ML20054K512

Forwards FEMA Responses to ASLB Questions on Extent to Which Panic & Psychological Stress Were Factored Into FEMA-REP-1, NUREG-0654,re Persons Who Panic in Disaster Situations.Svc List Encl

ML20054K512
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	06/28/1982
From:	Czaja R COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO., SHEA & GOULD
To:	Carter L Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
RTR-NUREG-0654, RTR-NUREG-654 ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8207020270
Download: ML20054K512 (7)

Text

SHEA & GouLD 330 MADISON AvCNUE w u a. ...-e. a.sv0= s.eOoko NEw YOR K. NEW YoR K 10 o17 ezvCe 4. es Cara s . . s . . ..u..ses a es=Ja=*= eaavat e = se.n o o. e isC= =*= cani3,o..ooo

• • • "',"*'*"*8*"'**

ese . svarev.= w.

casaman # avaeitas = *a' e= 0 see r 6'Oa ""*""*""******

.ame6. . 6,=,0= sev=Own .a6s.* ,cLgs..,3.,3 '***i**8 ****

, , Caekt r es sego JWLiase s. eusse vemC E se? O ese DON NE b b _

ausses .... . =

• Lese 6. a uis Tgge co ,; .n,3,4 ,.,,,,,,,,,u,e aO: .es..w.e. .e0..: oco<=aaO

.2,es sacO..O. see loo o Ca==, ***"S*'

e. te:not.. .

eauwa6 w. ease.... . w.u .. . ee.. =.sa.

. C -a 6 0,oe ... . . 6, e = ** s ni

• estCasaE L 48 SCM E E w.N e escenatu ===eO JUDSOsev.='.=GOWLD' A

4 tin p GOLO wdLLeaes C. Finest nase. Jn, wsLL'ame A.N E LSOce '

veuC t est w. Ou'eem. Ja. a6LAsea tgssign gewamp M. FOnectsOu

• u . a . 00.......... - : - .se . . . . . . . ................

aansso s. ,* Cone v=O-as s.CO=sva=Cr s&A POSTEL maTMOsen e. seampeese tumoptAN OFFICE L..... ...... 0...,w C .cSO- .,,,,,,,...Co...

JOtk8,,APERNea &Twant sesageeFetLO LONDON was DOS SOtte Cussas DAN 8tLL.Cammobb Eme6AND

.,On ,se......O ..w........ O..........

.,Coe... .... ..... - .C - . 6 C o. ' "'******

STS&TFOnD C wALLACE weLLiase se DuseLOP June 28, 1982 g gOme r T. eew??O*e PM841P R M AN ee Otomet F.SOSS

• SeCeeamO L.490seOeaffe LOsen .. Teost ma sset.T Pe#, set.

KOttet GOLO D.vec A CutesER se&aOL O A . a a t h DAW 80 e osamOwatt Agnaw, OppeCE A3f eeum 5. p &WF ee&se Cee ANLE S M Ban?E4 em WASes4NOTOct AVEneWE 7

$4Muth St Aew&se ERNE st 4 stmTOLOTTS ALSANT. setw Toma t3310 -

pavan c. Sf ame.Os JE FFa g y D. esameOn t a v ggasp..g.3330 MARytv FELOSCMREISER Janets 3. Faansagg

-ua' ra'<*-^~ . .., a. . . . . ese .. w . .

jesse CLsestunO WRITER'S DIRECT UNE estLt t F. escDON ALD

..uk .. .varer ARNOLD FOpsTER 370-8494 OF Cowesttk Hon. Louis J. Carter Administrative Judge Atomic Safety & Licensing Board 7300 City Line Avenue Philadelphia, PA 19151 Re: Consolidated Edison Company (In'dian Point, Unit 2); Power Authority of the State of New York. (Indian Point, Unit' 3); Docket Nos. 50-247-SP; 50-286-AP

Dear Judge Carter:

Pursuant to the discussion at the hearing herein on June 25, I provide herewith copies of Exhibit PA 1 to the Board, parties on the service list, the witness Mr. McIntyre (through his counsel, Mr. Glass), and the court reporter.

Very truly yours, J k_, - X*

Richard F. Czaja

)

RFC:mwm Enclosures cc: w/encls.-Hon. Oscar H. Paris Hon. Frederick J. Shon Service List Alderson Reporting, Attention: Mr. Alfred H. Ward (3 copies)

Stewart Glass, Esq. ,

8207020270 820628 l PDR ADOCK 05000247 0 PDR

/ g -

g

, Yfi/

-3

~_

1 FEliA RESPONSES 10 LICENSING BOARD QUESTIONS ON EXTENT 10 i

j WillCH PANIC AND PSYCliOLOGICAL STRESS WERE FACTORED INTO I NUREC-0654/ FEMA-REP-), ON FEMA DATA ON PERSONS Wl10 PANIC 4

IN DISASTER SITUA11CNS, AND ON DOCUMENT ATION AVAILABLE ,

i i' 10 FEMA ON EXTD!T 10 UtilCH EVACUEES RESPOND TO

INSTRUCTIONS PERCEIVED 10 BE CONTRARY TO IllEIR BEST INTERESTS l

l J

l l

l

Y d g

1. 1-1

1. Please documerit the extent to which panic and psychological stress were cons 2derWand I actored 2nto the development of I LMA emergency planning guidance (NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1).

Based on over thirty years of research, the eviden proportion of persons panic in disaster situation.g is th'at a negligible The research covers a range of situations from massive strategic bombing in Europe and the two atomic bombs dropped on Japanese cities during World War II.

through more recent natural and technological hazards including the Three Mile Island accident and the eruption of Mount St. Helens, and includes fires, f.loods and earthquakes. Panic occurs only under special circumstances: e g. when people are faced with a highly visible and and the immediate threat is survival within an enclosed area, and escape routes are closed off. Theater and night club fires r,re typical examples. g Rapid escape -- a perfectly natural reaction to disaster -- is not panic behavior. It is both rational and effective as a means of escape and survival. At IMI approximately 39% of the people in the immediate area evacuated spontaneously; they did not panic: the survey of THI evacuee behavior did identify cases of frantic ef forts of family memaers to account for other family members at school, work or home, g evacuationbehaviorwasorderly,albeithastyinsomecases. jut It was not irrational, groundless, dysfunctional or inerfeetive. The haste with which some evscuees depart does suggest fear, but nothing in the behavior can accurately be characerized as panic.

Psychological stress has been extensively studied by the research community.

Some form of psychological stress lies behind all actions, either adaptive or maladaptive, which result from a perceived disaster situation. In the develop-ment of NUREG-0654/f EMA-HEP-1, the FEMA /NRC Steering committee drew on the available research base in order to maximize the fraction of those persons whose adaptive behavior would protect their perceived best interest, albeit in in the presence of psychological stress.

The research illustrates that public education and communication are most important elements which precede the most favorable adaptive behavior In NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1. These elements are addressed in' Standards E and G and in Appendices 3 and 4.

i

• Standard "E" addressed notification methods and procedures, Clements 5.

6 and 7 in particular.

• Standard "G" addressed public e.,ocation and information, all elements are pcrtinent.

l 1/ Quarantelli, (1980), is the most recent summary of the pertinent research.

See especially sections on Patterns of Behavior (pp.99-108) and Withdrawal ((pp. 108-123). See also Quarantelli, 1954 and 1979, and l

fritz, 1961.

I 2/ Quarantelli, 1954, 1979.

l 3/ Flynn, 1979 4/ Selected References list follows Question 3 5/ Rogers, 1980, p. 35; Fritz, 1961, pp. 667-8.

l l

1-2 e a . .

Appendix 3 addresses means for providing prompt alert'ing and notification of response organizations and the population.

• Appendix 4 addresses evacuation time estimates within the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone with emphasis on behavioral aspects.

g 2-1

2. Please provide historical data and information, if any, on the projortion of persons who pan e in disaster situations and how these people are perceived by other evacuees. Does FEMA have a fife on panic?

FEMA has no organized data base which yields useful numbers in response to this question because the fraction of persons involved in panic has proven to be negligible in all cases involving disasters with large numbers of people in situations covered by FEMA's statutory role. Panic and mob behavior are a special sub-set of behavioral science which are encountered in fire d.sasters in confined spaces or in civil disorders. FEMA's research shows that cutside of these special situations, most people will behave predictively under tisaster stress associated with FEMA's experience. Even the emergent normative behavior which led to thousands of deaths in the fire storm associated with the Tokyo carthquake of 1929 cannot be classed as panic, but rather an adaptive action which was ineffective.

FEMA's concept of panic can be su'nmarized by the observations of fritz (Ref 1 Question 1) and Quarantelli (Ref 10 Question 1) - an acute fear reaction marked by loss of self-control and followed by non-social and nonrational u flight.

FEMA has no specific file on pinic incidente because it has proven to be negligible except for fire disasters and the like meeting the conditions described above. Summary comernts from the experts most familiar wit {gthis research appear in Quarantell. (1980, 1979, 1954), and fritz (1961).

l i

L1 Selected references list follows question 3 1

[ -

h $

3-1

3. To what extent do evacuees respond to instructions which they may perceive are not in their immediate best interest? What documentation is available to FEMA on this subject?

FEMA and its predecessor agencies have conducted extensive research on the general subject of grcup behavior in civil emrgencies. This research has concentrated primarily on population behavior during nuclear attack or the threat of nuclear atta{g, but does include data derived from the whole range of civil emergencies Based on this research, FEMA con say that the majo'rity of evacuees will respond to instuctions provided the basis for this instructions has been credibly established. This response varies not only with the information base but with the age distribution of evacuees.

Spontaneous evacuation, according to available research, does not constitute a problem. Those who evacuate spontaneously typically have a place to go and have  ;

planned their evacuation. Rather than complicating the implementation of '

evacuation plans, they tend to reduce the burden on emergency evacuation plan {grs and coordinators by reducing the numbers who must be directed and cared for.

Some insight into the numbers involved can be gained from the most recent survey by Professor Rogers of the University Center for Social And Urban Research of the the University of Pittsburgh which d Presidentially directed relocation. { git with public attitudes related 'to a L1 Selected references list follows this question 1.

l l

l

2) Quarantelli (1980); Rogers (1980). See especially Quarantelli p.108f.

3) Quarantelli (1980); fritz (luo1).

1 I

l e p , , e -o , - - - - , -- - ,

e W

,,eiczences ',r questions 61-3.

j< $

, 1. fritz, Charles E. " Disaster," in Contemporary Social Problem (s, R. K.

Herton and R. A. Nisbet (Eds.). Ilarcourt, Brace 570rld: 1961.

g

2. Marks, E. S. , and C. E. f ritz. Human Reaction in Disaster Situations.

Chicago: University of Chicago, 1954.

3. Hileti, Dennis S. " Human Adjustment to the Risk of Environmental Extremes," Sociology and Social Research (Vol. 64, No. 3) April 1980.

4. Mileti, D. S., g al,. Human Systems in Extreme Environments: A Sociolo_gical Perspective. Boulder, Colo.: University of Colorado, -

Institute of Behavioral Research,1975.

5. Perry, Ronald W. et. al. " Enhancing Evacuation Warning Compliance:

Suggestions for Emergency Planning." Seattle, Wash.: Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers, 1980. Report to the National Science Foundation.

6. Perry, Ronald W. " Evacuation Decision-Making in Natural Disasters,"

Hass Emergencies (4) 1979.

7. Perry, Ronald W. " Detecting Psychopathological Reactions to Natural Disaster: A Methodological Note," Social Behavior and Personality ,,

(Vol. 7, No. 2) 1979.

8. Quarantelli, E. L. Evacuation Behavior and Problems: Findings and Implications from the Research Literature. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Disaster Research Center, July 1980. FEMA report-contract DCPA 01-79-C-0258.

10. Quarantelli, E. L. " Panic Behavior in fire Situations: Findings and a Model from the English Language Research Literature." Preliminar'y Paper #54. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Disaster Research Center, 1979.

11. Quarantelli, E. L., and Russell R. Dynes. " Response to Social Crisis and Disaster," Annual Review of Sociology (No. 3) 1977.

12. Quarantelli, E. L., and Russell R. Dynes. "When Disbster Strikes (It Isn't Huch like What You've Heard and Read About)," Psychology Today, February 1972.

13. Rogers, George O. Presidentially Directed Relocation: Compliance A_ttitudes. Pittsburgh: University of Pitt sburgh, University Center for Social and Urban Research, 1980. FEMA contract DCPA01-77-C-0218-UNIT 48158.

14. Perry, Ronald W., et. al. The Implications of Natural Hazard Evacuation Warning Studies for CrQs Relocation Planning. Seattle, Wash.: Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers, 1980.

15. C. B. flynn. Three Mile Island Telephone Survey: Preliminary Report on Procedures and findings. NURtG/Cf-1093. Washingt on, D. C. : U. S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, October 1979.

IIEMS 4, 8,13 and 14 are DCPA st udies available from FEMA, Office of Mitigation and Research (copying may be required)

IIEMS 1, 8 and 13 available as cited IIEM 15 available from t he Nuclear Regulat ory Commission