NYC is susceptible to an accidental release of radiation from a variety of sources. Universities, colleges and hospitals all contain various radioactive materials, but the
61 Paula K. Dunbar, Craig S. Weaver, “U.S. States and Territories National Tsunami Hazard
Assessment: Historical Record and Sources for Waves,”
30
dangers posed by these facilities are generally minimal compared to the potential hazards posed by the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant, just 24 miles north of NYC.62 According to a 2011 report, federal watchdogs made safety at the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant their top priority and New York’s Governor stated that he wants the aging nuclear power plant shut down in the midst of its two remaining nuclear reactors being up for recertification in 2013 and 2015.63 The ability of this facility to withstand seismic activity is certainly questionable. The Governor recently met with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) officials to discuss Indian Point’s ability to withstand an earthquake beyond its design limits.64 The Indian Point plant, which has had its share of problems in the past including a leaking underground pipe feeding a backup cooling system and a transformer explosion which triggered a brief shutdown, is reportedly designed to withstand an earthquake up to an M 6.1.65 That is greater than the most powerful New York quake recorded at M 5.2 in 1884.66 More importantly, scientists at Columbia University have discovered that the Indian Point facility is within a mile of where New York’s two most active fault lines intersect and a 2008 paper reported the estimated chances of an M 7 earthquake occurring at this intersection to be 1.5% over a 50-year period.67 The Columbia paper also noted that Indian Point is located “closer to more people” than any other nuclear plant in America, at one of the least favorable sites from an earthquake hazard and risk perspective.68
62 Kenneth Lovett, Richard Sisk, “Shut Aging Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant Down, Gov. Cuomo Reiterates,” Dailynews.com, (March 23, 2011), http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/shut-aging-indian- point-nuclear-power-plant-gov-cuomo-reiterates-article-1.123495.
63 Ibid. 64 Ibid.
65 Michael Daly, “Regulators Say Indian Point Nuclear Plant is Safe, but can Chernobyl-on-the-
Hudson Happen?” Dailynews.com (March 15, 2011), http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/regulators-
indian-point-nuclear-plant-safe-chernobyl-on-the-hudson-happen-article-1.121117. 66 Ibid.
67 Ibid.
68 Michael Daly, “Regulators Say Indian Point Nuclear Plant is Safe, but can Chernobyl-on-the-
Hudson Happen?” Dailynews.com (March 15, 2011), http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/regulators-
31
Nuclear power has generally proved safe when it comes to human health, but when something goes wrong, it can result in widespread radioactive exposure and health hazards that can turn an average power plant mishap into a disaster reminiscent of Chernobyl.69 Radiation is invisible and cannot be tasted, smelled or felt.70 There are four primary kinds of ionizing radiation; alpha, beta, gamma and x-ray. Alpha particles are relatively heavy and, when emitted, cannot penetrate human skin or clothing, but are harmful if they get into the body via inhalation, ingestion or other methods.71 Beta radiation can cause skin injury and is also harmful to the body internally. Gamma and X- rays are high-energy radiation that can damage tissue and are considered the most hazardous to humans.72 Concerning the possible spread of radiation from malfunctioning nuclear power plants, most experts anticipate a gradual exposure over time.73 If leaking occurs, the local population could breathe in particles or ingest contaminated foods with radioactive elements causing widespread radiation sickness and death.74 An effective earthquake response plan for any area located in proximity to a nuclear power plant must take into account the possibility of significant, widespread, high dose radiation exposure and contamination.
A nuclear meltdown at the Indian Point plant can certainly pose significant hazards to the citizens of NYC, yet dangers of day-to-day activities using radioactive substances cannot be overlooked in the event of an earthquake. A study from the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement found that nearly half of the radiation to which the U.S. population is exposed comes from medical sources such as CT scans, X-rays and nuclear medicine.75 Prolonged exposure to radiation is dangerous and the
69 Elizabeth Landau, Madison Park, “Radiation: When to Worry,” CNN.com (March 15, 2011),
http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/14/japan.radiation.sickness/index.html. 70 Ibid. 71 Ibid. 72 Ibid. 73 Ibid. 74 Ibid.
75 Elizabeth Landau, Madison, Park, “Radiation: When to Worry.” CNN.com (March 15, 2011), http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/14/japan.radiation.sickness/index.html.
32
farther away an individual is from the source of radiation, the less exposure that person will have to the damaging radioactive particles or waves.76 To this effect, the FDNY has adopted the principles of time, distance and shielding for routine radiological incidents and this policy should be implemented during disaster mitigation following a moderate or severe earthquake. An accidental radiological release which occurs due to an earthquake poses a significant threat to the health and safety of first responders operating at incidents in and around hospitals, universities and other research and healthcare institutions, and should be taken into consideration when assessing the threats to NYC during a seismic event.
76 Elizabeth Landau, Madison, Park, “Radiation: When to Worry.” CNN.com (March 15, 2011), http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/14/japan.radiation.sickness/index.html.
33
III. CASE STUDIES
A medium to large earthquake occurring in or around NYC is a high risk, yet low frequency event. As shown in Table 4, an M 6 can result in a total loss of $39.3 billion for the Tristate area. Compare that to $5.7 billion in lost gross city product as a result of Hurricane Sandy in 2012.77 Because of the low frequency of this event, an abundant amount of data portraying the seismic hazard in NYC is not readily available. Historical records of earthquakes in the New York area cannot be analyzed to determine successful response strategies, as these quakes occurred in a time when the population, buildings and infrastructure of NYC were substantially different than they are today. In order to pre-plan an effective response in the event of this black swan, a case study must be performed analyzing various earthquakes occurring in similar large cities, in a time frame comparable to present day. A review of the challenges faced by modern urban cities in the aftermath of an earthquake, as well as a critique of their emergency response systems, will prove invaluable in determining how to prepare the FDNY for a similar scenario.