Page images
PDF
EPUB

Indian Point Emergency Preparedness
Independent Expert Task Force

Existing emergency plans, at the county level, methodically address impediments to evacuation, regardless of cause, including terrorist events.

The draft Witt Report asserts [page185] that the Indian Point emergency plan exercise program has not addressed a "fast-evolving accident" (i.e., release within six hours). In fact, nearly all Indian Point exercises in the last two years employed scenarios with offsite radiological consequences beginning sooner than six hours.

IETF Conclusion:

The draft Witt Report underlying assumption that a terrorist-caused radiation release at Indian Point would be more severe in magnitude and timing than that for which the emergency management process is designed is not correct. Emergency management processes accommodate radiation releases regardless of source or cause.

Appendix C discusses the draft Witt Report treatment of terrorist-related events in more detail.

3.5 Adequacy of Current Emergency Management Processes

In its single most important conclusion, the draft Witt Report finds that, with respect to the factors discussed in sections 3.1 through 3.4 above, "current radiological response system and capabilities are not adequate to overcome their combined weight (emphasis added) and protect the people from an unacceptable dose of radiation in the event of a release from Indian Point [pages viii and 240]”.

This conclusion is wholly unsupported by the balance of the report. It does not stem
logically from the information presented on the alleged contributing factors, and
the authors' assertion that their "combined weight" somehow renders the entire
process ineffective is not explained in any way. It is a conclusion that ignores the
large body of information and experience in real emergencies of all kinds, and it
contradicts consistent findings of emergency preparedness experts and responsible
public officials.

We know from real life experience, and particularly from non-nuclear emergencies that have occurred within the nuclear plant emergency planning zones, that nuclear plant emergency planning processes do work. Two specific examples are:

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Plans developed for the Waterford Plant were used to successfully warn and evacuate residents of Taft, LA, following a chemical plant accident [20]. This event was acknowledged in the draft Witt Report [page 241]

Following a fire at a metal processing plant in Nanticoke, PA, local officials used procedures developed for the Susquehanna Nuclear Station to conduct a successful warning and night-time evacuation. [21]

Indian Point Emergency Preparedness

Independent Expert Task Force

Emergency planning for nuclear plants is in the vanguard practice in the US, for protection from all threats, as demonstrated by the CAR (Capability Assessment for Readiness) conducted by FEMA, which concluded that "Overall, States participating in the REP Program score higher above the national average in all functional areas." [18, p. 122]

IETF Conclusion:

There is simply no basis for the draft Witt Report conclusion that the emergency management processes currently in place are inadequate to protect public health and safety.

Indian Point Emergency Preparedness
Independent Expert Task Force

4 IETF Comments on Witt Report Recommendations There are recommendations throughout the draft Witt Report. Many, not all, are restated in Section 11. The recommendations are not prioritized, and none is described as (nor do we consider any to be) central to emergency management

success.

Some of the report's recommendations are based on incorrect or unconfirmed assumptions. Many are vague or conceptual and some counter established practice and experience. In such cases, substantial further evaluation and development is warranted before they could be adopted.

In other areas, we agree that the recommended actions have merit and should be considered, and acted upon as appropriate.

4.1 Points of Agreement

Included in the draft Witt Report are recommendations regarding areas in which the emergency management planning and processes are frequently updated. In some of these cases, we understand that the actions recommended by the draft Witt Report had previously been identified and are already being implemented; others are attractive in concept and are expected to be evaluated. Examples are:

Incorporation of new technologies, such as reverse 911 and GPS, to
enhance emergency response

Adjustment of siren noise levels consistent with terrain and background
Mutual aid agreements between counties and support agencies and
organizations

Improvement in public education and outreach activities

Upgrading Emergency Operations Centers and technology supports for protective actions

Involvement of cities and counties, in response planning, training, and exercises

Improvements in methods and equipment for communications with state and counties. Development of methods to accommodate communication failures such as destruction of hardware, network jamming, computer system hijacking, and weak signals

Inclusion of large employers in emergency planning

Development of sound processes for use of stable iodine as a prophylactic for radioiodine uptake

Use of traffic simulation models, with inclusion of population variations including transients

Inclusion of shadow evacuations in the exercise system

Improvement in a comprehensive training program including certification

of some key positions involved in response

Regular feedback from the IP emergency response community to
professional organizations such as APCO

Indian Point Emergency Preparedness
Independent Expert Task Force

Use of improved plume modeling and related hazard assessment, taking
into account wind shifts and complex weather patterns

4.2 Comments on Key Witt Report Recommendations

The following are IETF comments on draft recommendations that we consider to be of particular significance:

1. Draft Witt Report recommendations that exercises should be “performance outcome-based":

As stated, "The State should work with FEMA and others to develop a performance outcome-based exercise program distinctly different from the functional exercise approach. A functional approach examines each activity against regulations, guidance, or plans and looks for compliance. An outcomebased approach looks for the effects of the actions on the community". [page ix, and subsequent]

We concur that that emergency preparedness exercises should include performance outcome assessment along with appropriate compliance measures. The exercise outcome of primary importance is the protection of public health and safety, and exercises should be conducted and assessed in a way demonstrates achievement of that objective.

This performance outcome philosophy is already being implemented. Over a year ago, FEMA incorporated this approach in its new process for grading nuclear plant exercises. FEMA now uses six evaluation areas instead the 33 objectives utilized previously. In accordance with the REP Program Manual, the new evaluation areas, "...reflect FEMA's shift towards a more 'results oriented' approach to the evaluation process. In other words, the accomplishment of the mission (result) is more important than the means used to achieve the result." [18, page iii-59]. IPEC and off-site authorities were evaluated against these new performance-based criteria during the September 24, 2002 FEMA Exercise.

This process is likely to see ongoing refinement and improvement. Full implementation of a fundamentally different exercise process will take time and will require development, testing and training. Emergency exercises for all nuclear plants currently follow federal regulations and guidelines and should be continued until a new process is ready for implementation.

2. Draft Witt Report recommendation that Emergency Plans should take into
account realistic behavior assumptions

As stated: "The current planning assumption, that the public will not act in ways that will compromise the effectiveness of the response, can lead to serious

Indian Point Emergency Preparedness
Independent Expert Task Force

miscalculations. Planning, response, and public education all need to take into account the general findings of disaster researchers on how people behave during emergencies as well as specific findings from the region on the expected actions and intentions of the people living and working around both nuclear facilities, both within and outside of the 10 mile EPZ".[page 225]

We agree that plans should be based on realistic behavioral assumptions and should take into account findings from disaster research. However, we note that behavioral intent studies have proven to be of limited use, because individuals' perceptions of what they would do in an emergency situation may differ considerably from their actual behavior in that situation, for a variety of reasons. Appendix D is a tabular summary of behavioral issues raised by the draft Witt Report, and the IETF comments on each.

Note also that rigid public conformance with protective action directions is not essential for an effective nuclear plant emergency response. These directions are conservative in nature, and in most cases variations in individual response would have little health consequence.

3. Draft Witt Report recommendation to improve public outreach

The report finds that “A comprehensive public outreach strategy should be put in place to better educate all sectors of the public on their role in emergency response plans."[page 222]

We concur that public education is a foundation for facilitating effective public response. This is, and will continue to be, an area of sharp focus and continuing improvement at Indian Point.

A number of specific recommendations are offered in the draft Witt Report regarding public outreach. We recommend that these be evaluated for inclusion in the ongoing efforts to improve public outreach in the Indian Point EPZ.

4. Draft Witt Report suggestion regarding event-specific protective action
strategies

While not presented as an explicit recommendation, the draft Witt Report argues that many case-specific protective action strategies be developed and incorporated into the Indian Point emergency management processes. Excerpts from the report in this area include: "Safety requires the right actions at the right time. Each radiological emergency can have unique aspects – the accident can be different, weather can be different, time of day and hence patterns of population distribution. ...Humans cannot process the hundreds of variations and arrive at the best strategy. However computers can ... Indian Point and Millstone need to develop a series of protective action strategies for varying contingencies. In our experience...several million simulations had to be run..." [pages 212 and 213]

« PreviousContinue »