then our logic would have failed. l 25 The logic of our findings 5.22 and the following one would Heritage Reporting Corporation , (202) 628-4888
27737
,-q 1 have failed.
I I
\ ,/ 2 JUDGE COLE: 5.25.
3 JUDGE SMITH: 5.25. 4 If we didn't the 2.6, our whole logic would have 5 failed. 6 Now, again, the point is not how sound that 7 decision was, not how well supported it is, but what was it.- 8 And our logic would not withstand your analysis. 9 MR. FIERCE: Well, can I explain, I think, how it 10 would? 11 In fact, the people arriving at the reception 12 centers are in two groups. You have permanent residents, 13 who the Applicants had said would be arriving at 2.6 people
,r~N 14 per car.
.\/
)
15 There is also a group of beach transients arriving 16 at the New Hampshire reception centers. And by the 17 Applicants own numbers, arriving at 2.4 people per car. 18 Therefore, the average is going to be something 19 less than 2.6. 20 Now we were there arguing that for besch l 21 transients the number should be higher than 2.4. You could 22 have agreed with us and found that in fact the number is not l 23 what we were saying, you know, up around three or higher, 1 l 24 but was 2.6. Therefore, plugged in across the board for all 23 of the arrivals, as you did here in your decision, 2.6. ( rs) Heritage Reporting Corporation
\/ (202) 628-4888 L _ __ _ .
27738 l 1 JUDGE SMITH: But we didn't. , 2 MR. FIERCE: Well, you have got a multiplier of ! l 3 2.6. 4 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, and we arrived at 2.6 because i 5 it was more conservative than 2.4. f 1 6 MR. TRAFICONTE: Let me give it a crack. l 7 I think the problem is -- 1 8 JUDGE SMITH: We didn't accept your higher number 9 implicitly. 10 MR. FIERCE: I'm saying implicitly you could have. 11 I don't think you reached the issue. 12 JUDGE SMITH: But we didn't. 13 MR. TRAFICONTE: Let me give it a crack. 14 I think the problem here is that there are two 15 different numbers. 16 The 2.6 that you found goes for everybody, 17 transients and permanent. 18 JUDGE SMITH: Yes. 19 MR. TRAFICONTE: And it's an average. 20 JUDGE SMITH: It's not an average. 21 MR. TROUT: No, it's a conservatism. 22 JUDGE SMITH: It's a higher limit. It's the 23 higher number of the two. 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Right. 25 And our perspective now is that you may well have Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
1 27739 iq 1 -adopted _our 3.0 number-for transients, used a 2.2 number.for N. 2 permanents, _and come up with 2.6. Thereby, this finding in 3 fact, because it's a combination'of the two, this finding-4 could support our present position'that the beach transients 5 leave three people per car. It's indifferent. 6 In other words, it doesn't indicate one'way or the
'7 other what your finding was with regard to vehicle occupancy 8' rates for the transient beach population. It's a general 9 finding of 2.6 when you had two different numbers for the 10 two different portions of that population. ,
l 11 MR. FIERCE: Let me just say theoretically -- 12 JUDGE SMITH: On that 5.22, are we not talking
' 13 about'an assumed 2.6 vehicle occupancy rate for everybody
/ 14 arriving there? Everybody.
15 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes, you are on average. 16 ' JUDGE SMITH: On average. 17 MR. TRAF1 CONTE: But it doesn't indicate whether 18 you are distinguishing -- in fact, quite clearly you are not l 19 distinguishing -- 20 JUDGE SMITH: No, that's right. 21 MR. TRAFICONTE: -- as between permanent numbers 22 in the - permanent number of people in the cars leaving 23 from permanent residence as v.poned t.o the transients. 24 And our point now is that we are putting in 25 evidence that, as to the beach transient population, their l Beritage Reporting Corporation I (202) 628-4888 L - _=_-___ _.
27740 1 vehicle occupancy rate is higher. This doesn't contradict 4 2 that necessarily. 3 MR. FIERCE: That's the only point. It doesn't 4 contradict. 5 I believe, Your Honor, that the issue just was not 6 reached. I think what you did is just adopt the New 7 Hampshire testimony without further analysis, and not even 8 incorporating the 31,000 beach vehicles that you later found 9 in the decision. 10 JUDGE SMITH: I recognize that memory does not 11 help us with what the language says. I have a hard time 12 disassociating myself, however, from the 2.4 and the 2.6 and i 13 the conservatism of 2.6. But this doesn't say it. 14 MR. FIERCE: But there is another possibility here 15 which is that Your Honor has found that the beach vehicles, 16 that everybody -- 17 JUDGE SMITH: There is an average between 2.2 18 and -- 19 MR. FIERCE: That everybody arriving, that the 20 average to use is 2.6 people per car. 21 JUDGE SMITH: All right, let's assume that it was 22 a 2.6 average. 23 How does that help you now today? 24 Because of a larger proportion of transients, and l 25 the average is no longer reliable? l i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 9j ! l l l
27741 e . 1. (The Board confers.)
\ '2 (Counsel confer.)-
-3 MR. FIERCE: .If Your Honor is asking the question 4- would we be happy with a finding, would we settle with a 5 . finding or --
6 JUDGE SMITH: No, no, no, no. 7 If, as you say, this was not a choice between 2.4' 8 and 2.6, but'in f :,t was an average between-2.2 and 3.0 or 9 'whatever. 10 MR. FIERCE: Yes. 11 JUDGE SMITH: Why would not that same average 12 prevail now other than you're saying, well, there are more 13 transients?
/ 14 MR. FIERCE: If that's what Your Honor did, I i \
15 would-agree. 16- JUDGE SMITH: No. 17 You are the one that gave us that idea. My idea 1l8 is that we took 2.6 over 2.4 as a conservatism in the 19 calculation. l 20 You're saying, no, you didn't do that. 21 MR. FIERCE: No, I think you did do that. I think I 22 New Hampshire's testimony used the number 2.6 as a 23 conservatism to show that they had adequate sheltering space i 24- even though they knew that the average number of people who 25 would be arriving per car would be somsthing less than that, s Beritage Reporting Corporation
'-- (202) 628-4888 L__-_-________x_-_ . _ _ . _ _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
27742 1 because they were in fact using themselves -- 2 JUDGE SMITH: It was conservative in another 3 direction. i 4 MR. FIERCE: They were showing that they had more 5 capacity for monitoring than they probably really needed. l l 6 That's what they were doing here. 7 JUDGE SMITH: Right. 8 MR. FIERCE: I think it avoids resolving this 9 question. That's really what happened here. 10 JUDGE SMITH: I'll tell you, I'm confused. 11 MR. TURK: Your Honor, may I perhaps help? 12 There is absolutely no basis in fact for the Mass h 13 AG's curren^ argument. 14 Back in the New Hampshire phase, Volume 6 of the 15 NHRERP assigned a vehicle occupancy of 2.G for the permanent 16 population. There was no ateraging between 2.2 and 3.0, or i 17 whatever numbers they are coming up with now trying to 18 convince you that you had an average number rather than a 19 factually-based number. 20 The NHRERP used 2.6 for the permanent residents. 21 MR. FIERCE: For the permanent residents, correct. 22 We're not disputing that. 23 JUDGE SMITH: Right. 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Permanent residents? 23 iTUDGE SMITH: Right. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I l j
L. ~ w LL 27743-3 .1" , MR. TURK: That's right.
~2 MR.'TRAFICONTE: We're not disputing that.
3 JUDGE SMITH: . Nail that down. 4 ' MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes, that's right. 5 MR. TURK: Yes. 6 MR.. FIERCE: Nail it down. 7 MR. TURK: So there was no averaging ~of two 8 extremes. 9 MR. TRAFICONTE: Permanent residents. 10- JUDGE SMITH: Right. 11 MR. TRAFICONTE: We're talking about averaging the 12 rate .for the permanent residents with a rate for the 13' transients. That was what we're talking about was averaged. A 14-And the 2.6 -- 3
-15 MR. TURK: Well, how could you average 2.6 with 16 something else and still come up with 2.6?
17 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well,'it would have to do with 18 .the percentage -- 19 FR. TROUT: Higher math, John. Higher math. 20 (Laughter) 21 JUDGE SMITH: And just think, a lawyer thought of 22 that. 23 (Laughter) 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Mathematically impossible. 2C You would only do it because you were trying to ( Heritage Reporting Corporation
-s (202) 628-4888 c - ___ -- - _. . .
27744 1 show a conservatism. 2 MR. TURK: I'm lost and for good reason. 3 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, you were right on the money 4 there. 5 JUDGE COLE: If he was trying to show a 6 conservatism, then the number we're averaging it woula de 7 less than 2.6. Is that the idea? E MR. FIERCE: Yes. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Right, that's 2 4. 10 MR. FIERCE: 2.4. 11 JUDGE COLE: Which is a lower concentration and 12 deviates from what you say is 3.0 to 3.5, doesn't it? 13 MR. FIERCE: That's right, that's right, if you 14 were trying to show that as a conservatism. 15 JUDGE SMITH; Again, it was'not an average. It 16 was a rejection of 2.4, accepting instead the figure for all 17 permanent residents across the board at the reception center 18 as a conservatism. That's what we did. 19 MR. FIERCE: I mean we may not have an issue here, 20 Your Honor. , i 21 If the Applicants are willing to agree that the 22 number on average for all arrivals at reception centers for 23 purposes of calculating loads should be 2.6, I think I , i 24 will -- l 25 JUDGE SMITH: They have to, i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 - - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ l
1k e' i l '
.27745 )
- m. N ' '
;1- 4 Don't'you?.
E( \' L % .2 MR. FIERCE: No,~they don't. feel' bound by that 3 here. o
- 4 MR.-TRAFICONTE: They are resisting the. finding.
5 MR. FIERCE: They want.to' argue here that the 6 average, .at least of the beach' arrivals when they . arrive at 7 reception centers, .is going'to be 2.4. 8 'MR. TROUT: Your. Honor, nor that's not the case.
~
-) .
9 Both numbers were 1ooked at in New Hampshire, the 10 2.6 and the 2.4. .They were looked at for ETE purposes. , 11 They were looked at for sheltering purposes. And they were 1 12 looked at for monitoring purposes. 13 And my argument _with:regards-to. monitoring.
.f l14 purposes is simply that, in applying 2.6'to calculate 3
1 g
-15 whether there are enough monitoring stations in New 16 Hampshire, the Board necessarily was rejecting any number 17 higher than 2.6.
~18 JUDGE SMITH: That's right.
19 MR. TROUT: It is not saying that for part of the 20 population, which the Board in.other parts of the PID, 21 - specifically 6.43, accepts the 2.4 number, it's not saying i 22' that that 2.4 number is not appropriate for beach 23 transients. 24 All.it's saying is that if you apply 2.6 across 25 the board, which is higher than yoo would expect -- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
27746 1 JUDGE SMITH: You got it for 2.4. . l 2 MR. TROUT: -- then you've got it. And so you've ; i 3 got it for 2.4. l 4 I 5 I 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14
,4 t
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (20 '; 628-4888
1 li\ 27747
- g
- f. L1 'MR., FIERCE: Well, again, it's consistent with the
"\ 2 Board's decision that they found, - in fact, that the average 3 -for the beach' vehicles was something' higher than 2.4. In 4 fact, it was 2.6; and therefore, applied-the 2.6 figure 5 across the board. 6 -JUDGE l SMITH: Except it wasn't--an average. You 7 keepfrejecting the' statement that it was not an averaga. It 8 was a selection. 9 MR. FIERCE: It wouldn't have been an average -- 10 ' JUDGE SMITH: , Well, we did make it an average. 11 But we didn't average averages 12~ MR. FIERCE: It wouldn't have to be an' average if 13 everybody.was arriving at the rate.of about 2.6 people per 14 car. 'We certainly wouldn't have needed to do'an average. 15 JUDGE SMITH: The'2.6 we selected as an average 16 for monitoring purposes, based upon 2.6 for resident 17 population. Not accepting 2.4 or using 2.6 instead of 2.4 18 for conservatism in the calculating. We did not average any 19 averages with other averages to arrive at the average of 20 2.6. 21 So his argument now is: we did not exclude 2.4. 22 We didn't work is that direction. We only worked in the
'23 direction of --
24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes, yes. 25 JUDGE SMITH: Is that a ratcheting? Does that Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . - _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ ~ _ _
27748 1 conservatism stick now?' ; 2 MR. TRAFICONTE: His argument goes further and 3 says, I believe that you found 2.4 and prevents us from 4 putting in evidence now that it's higher than 2.4. 5 JUDGE SMITH: 2.6. i 6 MR. TRAFICONTE: He has resisted that. 7 JUDGE SMITH: He says, necessarily we rejected 8 anything above 2.6, not above 2.4. We rejected -- 2.6 is 9 the rejection line above, but there is no rejection below. 10 That's what he says, I don't know. 11 MR. TRAFICONTE: Well, that just doesn't sound ; i 12 like res judicata to me. I mean, you either found it or you 13 didn't. It sounds like he wants -- 14 JUDGE SMITH: Well, address his rease ing? 15 His,, reasoning was, why we did it. It is true, 16 necessarily, he says we were seeking a conservatism, we 17 necessarily then had to reject anything higher otherwise it 18 would not have been a conservatism. 19 MR. TRAFICONTE: As long as you're not averaging. 20 Assuming that you're not averaging; that's a predicate for 21 that argument. 22 Because if you were averaging, then if you were 23 averaging a higher and a lower and came with 2.6; then the 24 higher number could still be for a portion of the population J 25 the right number. I l 1 Heritage Reporting Corporation i (202) 628-4888 l
27749
~~ 1 , JUDGE SMITH: -Yes, we weren't doing that. . _ - .2 MR. TRAFICONTE: So the argument he is making --
3 JUDGE SMITH: Because we l't know how to average 4 averages. l 5 MR. TRAFICONTE: I know, you just indicated that 6' the average is not the average of averages. I followed 7 that, believe it or not. 8 (Laughter) 9 JUDGE SMITH: That's one reason we didn't do that 10 because we don't know how to do it. 11 JUDGE McCOLLOM: For the same reason, Mr. 12 Traficonte, I think you can appreciate that there are no 13 below average children. 14 MR. TRAFICONTE: I think I can, yes.
' 15 (Laughter) 16 MR. TRAFICONTE: If we understand the flow, we 17 would still be permitted to put in evidence that the number 18 is higher than 2.4 and up to 2.6. And the testimony does 19 that in the form of arguing that it is above 2.6.
20 If I understand the logic -- 21 (Laughter) j i 22 JUDGE SMITH: That's good, though. > 23 (Laughter) 24 JUDGE McCOLLOM: That's excellent. 25 MR. TURK: Your Honor, there's another reason why i f Reporting Corporation f Heritage (202) 628-4888
27750 1 this whole argument by the Mass AG is frivolous and beyond; 2 you're finding 8.43 in the PID indicated what the summer 3 weekend beach estimates are. And you accepted the numbers 4 of 23,841 for Hampton Beach South; and 7398 for Seabrook 5 Beach. Those numbers were based upon an extrapolation by 6 counting vehicles and then assigning a vehicle occupancy l 1 7 rate to come up with a population number. 8 I don't have the old testimony in front of me to 9 backtrack and see what the number was. 10 MR. TRAFICONTE: Mr. Turk, are you representing 11 that if we divide those numbers by the findings as to l 12 vehicles that we will come up. Do you want to stand by 13 that? And it will come up with the right number of vehicle 14 occupancy rates; is that where you're going with that line? I 15 MR. TURK: I sure hope so. 16 (Laughter) 17 MR. TRAFICONTE: I want to make sure I understand. 18 JUDGE SMITH: Give me that citation again. 19 MR. TURK: This is 8.43. 20 JUDGE SMITH: Oh, 8.43. 21 MR. TRAFICONTE: That comes out to approximately 22 one person, does it not? 23 MR. TURK: No. You're looking at two beaches. 24 MR. TRAFICONTE: Your Honor, one problem with that 25 argument is -- and there no doubt are many problems -- but Heritage Reporting Corporation ' (202) 628-4888 _____ _ - i
27751 l
]
< ff-~y 1 one problem with that argument is.that two population j
'1{ l
) Coincidentally, I N_ ' 2. ' figures are for two specific beaches.
3- would add they total about'31,000, but that just happens to ;
.q 4' be an accident.
5 'But the populations are for two separate beaches' 1 6' and.there is no parallel finding anywhere in the PID of 7 vehicles for those two beaches. If there were, then I.think-8 I would agree that you could take the findings for vehicles 9 from the two beaches, match it to the findings for 10 population from the two beaches, and you.would have made',a 11 finding as to. vehicle occupancy rates for the beaches. 12 MR. TROUT: Except that the numbers of persons 13 were arrived at in precisely that way; they took the number-14 of. vehicles observed and multiplied it by 2.4 and that's how
}' 15- they got the number.
16 JUDGE. SMITH: Two of us at once isn't fair to the 17 argument. And the third just checked in. 18 (Laughter) 19 JUDGE SMITH: We've lost the thread of that 20 argument. That argument right from the very beginning when 21 Mr. Turk made it didn't help us. 1 22 Now, we have a problem here. We've got not only 23 us, but we got the reporter who has got to get this all out 24 tonight. 25- We did find 2.6 was the average that we selected.
/
Heritage Reporting Corporation ( (202) 628-4888
27752 1 excluding higher averages. That aspect is res judicata. I 2 We did not necessarily doing that, we buy the . 3 logic of Mr. Trout. By doing that we did not necessarily ) 4 then exclude a lower average. That's our ruling. 5 MR. TRAFICONTE: Nor did you -- and I have to go l I 6 back to my argument, although it's an unusual one perhaps. 7 Nor did you thereby exclude evidence that would push the 8 number higher than 2.4 as long as you weren't asked to find l 9 that it was higher than 2.6. 10 JUDGE SMITH: I don't know that we ever made a res 11 judicata finding of 2.4. 12 MR. TRAFICONTE: Right. i 13 JUDGE SMITH: If you did, you've got a problem. 14 MR. TRAFICONTE: Right. 15 JUDGE SMITH: I think there was an assumption that 16 we did and chose not to select it. But I just don't think 17 it's all that definite, I don't know. 18 Did we ever make a res judicata finding of 2.4? 19 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, I would -- 20 JUDGE SMITH: How are you going to do that anyway? 21 How are you going to get 2.47 What are you going to average 22 the 2.4 to stay at 2.47 23 MR. TROUT: Excuse me? I'm sorry, I did'Jt follow 24 that, Your Honor. 25 I believe, Your Honor, that in 8.43 in the Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27753
,-wy
- 1 sheltering section of the partial initial decision, the l l
i <
\_ 2 beach population -- beach occupancy numbers that the Board I l
3 adopts and finds are numbers which are arrived at by using 4 the 2.4 multiplier; and therefore, that the Board does have 5 a res judicata finding that 2.4 is correct. 6 But frankly, Your Honor, I'm not going to push 7 that argument because it's late in the day. I don't think 8 we need it to dispose of this piece of testimony. 9 And I'm perfectly willing to argue that one. If 10 Mass AG is going to argue in proposed findings that on the 11 basis of their cross-examination of Applicants panel it 12 should be 2.6 instead of 2.4, I'll argue that one in 13 proposed findings. \
,'"'} 14 JUDGE SMITH: All right. \ '/ 15 Well, that's our ruling.
16 Now, what comes out as a consequence of our 17 ruling? 18 MR. TROUT: The rest of question and answer, Your 19 Honor. 20 MR. FIERCE: Can I just get a clarification. I 21 thought Mr. Trout was basically saying, as to avoid further 22 argument on this he would withdraw that objection to that 23 section and argue it in proposed findings. 24 MR. TROUT: No. 25 JUDGE SMITH: He is not going to argue for the use
,/~~~
t Heritage Reporting Corporation
\- (202) 628-4886
27754 1 of 2.4 this evening for his purposes. 2 MR. FIERCE: Right. 3 JUDGE SMITH: He will settle for us ruling that 4 nothing higher than 2.6 may be used. That's already decided 5 tonight. 6 MR. FIERCE: Then let me focus on the language. 7 He says: "In my opinion, vehicle occupancy rate is 8 probably higher than that " That sentence is okay. 9 " Surveys conducted of vehicle occupancy on hot 10 days are reported in Volume 6." And he just cites what 11 those surveys are. 12 JUDGE SMITH: That's where you usually begin to 13 fail on your argument. It always pretty much turns out the 14 same way. 15 It only explains what he's thinking and there's a 16 no moment. If there's a no moment, then it doesn't belong 17 in there. 18 MR. FIERCE: It explains why he believes in his 19 opinion it would be higher. He doesn't say -- he's not 20 saying it would be 3.0 or 3.5. 21 JUDGE SMITH: We are rejecting evidence which 22 would have us find either directly or indirectly or 23 inferentially that there is a vehicle occupancy rate higher 24 than 2.6; and that's exactly what he does. 25 MR. FIERCE: I'm just saying, to the extent, Your Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27755 [x 1 Honor, that you have. limited a proposed finding that we { ) (m ,/ 2 can't go over 2.6. But I could brse a proposed finding that 3 says, it should be as high as 2.6 because there is other 4 evidence which goes considerably higher than the number the 5 Applicants want to use. 6 JUDGE SMITH: That's rejected. 7 That evidence is rejected as res judicata. I 8 mean, you can't prove that point because it is res judicata. ! 9 He can't use to inflate his average a fact that has been i 10 decided. l 11 MR. FIERCE: If there were a series of studies 12 that were done and he came in with them showing 2.6; 2.8; 13 2.9; and 3.0, you would only allow one of those studies, the , l r~N, 14 2.6 in; is that what you're saying? r l N- ' 15 It seems to me I know I can't argue higher in a 16 proposed finding for anything higher. But the relevant 17 evidence would be that studies have shown that higher than 18 2.4 has been found. 19 JUDGE SMITH: No. 20 MR. TRAFICONTE: Your Honor, why couldn't we argue 21 -- Dr. High could come in and testify that it's his view 22 that it's 2.8. And if he made that statement and there's 23 res judicata that it cannot be more than 2.6, he could still 24 come in and testify that in his view it's 2.8 and we could 25 argue in proposed findings that for that reason you should (A) sms Heritage Reporting Corporation g202) 628-4888 i
27756 1 reject 2.4 and assume 2.6. 2 You seem to be excluding the testimony that in his 3 view it's 2.8. 4 JUDGE SMITH: That's right. 5 MR. TRAFICONTE: Based on the finding that it's no 6 higher than 2.6. 7 JUDGE SMITH: Which was what we found. 8 MR. TRAFICONTE: But they're going to ask -- 9 JUDGE SMITH: We found that the highest average 10 that could be expected to show up in a monitoring station 11 was 2.6 per car; that's what we found. 12 And using evidence contrary to that factual 13 finding contravenes the res judicata doctrine. , i 15 j l 16 17 18 19 ; 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
N' L 27757~
"/"%: . l' ~MR. FIERCE: I mean we just' disagree with that.
(3- . 2 MR. TRAFICONTE: Yes, I think that's right, yes. 3 MR. FIERCE: We just fundamentally disagree with 4 that. 5 We think that that -- 6 MR. TRAFICONTE: We disagreement.with the 7 understanding of the scope of res judicata, I think, is what 8 we're -- 9 MR. FIERCE: As long as we have an open issue and 10 evidence is relevant, which it would be, studies have shown 11- many higher numbers. 12 JUDGE SMITH: . Well, I just disagree with how you 13 are applying our finding of 2.6. 14 It'wasn't found in the manner in which you are 15- talking about. It was not an average of higher' averages. 16' It was a finding. So we do disagree. 17 And with that, I don't see why you can't leave in 18 there, yes, leave that in and knock out beginning with
'19 " Surveys".
20 MR. FIERCE: Well, if that's your ruling, we'll do 21 that. 22 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, what happens on cross-23 examination? 24 The testimony as it would stand is, "In my 25 opinion, the vehicle occupancy rate is probably higher than Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
27758 1 that." 2 We would ask him on cross-examination, what do you 3 think the rate is and what's your basis for that. And he 4 says, the rate is 2.3 or 3.0. 5 JUDGE SMITH: Well, that's a good point. 6 See, what we did is we interpreted in the light 7 most favorable to their position. And that is, the language 8 beginning, " Surveys is just a reason" 9 If that is the sole reason, and you establish 10 that, well, then you have prevailed. 11 If he has no other reason for that statement that ! 12 the higher averages, then you have prevailed because of res 13 judicata. 14 MR. TROUT: All right, r 15 JUDGE SMITH: But ne've interpreted it in the best 16 light to Interveners' position in that where he says, "In my 17 opinion, the vehicle occupancy rate is probably higher than 18 that," he may have an independent basis for that which is 19 not res judicata, and we do not necessarily define that 20 statement by the rest of the paragraph. l 21 MR. TROUT: I do have a little bit of a problem 32 with that, Your Honor, and I'll just articulate my problem 22 and then you can tell me that it's too bad or whatever. 24 My problem is that the witness has given a reason. 25 He's expressed an opinion as an expert and given the basis Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
- -p
'27759.
1- for this opinion'in his. testimony. N 2 We've rejected the basis for his opinion. 3 JUDGE SMITH: See, that's where we didn't agree 4 with you. ] 5 MR. TROUT: Okay. 6 JUDGE SMITH: We didn't read that as being the 7 sole basis.for his opinion. l 8 If you develop on cross-examination that that is 9 the sole basis for his. opinion, then you will have 10 prevailed. Then you can move to strike. , 11 MR. TROUT: All right. 12 JUDGE SMITH: But'we are reading.it in the light 13 most_ favorable that he may have another basis, not res :i 14 judicata for'that opinion.- 15 It's not likely, all right. But that's the 16 trouble with arguing these things. He's not here. 17 Okay, wait a minute. 18 (The Board confers.) 19 JUDGE SMITH: Judge McCollom pointed out that in 20 line with that ruling, we have to strike the phrase "for two 21 reasons". 22 MR. TROUT: Yes. 23 JUDGE McCOLLOM: And the "first" because we struck 24 "second". 25 JUDGE SMITH: Knock it all out, but we didn't. { Heritage Reporting Corporation j (202) 628-4888
27760 1 MR. TURK: Before they disappear, Your Honor, may 2 I note the appearance of my children? 3 (Laughter) 4 MR. TRAFICONTE: I noted how silent and quiet they 5 are. 6 JUDGE SMITH: Yes, I was noticing, commendably, 7 unintrusive into the proceeding. 8 MR. TURK: Nice and well behaved sometimes. 9 JUDGE COLE: Put that on the record. 10 MR. TRAFICONTE: Sherwin, they don't have your 11 personality. They are so quiet. 12 (Laughter) 13 JUDGE SMITH: Okay, what's the next one. 14 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, the two remaining portions 15 of the testimony. 16 The first portion was the town clerk data in place 17 of Luloff data. 18 The second portion was dividing the 31,000 beach 19 vehicles between New Hampshire and Massachusetts. And there 20 again, I would make two arguments. 21 The first argument being the one that we didn't -- 22 oh, wait a minute, Your Honor, I'm sorry. 23 I hate to do this, but going back to the third 24 part which we just ruled on. Your Honor has ruled that 25 everything except for two sentences in that paragraph of , 1 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l
27761-f-'s 2 Answer 7 are res judicata,:and those two sentences may or
't
\w 2 may not be res judicata.
3 But you didn't get to my second argument that
- 4. whether it's-resijudicata or not, it's also outside the 5 scope of the contention.
6 Sorry about that. 7 And the reason I bring that up is I was about to 6 make the same argument with regard to part two, that it's 9 beyond the scope of the contention for many of the same - 10 reasons. 11 JUDGE SMITH: That might have been the easier 12 disposition of it. 13 MR. . TROUT: The contention, Your Honor, is-JI-56,
'14 Basis A. The issue is monitoring rate.
15 Now if you recall the argument the last time we 16 considered Mr. High's testimony, Dr. High's testimony, was l 17 that that contention admittedly did not raise population 18 issues, but that JI-21 raised the population issue. p L19 And, therefore, if you put JI-21 and JI-56 l
- j. 20 together to get the monitoring rate issue, pcpulation was 1.
'21 within the scope of the contention. .That was the Board's 22 ruling. The Board let the Interveners piggy-back the two 23 contentions together.
24 Well, whether you look at JI-56 or you look at 25 JI-21, you don't find in the contention, in the bases or in Reporting Corporation Heritaga (202) 628-4888
27762 1 the interrogatory responses the issue of vehicle occupancy 2 rate as affecting monitoring rate. It's just not there. i i 3 JUDGE SMITH: Monitoring rate. ! 4 MR. TROUT: 0xcuse me? 5 JUDGE SMITH: Monitoring rate. 6 MR. TROUT: Yes, Your Honor. 7 JUDGE SMITH: How about 21, what is 21? 8 MR. TROUT: Twenty-one is thet the population 9 counts are too low. 10 JUDGE SMITH: Oh, oh. I'm with you. 11 MR. FIERCE: I'm not sure I follow that argument, 12 Your Honor. 13 MR. TROUT: Well, it's a simple -- 14 JUDGE SMITH: It does seem that JI-56 challenges 15 the capacity for monitoring. 16 MR. FIERCE: Right. 17 JUDGE SMITH: And not the load to be monitored. 18 MR. TROUT: Right. 19 JUDGE SMITH: Not the demand, but the capacity. 20 MR. FIERCE: Well, except this was discussed in a 21 telephone conference call, as you might recall. 22 The issue of the rates of monitoring of over a 12-23 hour period and whether it can be accomplished is 24 necessarily takes a look at how many people they have to 25 monitor. Heritage Reporting Corporation ! (202) 628-4888 2
~
i i (- 1 I i i 27763 j f~N 1 MR. TROUT: But you never said the number of i x/
) 2 people that we were working with was wrong.
3 MR. FIERCE: Well, again, this is the argument I , 1 4 thought I did prevail on the last time, which is we have -- 5 there are various places throughout the plans where ] 6 population numbers are used for planning basis purposes. 7 And we have one contention that goes directly to that. 8 MR. TROUT: That's JI-21. 9 MR. FIERCE: It's JI-21, and this would be where 10 the 2.4 is relevant, because it's a multiplier, or a 11 divisor, I should say. j l 12 You know how many vehicles you have got. It is a l 13 multiplier., You multiply by 2.4 to see how many people from (T 14 those beach areas you are going to have arriving at the ( / 15 reception centers. And it's a population issue, the total 16 population. 17 The total peak population is a table in the SPMC, . 1 18 Table 3.6-1. And it's from those numbers that a whole 19 series of planning issues are addressed throughout the plan. 20 And we've gone to the heart of it. 21 JUDGE SMITH: Do we have to know all of that to 22 decide the narrow issue is it within --
)
23 MR. FIERCE: Well, the narrow issue here is this i 24 issue of the 31,000 beach vehicles. How many of them are in 25 New Hampshire and how many of them are in Massachusetts. im Reporting Corporation (x- Heritage (202) 628-4888 l l l h - _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l 27764 1 JUDGE SMITH: No. 2 The narrow issue is does it fall within the ambit That's the point that he's raising now. I 3 of the contention. 4 MR. FIERCE: JI-56, you have determined addresses 5 the issue of the monitoring rates and the issue of can they , l 6 monitor using the FEMA 20 percent standard. Can they I I 7 monitor 20 percent of the population within a 12-hour 8 period? 9 Are they going to be able to monitor fast enough 10 to do that? j 11 That's the only way you get to the monitoring rate 12 issue. 13 In the abstract, whether they can do 60 seconds, j 14 or 70 seconds or 80 seconds, is not a particularly relevant 15 inquiry without applying it to the standard, Your Honor. 16 JUDGE SMITH: I don't recall ruling on this 17 before. 18 MR. TROUT: Your Honor, the way the issue came up 19 was -- 20 JUDGE SMITH: I recall talking about it. 21 MR. TROUT: The issue was framed very much the way l 22 it's been framed now. 23 JI-56 just talks about monitoring rate. And from 24 the discovery responses and from the contention itself, you 25 would assume that the iusue is tb there is no dispute l I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 { 1
i 27765
.y' 1 about the' population. It's just how fast can our people L.( % '2' . process that population: .70 seconds, 90 seconds, 120 3 seconds per person, what's the actual rate.
4 The argument-that. Mass AG made the last time the 5 issue.came up was that, well, no, we'didn't, in JI-56, 6 challenge'the population component. We didn't have that 7 anywhero in our interrogatory answers or in our JI-56
- 8. contention, but'it was in JI-21 where we say that the )
1 9 populations are off. 10 And, therefore, if you put the two together. , l 1 11 JUDGE SMITH: Right.
~12 MR. TROUT: And the Board was persuaded'by that
]l 13 and the Board found -- )
14 JUDGE SMITH: If you put them together what?
'15 MR. TROUT: You put them together. You.get the o l
16 issue of population. But it doesn't give you, and as you 17 ' recall, that was when I put in my footnote. And I said, i
)
J 18 - well,'whether population is in through JI-21 or not, the 5 19 question of vehicle occupancy rate, and when we get to the
]l
,i 20 next part of the testimony, the issue of dividing between 21 Massachusetts and New Hampshire beach vehicles, those issues j 22 aren't picked up even in JI-21.
l 23 And so it's not in the contention even giving them 24 the piggy-back of JI-21 onto JI-56. It's just not in there. 25 JUDGE SMITH: I just can't get all of these ducks j
-( ) Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1
1 _ _ - - - _ . --_ _ _- _ _-_w
1 27766 , 1 1 in a row. 2 MR. TROUT: I'm sorry, Your Honor. 3 JITDGE SMITH: JI-21 is stipulated out. l 4 MR. TROUT: No , sir. 5 JUDGE COLE: No, no. l t 6 MR. TROUT: That was one of the -- 7 JUDGE COLE: It was withdrawn and then reentered. 8 JUDGE SMITH: It's on. JI-21 is in. 9 MR. TROUT: Yes, sir. 10 JUDGE SMITH: And it alleges that the population 11 to be monitored is greater than you think it is. 12 MR. TROUT: No, Your Honor. 13 JUDGE SMITH: What does it allege? 14 MR. TROUT: It alleges, in general, that the I 15 summer peak population numbers that we use are too low. 16 JUDGE SMITH: Okay. 17 MR. TROUT: And although that's a contention that 18 was narrowed by stipulation, what -- I'll do the history of 19 it very briefly. j. 20 21 22 23 24 25
- Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
)
)
I
( l l 27767 l 1 s .1 MR. TROUT: The February 7th stipulation narrowed i I ( ,) I; 2 JI-21. Then the ETE stipulation, the February 16th 3 stipulation eliminated that remaining narrow part of 3t. l 4 When the ETE stipulation fell apart the remaining narrowed 5 part of JI-21 came back into the proceeding. j 6 And that narrowed part upon which Applicants 7 conducted discovery alleges that the peak population 8 figures, summer peak population figures that Applicants use 9 on their population distribution maps and elsewhere, as Mr. 10 Fierce correctly points out, are too low. 11 Nowhere is there any allegation about 2.4 versus 12 3.0 persons per vehicle on the beach. 13 JUDGE SMITH: Now you're confusing me on that. 14 Nowhere was there an allegation that the persons
-- 15 to be monitored was greater than 8300 or whatever.
16 MR. TROUT: That's correct, Your Honor. 17 That's right, there was no allegation of that in 18 JI-56. What the Board considered last time was Mr. Turk's l r 19 argument -- what the Board considered last time was Mass 20 AG's argument in response to Mr. Turk's argument. Mr. Turk l 21 made the argument that this whole population question was 22 irrelevant because -- and all of this testimony should be 23 thrown out -- because there was no challenge to the 8300, 24 yes, that's right, to the 8300 in JI-56, it just wasn't in 25 there. s j [ Heritage Reporting Corporation j
)
\_ / (202) 628-4888 ]
1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l
I i 27768 j i 1 And Mass AG came back and said, well, no, it may 2 not be in JI-56, but in JI-21 e say their population 3 numbers are wrong; and therefore, you should read JI-21 into ) 4 JI-56 even though it's not cross-referenced there. And let 5 us consider the population issue. j i 6 The Board accepted that argument at that time. I 7 And so we didn't decide that motion on the basis of the 8 population being inside or outside the scope of the 9 contention. 10 At that time when the Board was making that i l I 11 ruling, I reserved -- I expressly reserved the argument 12 that, whether population in general was raised by JI-21, the 13 specific argument that because we' re using the wrong beach 14 vehicle multiplier our monitoring capacity is off, our ( 15 monitoring load is off; that isn't colored by 56 or 21. And i 16 therefore, that is regardless of how you rule on the general l 17 population. I 18 JUDGE SMITH: So you're not talking now about a 19 general allegation from 21 transferred to 56 that the 1 20 population is too great. 21 MR. TROUT: That's correct. 22 JUDGE SMITH: You're saying that 56 in no way, nor 23 did 21 in any way, give as a specified basis the vehicle 24 occupancy rate. 25 MR. TROUT: Yes, Your Honor. that's it. i i Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
7, j ore g, lb s ,
;27769 p- 1 OUDGE SMITH: And nor did responses to discovery.
..QM 2 MR. TROUT: That's correct, Your Honor, i
>;f u 31 .MR. . FIERCE: Well, I' don't:have all the discoveryf .1 o- q 4 right here.in front 1of me and I'm not sure'they ever askedf j
1 They probablyfasked us some 5 - us the specific questions. 6 questions;about this. point, but our point was:~you haven't
- 7: calculated the summer; weekend peak population correctly..
8 JUDGE SMITH: So it's evidence again. 9: . MR . FIERCE: It's certainly an element in the 10 population calculation. That's the'only way. If you think 11 about, it's'the only way. The parties have been arguing 12- over the summer weekend population. .There are two elements:- 13' there's the number of vehicles. The Board has determined (
-\
14 the overall number. 15 And.then there's the number of them that need to 16 ' be distributed between Massachusetts and New Hampshire; that 17 I' submit'is an open issue. 18 JUDGE SMITH: Let's get the interrogatory and the 19 answer. 20 MR. FIERCE: And just to complete my thought: and~ 21 then the only other issue is how many people per car are 22 there on the beaches once you've decided how many vehicles 1 23 you've got in Massachusetts.
- 24 That's the only way you can really contest the 25 population. We're clearly contesting the population for the Beritage Reporting Corporation L Nw (202) 628-4888 r
____l_m.__E______.____ _m _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _
l 27770 f l 1 summer weekend peak in the beach areas. It seems so 1 l l' 2 obvious. 3 JUDGE SMITH: That 21 did not allege as a basis 4 that the vehicle occupancy rates used were incorrect or that 5 the vehicle occupancy rates show that the population was 6 incorrect. 7 You're saying that should be assumed because 8 that's the only you had. 9 MR. FIERCE: It's the only way we can get there. 10 JUDGE SMITH: Other than resident population i 11 county. 12 MR. FIERCE: Well, we' re only talking the summer 13 beach counts. 14 'UDGE SMITH: All right. 15 Summer beach counts. Now -- 16 MR. FIERCE: As an element of the population was 17 clearly, lir. Trout is admitting, an item thur we were 18 disputing. 19 JUDGE SMITH: Let's test your argument then by the 20 discovery inquiry and response. 21 (Pause) 22 MR. FIERCE: I just found that it's here. It's 23 interrogatory No. 160 of the Mass AG's answers -- answers 24 and responses of the Mass AG to the Applicants' 25 interrogatories and request for the production concerning JI Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
r i t.. 1
)
27771 [ 1 Contentions'1 through 20. N ' 2. And as tr TI-21.there is, first,'a question about 3 th'e permanent resit .cs. And next a question about the peak 4- ' summer' totals; midweek and weekends,. state all the facts.
.5~ And response: "The facts'available to the' Mass AG.
6 at this time include the testimony of Drs. Befort, High, and 7 Adler.in the NHRER proceedings." 8 It was the testimony of Dr. Adler in the fcotnote 9- that raised the question. 10 JUDGE SMITH: Now, you're not reading from the 11 answer, you're just saying generally their testimony.
.- 12 MR. FIERCE: Yes.
13 JUDGE SMITH: Now you're explaining to us that
/ 14 going to-his testimony you would have found in the footnote f
15 the vehicle occupancy rate. 16 MR. FIERCE: That's right 17 When they ask a question, all the facts,-we didn't
. 18 feel that we were compelled there to list or to restate the.
19 testimony of all of our previous witnesses on this 20 population issue. 21 We referred them to the documents. And clearly, 22 those documents raised this issue. 23 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 24 Will you answer that; and also at the time, answer 25 his point, isn't it true that vehicle occupancy rates has ( Heritago Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 i
[- l 27772 l I been an important -- almost an essential aspect of counting 2 transient population? 3 MR. TROUT: Well, Your Honor, I would agree with 4 that second ooint and that's why I argued it was zes 5 judicata. 6 JUDGE SMITH: Now we' re not talking about res 7 judicata anymore. 8 MR. TROUT: I know. 9 JUDGE SMITH: Was it in the contention? 10 MR. TROUT: Yes. 11 JUDGE SMITH
- See, this is your double reason.
12 MR. TROUT: The argument would be -- the first 13 argument would be that referring us to Befort, High, and 14 Adler. 15 We're supposed to go back and find the footnote in ' 16 Befort, High, and Adler and decide that that's one of the 17 facts that they're alleging, among all the facts that are in 18 that testimony. 19 I respectfully suggest that that is not 20 sufficient to put us on notice. I will concede that the 21 reference is there in the interrogatory responses. 22 JUDGE SMITH: All right. 23 MR. TROUT: Which frankly is more _an I 24 remembered. I didn't remember it being there. 25 JUDGE SMITH: So this is where we are then with Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
L 27773 l l f-w s~ i 1 respectLto: JI-21 the issue is: could you have reasonably [ss. '2: ' inferred from the-contention of the bases that the 3 population; allegations would-depend upon evidence of car 4 occupancy. averaging. 5 -MR. FIERCE: Your Honor, there's one more 6 interrogatory; there were only three. One about the 7 permanent residents; and two about'the summer. weekend peaks.- 8 JUDGE SMITH: Go on. 9 MR. FIERCE: And the second one I haven't 10 indicated to you yet. They ask us: "What do Interveners
'll' assert the current correr'. tigures for permanent residents, 12 summer midweek peak, and summer weekend peak for the 13 Massachusetts EPZ and by municipality? Please state all the 14 facts, estimates, and observation."
' 15 Response: " Mass AG has not calculated or 16 estimated these figures for'the current period. The most 17 recent. population calculations made were those set forth in 18 the Mass AG's NHRERP testimony."
19 If you want to get that calculation, you will go
-20 back to our testimony and the calculation is presented l 21 vehicles times people per car; and you'will see right there.
2? in that calculation we were using a higher number than 2.4. 23 JUDGE SMITH: Well, that's different. 24 What we're talking now is: does the contention in 25 discovery put them in -- see, we're talking scope of ( Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 I - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - l
/
27774 1 contention and not res judicata. l 2 MR. FIERCE: Absolutely, j l 3 Scope of contention -- j 1 4 JUDGE SMITH: It's hard enough to decide these l I 5 issues one at a time without all at once. l ( 6 MR. FIERCE: The contention says, summer peak ] 7 population. 8 JDGE SMITH: What we have to decide is: does 9 JI-21 alleging a viewpoint on summer peak population 10 subsumed within it notice that you would be offering 11 evidence as to vehicle occupancy rates? That's the 12 question? i 13 Is that the question? 14 MR. FIERCE: Yes. 15 JUDGE SMITH: And now you're saying, vehicle j 16 occupancy rates heve been an essential aspect of counting 17 populStion, j 18 MR. FIERCE: Absolutely. 19 JUDGE SMITH: It is necessarily a part of any such ! 20 contention. And in addition, the footnote to Dr. Adler's 21 testimony to which you alluded gave them additional notice. 22 MR. FIERCE: And this refers to another piece of 23 testimony. 24 JUDGE SMITH: I don't know how that helps you. 25 I lost track. ' I Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 91l 1 l
i U ' 27775 jcs l 1 MR. FIERCE: In the sheltering testimony.there was l(,,/' 2 -- Dr. Adler did'not ccmpute the number of what the peak 3 would be, a number of people. He was not concerned about 4 people. And nowhere.in his testimony do you find a people 5 ca3 culation. 6 He did have a footnote where he said it could be 7 as high as -- I forget the number he used, it was over 8 -three. That number-was then used in.the sheltering 9' testimony by the Mass AG, I believe. And there was a 10 calculation, an estimate made of the total number of people. 11 JUDGE SMITH: Okay, that's enough. 12 (Board confers.) 13 JUDGE SMITH: Our ruling is, even though vehicle 14 occupancy rates for this purpose is res judicata,
}/^ ~' 15 -nevertheless it is part and parcel of JI-21 because it is an 16 essential aspect of counting the important part of the 17 population. ,
i 18 Now, I forget the relationship between 21 and 56, 19 but we're ruling piecemeal here and 21 did sufficiently, 20 necessarily because of the record of this case, put you on 21 notice that vehicle occupancy rates reasonably could be 22' offered as evidence aside from res judicata. 23 MR. TROUT: All right. 24 I understand, Your Honor. 25 JUDGE SMITH: So where are we? Heritage Reporting Corporation L \m/ (202) 628-4888 \ I
-_- . - _ _ _ - - _ _ - - _ _ - .-. s
l L 27776 1 What does that do? 2 I don't know, that is very much an impartial 3 ruling because I don't know what it does for you. l 4 MR. TROUT: I think it leaves that portion of the 5 testimony in. 6 JUDGE SMITH: Because I have forgotten the bridge 7 between 21 and 56. But if you don't think we have to go 8 through it, that's it, we'll just let it go at that. 9 MR. TROUT: Well, I wasn't happy with the bridge, 10 but it's late in the day. 11 JUDGE SMITH: The bridge was made. 12 MR. TROUT: Yes. 13 JUDGE SMITH: So you have another one and that's 14 the 40 percent premise. 15 MR. TROUT: Your Honor. 16 MR. TURK: Your Honor, may I ask -- I'm sorry to 17 do this late. I think this is in the way of a motion for 18 reconsideration. 19 I assume that the basis of your ruling is that 20 because Mass AG said, look at the Mass AG's testimony in the 21 New Hampshire phase and that's the basis for those 22 contention. 23 JUDGE SMITH: That's the weak base. That's the 24 weaker reason for our finding. 25 The stronger reason is: given the history of this I Beritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 L _ ___m_
a-O w. ' ' ; L-27777- [y 1- litigation, that when you're counting beach population you.
\- / 2 -are necessarily put on' notice that evidence concerning 3 vehicle occupancy rates may be adduced, because we know
- 4 there's no other way to count parts of;the population.
L 5-' MR. TROUT: Well, on that score,;-Your Honor, then 6 I'm going to have to weigh back in again, if that's the 7- principal' argument. 8 JUDGE SMITH: In addition to.other things. 9 MR. TROUT: 'And now I'm going to renege on whatlI-10 said earlier about -- 11 JUDGE SMITH: Wait a minute. 12 I think we've just-run'out of resources today. - I 13 don't think we.can do anymore. We'll just-have to come back-
, 14- tomorrow.
.\
Is it the' Board's pleasure'to take-15 MR. TROUT:
.16 this up first thing or would you rather get the. panel on and 17 off?
18 19 20 22 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 l l I
. 1
27778 ! l 1 JUDGE SMITH: Well, we can talk about that off the l 2 record. 3 MR. TROUT: All right. 4 4 JUDGE SMITH: But these people have a big night's / 5 work ahead of them, a very large night's work. This was a 6 heavy day. 7 We're adjourned until 8:30 tomorrow. 8 (!Ehereupon, at 6:10 p.m. the hearing was adjourned 9 to reconvene tomorrow morning at 8:30 a.m., Wednesday, 10 June 28, 1989.) - 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888
f s (_,) June 26, 1989 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION before the ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
)
In the Matter of )
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF ) Docket Nos. 50-443-OL NEW HAMPSHIRE, et al. ) 50-444-OL )
) Off-site Emergency (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) ) Planning Issues
)
)
.( p-~ ) APPLICANTS' OUTLINE CROSS-EXAMINATION PLAN
's~ FOR THE TESTIMONY OF T. MICHAEL CARTER CONCERNING CONTENTIONS JI 13B; JI 27C; JI 36; MAG EX-9 Applicants' cross-examination will inquire into the background of the witness, the circumstances under which the testimony was prepared, and the purposes for which the prefiled testimony is offered.
Applicants' cross-examination will be directed to a showing that: Hurricane hazards are quite different from nuclear power plants, yet all of the witnesses' expertise is tied to the former;
?3 b me.crw .m
i i l The witness has misread or misrepresents what he l 4' I has referenced in the literatura from which he j develops a net of evaluation criteria that he uses l to criticize the Applicants' SPMC planning basis and graded exercise actitity; ; i The witness overlooks matters in the EBS messages ' which he alleges are not there; he mischaracterizes the deposition testimony of Richard Donovan in i regard to the graded exercise evaluation; The witness ~ suggests that all matters (all elements i of an EBS message) should be included in all EBS I l messages for all categories of risk; l The witness suggests and rests his criticism upon l< 1 i matters that simply could not be encompassed within an EBS message and still get out timely EBS messages to the public; 1 The witness's criticism of the SPMC procedures for developing and dissemination of emergency i information to the public and the news media is i unfounded; l i cut.cM.AN . n L _ _ _ _ __.
, ,-s The witness's belief that the NHY ORO does not have the capability to establish and maintain coordination with the' state of New Hampshire is unfounded.
Respectfully submitted, M <b_0 Thomas ~G. Dignan,'Jr.~ George H. Lewald i Kathryn A. Selleck i Jeffrey P. Trout i Jay Bradford Smith l Geoffrey C. Cook William L. Parker Ropes & Gray . One International Place i Boston, MA 02110-2624 ; (617) 951-7000 (w, - l O
\
l
\__ cm.cra NH l
\ I.
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the l United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter j i of: , Name: Public Service Company of New Hampshire, et al. (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2) Docket No: 50-443-OL 50-444-OL (Off-site Emergency Planning) Place: Boston, Massachusetts Date: June 27, 1989 were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken stenographically by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
/S/ -
(Signature typed) : Donna L. Cook Official Reporter Heritage Reporting Corporation HERITAGE REPORTING CORPORATION O:j (202)628-4888 i f- _ I
l l 9 O
y, , g 4,fp I '$' a 4,. e 1
. .s lf . t', ') \ <,- y I
'T*g<mj ?
( s
. 'P
-,,3,r
,q" ;4'f P.47/
Y t ,' 4 :,-)-,4
.'{r, l' t1 '5Iil h',
V'). '. a', ,;; j ;3;iE
\
s }t .. ' n p e 4e
,' =
mk ._, i 1 1 . .' l .k -
!r f,- , . . .r,.-
- . . . . -q.
s. i
,3 r
1,- O , t .. ,' s
=
} l i l, 1 3 y 1 l 4 -. ). .;
. l-O G
f
/
k u.. .
,y
,i
- ^ ' - " ' ' - " " "- - --mum _2 , _ , _ _ ,,_ ,, _}}